Alea iacta est

I'll let you be an idiot if you want, but don't expect me to congratulate you for it.

Oliver Kamm's blog is one of the few where I find myself nodding my head in agreement at nearly every one of his posts. His latest is no exception.

On the subject of a religious figure feeling he is entitled to respect, Kamm says:

He was, and is, entitled to no such thing. He is entitled in a democratic society to no more and no less than religious and political liberty. Whether he enjoys respect as well is entirely up to him; it is not up to our political and juridical system. The notion that in suffering offence he is done an injustice is false and pernicious. It's also dangerous, because it places no limit on how far the state should regulate people's lives.

Exactly, and it is something few seem to grasp. Respect isn't an entitlement - it's something you earn, through your own actions. If you are worthy of respect, you will receive it - but it's not a civil right.

Freedom of expression is, but just because you are left to live your life the way you please, doesn't mean people are forced to "respect" your opinions as a matter of course. Religion is a case in point.

Religious beliefs are not entitled to "respect" simply because they are religious beliefs. Otherwise you have the absurd situation of having to "respect" the beliefs of the Branch Davidians, or Jim Jones, or the ancient Aztec tradition of live human sacrifice.

The rest of Kamm's post is just as good. Read the whole thing, as they say on the Interwebs.

Posted by Quentin George at October 24, 2006 06:40 PM