 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
It’s a shame that so many people, especially pop icons, think that what happened to the Dixie Chicks was un-American. It was entirely American! The Chicks had the right to say what they said and Americans had the right to respond the way they did by boycotting radio stations and destroying CDs. It is just like so many who didn’t like what Trent Lott said, and subsequently forced him to the background of the political spotlight. It is American for Lott to make his comments and it is American for the citizens of the U.S. to say, “We don’t like it so we’re not going to vote for you, or buy your music, or whatever may be the case.”
Just as Maines was free to express her opinion so should all citizens be able to enjoy that same freedom. To say that she should be immune from backlash is to say that only celebrities can express their opinion and others should not be able to respond. For Bruce Springsteen to say that what has happened to the Chicks was un-American only reinforces the notion that many celebrities don’t think through things logically (or objectively).
America is about freedom, including freedom of speech. But America is not about freedom from speech. If you choose to exercise your freedom to say what you think, you are opening yourself up for others to respond with what they think. It’s simply childish that the Chicks are now whining because people don’t want to hear their music and are expressing their opinion through such means. Maines chose to express her freedom and must now deal with the freedom that other Americans have to express theirs.
If Diane Sawyer announced tomorrow that she hates all men, she would simply be exercising her freedom of speech. But fans of her shows should not be forced to continue to watch her if they disagree. They have the freedom to express their disgust with her by changing the channel, calling stations and asking them to stop playing her show, and even burning their Diane Sawyer t-shirts. American freedom doesn’t mean that you are free to do anything without consequences. It simply means that you are free.
Likewise, the same can be said about freedom of religion. It is a right that must be treasured. But some want freedom from religion and this leads us to the same result as mentioned in relation to freedom itself. With freedom comes consequences and one must determine how enjoyable that freedom is compared to the consequences that result. As a Christian, I adore freedom of religion because in that freedom thrives the worship and practice that pleases God. But I also accept that there are those who are atheists, agnostics, non-Christians, secularists, etc... and the consequences of freedom mean that they do not have to accept my religion or beliefs. Where the line must be drawn is when an atheist says there must be no religion (for that is a religion in itself) or the Christian says that no other religion can be tolerated. This is when freedom is gone.
I conclude by saying that America may be the purest example of political and societal freedom that can be witnessed today, but it is not pure freedom. Pure freedom can only be experienced in Jesus Christ. He said, "If the Son has set you free, you are free indeed." He speaks of a freedom from sin that results in freedom from fear. It is a freedom that leads to peace and joy. The non-Christian does not know this joy and is therefore enslaved to finding hapiness by whatever means he can. He collects, achieves, strives, reaches, strains, grabs and yet cannot attain it. One after one he goes to the grave empty, leaving it all behind for the government, his wife or mistress, or disgruntled children to fight over. This enslavement masquerades as the American Dream (you can have it all), but it leads all to the same place. True freedom is found only in the deliverance from enslavement that Christ provides. If the Son has set you free, you are free indeed.
JSW - April 24, 2003