I came across this great article in the International Herald-Tribune about a free-speech case currently going on in Canada. The Canadian newsmagazine Maclean’s is under trial not for libelous or inaccurate articles, but for “hate speech.”

Under Canadian law, there is a serious argument that the article contained hate speech and that its publisher, Maclean’s magazine, the nation’s leading newsweekly, should be forbidden from saying similar things, forced to publish a rebuttal and made to compensate Muslims for injuring their “dignity, feelings and self respect.”

Wait a second, a magazine is “forbidden” by law from printing whatever it wants? It may have to pay restitution for injuring someone’s dignity? I’m sorry, but as an American I find this completely nuts.

But wait, it gets stranger:

The British Columbia Human Rights Tribunal, which held five days of hearings on those questions in Vancouver last week, will soon rule on whether Maclean’s violated a provincial hate speech law by stirring up animosity toward Muslims.

What’s a “Human Rights Tribunal?” What’s wrong with having this case tried in a “court” or have a “jury” deliberate the issue? Maybe I’m behind the curve here, but I’m really blown away that someone in North America can be arrested, fined, or imprisoned for saying something. Obviously, there are some notable, understandable free-speech exceptions for some nations (Nazism bans come to mind), but the concept of someone being forcibly silenced by the state for saying something un-PC seems so inhibiting, so repressive, that its downright frightening.

I tracked down the article that caused all this trouble, entitled “The Future Belongs to Islam” by Mark Steyn. It turned out to be a classic “The West is Doomed” scaremonger feature, taking the tried-and-true “We’re Not Having Enough Babies” angle to forecast an Islam-induced cultural holocaust. Along the way, he says Palestinians run a “death cult,” that Palestine is a “pseudo-nation,” that Spaniards are sissies (compelling but requires further debate), and that Africans only care about their “tribes.” Not only that, but this mess runs about 5,000 words and includes two references to My Big Fat Greek Wedding. In other words, its a disjointed, rambling, poorly written rant that just screams “Canadian.”

Here’s a quote, probably the one everyone’s upset about:

In a few years, as millions of Muslim teenagers are entering their voting booths, some European countries will not be living formally under sharia, but – as much as parts of Nigeria, they will have reached an accommodation with their radicalized Islamic compatriots, who like many intolerant types are expert at exploiting the “tolerance” of pluralist societies. Wherever one’s sympathies lie on Islam’s multiple battle fronts the fact is the jihad has held out a long time against very tough enemies. If you’re not shy about taking on the Israelis and Russians, why wouldn’t you fancy your chances against the Belgians and Spaniards?

I’m not going to argue with this article or tell you why its stupid. Trust me, it is. I’m way more shaken by the free-speech issues at play here, and that Maclean’s magazine could now be forced to pay restitution for saying something not nice about Muslims. To give you an idea of how close to home this hits, I am going to quote an opinion column I wrote for my college newspaper back in 2002:

….the highest-ranking Muslim cleric in Egypt wholeheartedly supports suicide bombings. This “man of God” believes that Palestinians have no other methods of fighting back against Israel, and therefore marketplace and bus bombings are their only options. These are the same suicide attacks that Human Rights Watch has declared “crimes against humanity.”

Radical preachers are not “small minorities” and they have not “hijacked” Islam. They have always been there, and they have always been popular. While it’s obvious not every Islamic religious leader is a militant, it’s plain to see that there are plenty of violent ones who definitely hold power within their communities.

Had this article been published in the McGill Daily instead of the mighty Freep, there’s a good chance I would have spent my Senior year on trial before the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal.

I know we all like to rant and rave about how much America drives us nuts, and how whenever America does something dumb we threaten to move to Canada. But issues like this can remind us why we should be proud to live in a country where people can say whatever they want without fear of government retribution. In America, free speech is a civil issue, no government can tell you what to say, and you most certainly can’t be muzzled if someone takes offense at your statements.

Admittedly, this freedom has a few negative, flashy drawbacks – cross burnings and Illinois Nazis being only two of them. But in this country we have enough confidence in our citizens to know that if some lousy writer says we’re at war with an entire religion the people probably won’t rush into the street with machine guns to take revenge.

Yes, free speech causes offense, but its perfectly OK for someone to respond back using the same rights as the author. For instance, if I were to directly counter Mr. Steyn’s article, I would probably write to a blog, competing newspaper, or “letters section” of Macleans and allege that that anyone who alludes to My Big Fat Greek Wedding in their article about the dangers of Islam is a moron and his opinion forfeit.

But instead of beginning a reasoned, civil debate, the issue is brought before a “tribunal” of human rights activists, who then decide whether or not the article is “offensive” and then has the power to levy fines or restrictions on the magazine, making sure they never speak out of turn again.

Shockingly, Steyn makes a good point about this process when quoted in the original IHT article

“Western governments are becoming increasingly comfortable with the regulation of opinion. The First Amendment really does distinguish the U.S., not just from Canada but from the rest of the Western world.”

The regulation of opinion…wow that sounds scary. Thanks a lot, IHT, for reminding me why I’m proud to be an American.

Is this too over the top? Good.

PS: On an unrelated note:AirOne is coming to Boston. Can’t say enough good things about this airline.