Dude, I ain't hurtin' you, it's my head, I can do what I want.
I like to go back and see if I still like and agree with things I've written before. Sometimes I don't. Sometimes I do. This is one of the times that I wouldn't change a single word:
"Their appearance, like little else, has unnerved other Britons, testing the limits of tolerance here and fueling the debate over the role of Muslims in British life." NY Times, June 2007
There are so many reasons why this is sad.
The people of the world are polarized by religion and culture. You would think that with the methods of knowledge at our disposal today, this would be a thing of the past, but perhaps global access has had the opposite effect. Is it making us a "conscious whole" that rejects the slightest change in what is perceived to be the safe status quo?
The attitude of Britian's citizens is an indication that the Democracy Hypocrisy is far closer to reality in the free world than I previously imagined. I almost put free in quotation marks.
The most highly valued possession of any nation should be its people. The very reason we fight for, and are given, so many freedoms is precisely because we are the chief engine of an economy.
If an individual is willing to take the personal chance of wearing something in public that may get them fired, arrested, or even killed, that person must care much more about it than others are willing to credit.
Docile actions discolored with questionable origins or misinterpreted intentions should nevertheless be regarded as a freedom of expression. However, to say that this expression has nothing to do with others is presumptuous. Passing each other on the street automatically involves two parties: someone is making a statement that the other has every right to reject. But dictating that the majority opinion nullifies an individual right of expression is when honor, and then freedom, falls apart.