Jonathan Rauch's In Defense Of Prejudice

729 Words3 Pages
In Jonathan Rauch’s article In Defense of Prejudice, Rauch gives a compelling argument as to why people prejudicial talk should not be diminished. In agreement with Salman Rushdie: "without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist,” Rauch believes society should not be seeking ways to end this type of speech. This is because taking it away would cause a regression in society’s development. Instead, all should come to terms with the idea that with freedom of speech; comes unwanted opinions. I strongly agree with the viewpoint Jonathan Rauch presented in his article; it is upon all of us to stop pointing fingers and calling each other bigots because they do not fit into our molds of right and wrong. Jonathan Rauch is a Jewish Gay man. As he states, if anyone has the right to be triggered by hate speech, it is himself. He is the one who is a part of two prominent minority groups- Jews and Homosexuals. After experiencing homophobic speech when his classmates responded with “Faggot north” after the driver asked them for directions, Rauch decided to take a step and examine the situation: nothing was aimed at him, there was no incident, and they were just talking. Rauch assessed that he instilled fear in himself when there was no reason to be scared. He even describes…show more content…
Many know that the world is filled with anti-Semitic and sexist people. Although I disagree with their viewpoints, it is not my place to take their opinions away. If one cannot freely state their opinion without getting in trouble, it will cause a rise in violent approaches to make sure their voice is heard. As Rauch also touches on and I agree with, having an open space gives way to new perspectives and critical thinking. If one is open to hearing different viewpoints instead of jumping quickly to shut them down, one could learn something they new they never knew before that could strengthen or even change their
Open Document