How much thought do everyday Americans give to their First Amendment rights? For the majority, censorship is seen as something inherently alien, associated with repressive regimens abroad. Freedom of speech is considered to be inseparable to the very meaning of being an American or a citizen of the "free" world.
However, the attack last week on famed novelist Salman Rushdie revisits a rather pertinent question: What is the best way to define free speech in America? Does it imply we can voice or publish whatever, wherever, or whenever we want no matter how inflammatory, incendiary, undermining and polarizing the message?
In its definition of free speech, USCourts.gov maintains freedom of speech does not include protections for obscene materials. When broken down, the obscene encompasses words like indecency, vulgarity and crudeness.
It is for this reason that images like swastikas and public executions on the evening news are not considered tolerable expressions of our First Amendment right to free speech.
Salman Rushdie has undoubtedly gained fame and notoriety as an outspoken atheist and secular humanist. Rushdie self-identifies as a "hard line atheist." However, is he also an equal opportunity one? To paraphrase Rushdie when called out on his Islamophobia, he responded: No, it is unfair to label Islam violent, but to my immediate knowledge, no writer has never gone into hiding for criticizing the Amish.
As a Muslim American, I cannot resist wondering: Has Rushdie criticized the Amish in the same way he criticizes Islam and Muslims? Rushdie's magnum opus, "The Satanic Verses," is arguably best described as a work caught somewhere between religious romanticism, pre-Islamic mythological allegory and new age metaphysics centered on the duality of man.
Every character in his seminal novel carries equal capacity to be the protagonist in a subplot of the greater narrative, where the story line imagery never seems to leave the Judeo Christian-inspired Garden of Eden.
If Rushdie really wanted to prove he is in fact not an Islamophobe, why did he limit his focus in "The Satanic Verses" to Islam? Why not develop the work into a multivolume trilogy equally targeting Christianity and Judaism the same way Rushdie targeted and subsequently attacked Islam?
