Application question

Reading 3 and Reading 4 cited differing views regarding freedom of expression. Which view do you subscribe to and why?

First of all, how do we define freedom of expression? The right to express one's view? Regardless of the consequences?

From http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/freedom%20of%20speech , freedom of expression = freedom of speech : the right to express information, ideas, and opinions free of government restrictions based on content and subject only to reasonable limitations.

I think freedom of expression is the right that everyone deserves, especially in countries that practice democracy. However, one must note that every action comes with the consequences.
We will need to analyse and weigh the consequences that follow before deciding to voice out our opinions.

Reading 3 seems to be against freedom of expression. It has an all-rounded thought and seems to suggest that things happen in a cycle. We must also put ourselves in others' point of view and be liberal. An example is that it says those who agree that the European media are free to 'publish and be damned', must also accept that the Muslims are also free to vent their anger. I find this very true. Each and every human being is equal. We all have the right to choose the faith we want to believe in and are free to voice our opinions should the other community offend us. However, in civilised countries, we respect each other's religion and do not cross the borders. The only way to live in harmony is to compromise. Those who believe that they are free to say whatever they want at the expense of others are literally 'barbarians living in civilisations'.

However, Reading 4 takes on a different view. The author believes that everyone should be given the chance to express their opinions and the other party should just 'protest privately'. However, I think this belief is too one-sided. We must know that not every country is like Singapore, where we just let things be and mind our own business. Singaporean, as the author is, often just rant at home and forget about it. However, in many other countries, people do not let things rest so easily. They go to extremes to make sure their anger is heard. This should be taken into consideration whether freedom of speech is a good or bad thing.

To sum up, freedom of expression is a human right but human rights go both way. Yes, we can do whatever we want, say whatever we wish. This is our human right. But, we need to consider the other party's feeling and weigh the consequences (if there is). Have we infringe their rights? Do remember that wars and chaos do not happen without a reason. Very often, it is because someone, whether accidentally or purposely, stepped on the borders. Personally, I feel that the best solution is to compromise.