Gagging Gaga

Boycott her concert? Protest it? Or should it just be banned altogether? These seem to be the solutions to Lady Gaga offered by Catholic Church leaders, who seem to be afraid of the messages she espouses, the “lifestyles” she promotes, or even the outfits she wears.  

But all of these are, precisely, the reasons why she should not be banned. While I am revolted by her fashion sense and unimpressed by her reductive musical style (so you can probably guess whose camp I belong to), I have not heard anything from the religious sector to convince me to support the ban.

The Bishop of Sorsogon says she promotes “godlessness”, which is “offensive to any religion.”  So what is the problem, exactly?  Isn’t it basic to the ideal of freedom of religion that we can, after surveying the choices out there, choose not to have a religion?  

What if a person doesn’t (gasp) believe in Capital G.O.D., or in Buddha, or in the fairy residing in the closet?  And ends up deciding he’s not convinced of any of the arguments out there that a God exists?  So what if a person is godless?  What’s society supposed to do?  Clap him in a monastery until he sees the light?

Society’s role isn’t to force citizens to adhere to Catholic views, it’s to facilitate a marketplace of ideas, where ideas can compete and seek to sway opinions.  So, if that person isn’t convinced that a god exists, then that’s actually good news for the missionaries: he’s fair game!

Congressman Benny Abante has been quoted as threatening to sue the organizers and sponsors of the concert with a criminal lawsuit for publicly exhibiting an indecent or immoral show, which is prohibited by our Penal Code.  And, he’s even wrote the Mayor of Pasay City, asking the mayor to stop the concert.  But where is the indecency or immorality complained of by the Congressman, when the show hasn’t been shown?  With his actions, he tramples upon the freedom of speech, when he seeks to muzzle the speaker even before she opens her lipsticked mouth.  (We call that prior restraint in Constitutional law).

Christian leaders (who need not be named) point to Gaga’s song “Born This Way” as objectionable because it promotes homosexuality.  And they point to her “skimpy outfits and drag queen costumes.” And their point is?

Oh yeah, right.  Their religion thinks homosexuality is a sin.  But many people don’t believe the same, so why should the protesters’ religious beliefs trample upon differing beliefs?  If a sizeable portion of the community is gay, wears skimpy outfits, or are drag queens, or are all of the above rolled into one, what do these groups propose to do?  Ban them from ever being seen in public?

Thankfully, the office of the President doesn’t want to be involved in this persecution of ideas.  Their only message is for teenagers to seek advice from their parents before going to the concert.  That means, the burden is on parents to counsel their kids, to either brainwash them into not going (because Madonna is so much better) or to put their foot down on spending hundreds of dollars on a foreign artist when our local artistic community needs our support.  (See, I can think of plenty of more valid reasons why we shouldn’t attend the concert.)

But because it’s a “direct attack against ...Christian faith”?  Because she “symbolizes everything that is corrupt or demonic”?  Because her songs contain lyrics they consider “satanic”?  Well, they’re free to air their beliefs, much as she should be free to sing hers.