Controversies about freedom of expression often occur along religious and ethnic boundaries. The most familiar cases are ones where an intolerant majority group attempts to silence the expressions or protests of a minority. 1 Less familiar, but also important, are cases where an intolerant minority group seeks to squelch expressions or protests of which it disapproves -e.g., the violent response of some members of the Miami Cuban community in 1987 against a group protesting U.S. aid to the Nicaraguan contras.
This paper connects issues about freedom of expression with more general issues about tolerance of distinctive religious and cultural groups. I argue that tolerance of expressions of distinctive religious and cultural perspectives follows from, or is part of, the only policies for dealing with cultural and religious diversity that are morally and politically attractive in the United States today. I am concerned with freedom of expression both as a constitutional right and as a more general social policy. This is a somewhat unusual way of treating the scope and justification of freedom of expression. Perhaps it will seem less peculiar if we recall that liberalism, with its tolerant attitudes towards the expression of different religious perspectives, is often thought to have evolved as a practical response to the religious wars of early modern Europe. This explanation of the origins of liberalism presupposes what I want to emphasize, namely that tolerance is an attractive option in dealing with the problems of accommodating diverse groups within a single society.