Topic: Freedom of speech

[Titi Camara]

Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of your speech.

I generally and genuinely hate posts that say "this" but above is the correct answer.

Say what you want but be prepared to reap the repercussions if what you're saying is cuntish!

[The Gulleysucker]

Stephen Fry on the cartoon issue.... He (of course) nails it.

While I have the utmost respect for his intellect, though outside of normal stage or film craft I'm not always a great fan of his utterances, but I have to agree Fry is pretty spot on with that.

[The North Bank]

There is no such thing as freedom of speech, unless its a new idea born 4 days ago. It wont work anyway.
What there is, is emotion and anger and solidarity against terrorists. Not protection of freedom of speech, that has never existed, and never will. Its a hypocritical concept because the minute you draw the line , you are restricting freedom of speech, and if you dont draw the line then you will quickly have carnage.

[jooneyisdagod]

I think freedom of speech should be 'absolute'. Let me qualify that term though because nowhere in the world is freedom of speech actually absolute. In most countries, there are some checks in place mostly to prevent flare-ups between members of society i.e. incitation to violence or defamation, which I think should only be applied in case of misinformation and I guess requires a strong judicial precedent of only striking down any claims just put in to either delay a review of a product or an article about a person. But apart from that, I'm happy for anything to go. Even language that directs hate at a community/race because as soon as this leads to an act of violence/discrimination it becomes a matter for the law anyway. So I'm happy for freedom of speech to exclude these illegal acts and otherwise continue to be absolute and this is absolutely the case with respect to criticising, insulting or mocking ideas.

[ShayGuevara]

If your view's don't match what the mainstream media feed people they are conceived as wrong and politically uncorrect often.

People think they have total freedom, look at America "the land of the free" they blamed 9/11 on Al Qaeda hating America for the freedom the people enjoy.

Freedom like NSA spying? Like having the most people in prison per capita in the world, the largest army budget in the world, the same few people running for presidents (I believe it's like to be Clinton and Bush again, those names sound familar) the list goes on and on.

Look how free speech went for Bradley Manning or Edward Snowden?

So little negative is spoken about governments and corparations in the media the hub of free speech, yet online these people are questioned by many everyday.

The developed world isn't near as free as it portrays, it just cover's it up a lot better.

The final straw for me is when they inevitably try to censor the internet, that's the day when people will have to start realising how free they actually are?

[The 1989 Brit Awards]

Say what you want but be prepared to reap the repercussions if what you're saying is cuntish!

And yet that doesn't go against the fact that said "repercussions" are in not in any way justifiable, just, legal, instead being  utterly criminal, repulsive and much more condemnable than the initial cuntish thing said.

Like I heard Bill Maher say the other day, the "oh, he said something against the prophet, I'm sorry for him and his family and it's a tragedy, but all bets are off when he does that" attitude (that's actually quite pervasive, it seems) is completely wrong, and those "consequences" are still very fucking bad, light years worse than cuntish things said.

[stara]

I generally and genuinely hate posts that say "this" but above is the correct answer.

Say what you want but be prepared to reap the repercussions if what you're saying is cuntish!

And above is why only fear is acceptable reason not to exercise freedom of speech and respect is not

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/pIZys7C4mzM" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/pIZys7C4mzM</a>

[Ken-Obi]

1. No one or two million person is the same - don't expect everybody to agree with you.
2. Humans are irrational regardless of how much we want to be logical.
3. Humans are analog creatures, not digital zeroes and ones.
4. Be prepared to be responsible for the reaction to your speech; be it justified or not.
5. Context of speech matters, so is being tactful.

etc.

[Trada]

[jooneyisdagod]

Rubbish. He equates a race with a religion. One is an idea and the other is not and ideas should be scrutinised.

[BoRed]

Rubbish. He equates a race with a religion. One is an idea and the other is not and ideas should be scrutinised.

It's about the right to offend, not scrutinise.

[jooneyisdagod]

It's about the right to offend, not scrutinise.

You are right but it's about the right to offend. Which should still be within legal limits when it comes to ideas.

But it's not just offence that a some muslims want shut down, it's also any scrutiny of the religion and its ideas. Just look at the what's happening with the Saudi blogger. He didn't draw the Prophet or particularly offend or attack anyone. He simply started a liberal society and blogged. Make no mistake, there is an attempt to shut down any discussion let alone offending important religious ideas.

[CHOPPER]

You are right but it's about the right to offend. Which should still be within legal limits when it comes to ideas.

But it's not just offence that a some muslims want shut down, it's also any scrutiny of the religion and its ideas. Just look at the what's happening with the Saudi blogger. He didn't draw the Prophet or particularly offend or attack anyone. He simply started a liberal society and blogged. Make no mistake, there is an attempt to shut down any discussion let alone offending important religious ideas.

It's not about a right to offend at all. Satire, like sarcasm, is to provoke and highlight through humour, concious thought and debate about the subject matter.

Wilde wrote - Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence.


Now I don't necessarily believe both are entirely exact, but I get the jist. The trick with Charlie Hebdo and those like them - is to understand what they are trying to say, not just the images that front the point of debate.

 

[jooneyisdagod]

It's not about a right to offend at all. Satire, like sarcasm, is to provoke and highlight through humour, concious thought and debate about the subject matter.

Wilde wrote - Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence.


Now I don't necessarily believe both are entirely exact, but I get the jist. The trick with Charlie Hebdo and those like them - is to understand what they are trying to say, not just the images that front the point of debate.

 

I agree entirely on the Charlie Hebdo point about how we've got to look at the message. Caroline Fourest has frequently argued similarly. But a lot of people are simply incapable of looking past the 'offensive' nature of some of the cartoons. And that's where the question of having the right to offend comes in. Do you have a right to offend if you're trying to make a bigger point ? Or do you further have a point to offend just for shits and giggles ? For what it's worth, I think they're both okay but clearly a lot of people think they're both not okay and others think offending to make a point is fine while offending for the sake of it isn't.

[BlackandWhitePaul]

There is no such thing as freedom of speech

Yes there is, and Arsenal suck   

[youll never walk alone it]

Freedom of speach? what a joke..

[Veinticinco de Mayo]

Freedom of Speech is only one of many freedoms that we feel are human rights, the freedom to exercise it however is restricted by other freedoms, some of which are more fundamental than freedom of speech.  The right to safety being one of them. 

All freedoms and rights are necessarily limited by how they impact the freedoms and rights of others.

[TepidT2O]

Freedom of Speech is only one of many freedoms that we feel are human rights, the freedom to exercise it however is restricted by other freedoms, some of which are more fundamental than freedom of speech.  The right to safety being one of them. 

All freedoms and rights are necessarily limited by how they impact the freedoms and rights of others.

but crucially not whether it hurts their feelings....

[Alan_X]

Here's a question about freedom of speech.

Does it apply equally for all religions in this country?

I ask this because of the recent events.  The BBC had a rule (until two days ago) that there was no circumstance upon which they would show an image of Mohammed.  However, they were perfectly happy to show Jerry Springer the musical.

Do we have freedom of speech when it's ok to insult one religion and not another?

Theres a cartoon in yesterday's Guardian addressing that issue. The reason for not showing an image of Mohamed was to do with the safety of BBC staff not freedom of speech.

Or rather our freedom of speech is bound to be constrained when commenting on one religion is likely to result in death.

Charlie Hebdo wasn't the first and won't be the last. Theo Van Goch was murdered for criticising Islam.

Hitoshi Igarashi who was the Japanese translator of the Satanic Verses was murdered. The Italian translator was stabbed and the Norwegian publisher was the target of an assassination attempt. An arson attack protesting against the publication in Turkey resulted in the deaths of 37 people.

At the moment, Christian leaders don't issue instruction to assassinate blasphemers.

[Alan_X]

Freedom of speach? what a joke..

Go and live somewhere that has real constraints on freedom of speech and try writing that.  It's depressing that though cynicism and apathy people seem happy to piss away freedoms that have been so hard won.

[Alan_X]

It's not about a right to offend at all. Satire, like sarcasm, is to provoke and highlight through humour, concious thought and debate about the subject matter.

Wilde wrote - Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but the highest form of intelligence.


Now I don't necessarily believe both are entirely exact, but I get the jist. The trick with Charlie Hebdo and those like them - is to understand what they are trying to say, not just the images that front the point of debate.

 

Spot on.

[Alan_X]

I generally and genuinely hate posts that say "this" but above is the correct answer.

Say what you want but be prepared to reap the repercussions if what you're saying is cuntish!

So it's reasonable to be murdered if someone is offended by what you say?

[TepidT2O]

Theres a cartoon in yesterday's Guardian addressing that issue. The reason for not showing an image of Mohamed was to do with the safety of BBC staff not freedom of speech.

Or rather our freedom of speech is bound to be constrained when commenting on one religion is likely to result in death.

Charlie Hebdo wasn't the first and won't be the last. Theo Van Goch was murdered for criticising Islam.

Hitoshi Igarashi who was the Japanese translator of the Satanic Verses was murdered. The Italian translator was stabbed and the Norwegian publisher was the target of an assassination attempt. An arson attack protesting against the publication in Turkey resulted in the deaths of 37 people.

At the moment, Christian leaders don't issue instruction to assassinate blasphemers.

Yes, it was refreshing that the Guardian was at least honest about that.

I can't think of any other paper that has said that.

It raises the issue of what we can realistically do about people who are wiling to slaughter get their own way.

Lots of people blaming the Iraq war, but I'm not sure its changed much and it certainly doesn't help us with solutions.

[Millie]

So it's reasonable to be murdered if someone is offended by what you say?

Seriously he did not say that at all

[kesey]

I should also say that a swastika can be a very very funny thing when used cleverly. Some amazing jewish comedians and writers have been pretty fearless when it comes to this sort of thing, but it's definitely not to everyone's taste.

The Swastika is also a postitive symbol that predates the Nazi's by 1,000s of years.

Just saying.

[TepidT2O]

A number of people suggesting that we should restrict freedom of speech if it offends a large number of people.  1.3bn blah blah blah.

I saw the video of one of the halfwits on the BBC website.  I thought about watching it and decided that it would offend me, so I didn't.

If images of Mohammed offend people so much then I'm not sure how a small 60000 run magazine is so difficult to ignore. Indeed, they must have actively sought out the outrage to even know about it.

What happens when these people say openly gay people offend them? Do we give in to that?

People legitimately oppose the origins of Islam. You may not agree with them, if you do, just ignore them.

It's simple.

[TepidT2O]

The Swastika is also a postitive symbol that predates the Nazi's by 1,000s of years.

Just saying.

Keesey, I find your outlook on life bonkers... But I'm so glad you're around to express it.

[kesey]

Keesey, I find your outlook on life bonkers... But I'm so glad you're around to express it.

You're a twat . Thanks for acknowledging my freedom to express it though.   

[TepidT2O]

You're a twat . Thanks for acknowledging my freedom to express it though.   

[KiNki]

Indeed, they must have actively sought out the outrage to even know about it.

why would they do that do you reckon?

P.s has Kesey, the peace luvin hippie, offended you by calling you a twat shall I have him slain? If so, any preferred method? Thrown from a cliff, boiled alive, forced to wear a suit n tie, smothered with love and kisses.

Perhaps that's what our angry individuals looking to be outraged and angry need.  A hug. 

[TepidT2O]

why would they do that do you reckon?

P.s has Kesey, the peace luvin hippie, offended you by calling you a twat shall I have him slain? If so, any preferred method? Thrown from a cliff, boiled alive, forced to wear a suit n tie, smothered with love and kisses.

Perhaps that's what our angry individuals looking to be outraged and angry need.  A hug. 

I am a twat and Kesey is bonkers, the word, is better for it.  Vive la difference! (Or something!)

[GreatEx]

why would they do that do you reckon?

P.s has Kesey, the peace luvin hippie, offended you by calling you a twat shall I have him slain? If so, any preferred method? Thrown from a cliff, boiled alive, forced to wear a suit n tie, smothered with love and kisses.

Perhaps that's what our angry individuals looking to be outraged and angry need.  A hug. 

The fundies did seem to calm down a lot in 2006 after Charlie responded to their death threats with the famous "L'amour est plus fort que la haine" cover featuring an extremist locked in a saliva-drenched smooch with a cartoonist. I think they secretly liked that.

[kesey]

 

My thoughts on what is a sensitive issue.

We should be able to express what we think or feel.

That's all I have to offer right now as got a lot of personal stuff Iam wading through. Which to me is far more important.

There you go.

[BlackandWhitePaul]

My thoughts on what is a sensitive issue.

We should be able to express what we think or feel.

That's all I have to offer right now as got a lot of personal stuff Iam wading through. Which to me is far more important.

There you go.

I've been saying on here for years that Alan Shearer is the GREATEST Footballer the World has ever seen and nobodies having it   

[The North Bank]

I've been saying on here for years that Alan Shearer is the GREATEST Footballer the World has ever seen and nobodies having it   

Shearer isnt even in the top 20 premier league players ever. I never wanted to break the news to you, but since we have started speaking freely I ought to let you know that the greatest thing he has achieved since leaving Blackburn is that honey monster advert. I know this will offend you, but you will just have to deal with it.

I KNOW MY RIGHTS

 

[Corkboy]

Shearer isnt even in the top 20 premier league players ever.

Top ten utter c*nts, though.

[BlackandWhitePaul]

Shearer isnt even in the top 20 premier league players ever. I never wanted to break the news to you, but since we have started speaking freely I ought to let you know that the greatest thing he has achieved since leaving Blackburn is that honey monster advert. I know this will offend you, but you will just have to deal with it.

I KNOW MY RIGHTS

 

Never thought it would happen, like EVER, but you just made me laugh he heh   

[alfonso]

Someone sent me this:
The French newspaper Liberation reported on September 12, 1996, that three stalwarts of Charlie Hebdo (including Stephane ‘Charb’ Charbonnier) had campaigned in their magazine to collect more than 170,000 signatures for a petition calling for a ban on the French National Front party. They did this in the name of the ‘Rights of Man’.

[The 1989 Brit Awards]

Someone sent me this:
The French newspaper Liberation reported on September 12, 1996, that three stalwarts of Charlie Hebdo (including Stephane ‘Charb’ Charbonnier) had campaigned in their magazine to collect more than 170,000 signatures for a petition calling for a ban on the French National Front party. They did this in the name of the ‘Rights of Man’.

Difference there being on one hand Charlie Hebdo simply mocking and satirizing something, as opposed to a party threading the fine line with hate speech.

Satire /= Hate Speech

[jooneyisdagod]

Someone sent me this:
The French newspaper Liberation reported on September 12, 1996, that three stalwarts of Charlie Hebdo (including Stephane ‘Charb’ Charbonnier) had campaigned in their magazine to collect more than 170,000 signatures for a petition calling for a ban on the French National Front party. They did this in the name of the ‘Rights of Man’.

They're staunchly anti-racist. And while a petition is filed as is within their rights, the government still has to work on whether or not the party deserves to be banned. If only there was a petition to ban Charlie Hebdo instead of these senseless killings and then I suppose our discussion would be held in happier times.