Topic: Freedom of speech

[TipTopKop]

The pope may just have a vested interest in where that line is drawn.

Everyone has some form of a vested interested which places them on either side of this sort of issue I guess.

People who don't believe in religion or don't care about such matters will obviously see no potential harm in this, those who do believe (or respect the rights of others to believe) obviously will.

Over the past few days I found myself agreeing (or at least understanding) points on both sides.

[Trada]

Sky News refuse to show front page of Charlie Hebdo

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMbwcBYT0DI

[B0151?]

This is interesting.

I'm really not sure you should be allowed to promote hatred. To me, promoting discrimination can be as bad as, as well as lead to, violence. I'm thinking more in the cases of far right groups and extremist preachers here. A lot of the time the end goal is to incite violence, just because they aren't doing it explicitly means it should be legal?

[Elmo!]

This is interesting.

Surely this is wrong (in the UK anyway)? Inciting racial hatred is illegal in the UK so should be below the Legal line.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incitement_to_ethnic_or_racial_hatred

EDIT: or is there a difference between 'Promoting' and 'Inciting' which makes 'Promoting' legal?

[OperationIvy]

But what is insulting to a faith? A rational, non-confrontational challenge to the central tenets of a faith could be views as insulting to the faith.  It is platitudes, but is little use for defining where to draw the line between honest intellectual inquiry and insults.

The pope may just have a vested interest in where that line is drawn.

People choose their religion and anyone should be allowed to take the piss out of peoples choices.

And anyway, assuming god exists, religion is just a "middle man" between yourself and god. A completely redundant position really.

[CHOPPER]

People choose their religion and anyone should be allowed to take the piss out of peoples choices.

And anyway, assuming god exists, religion is just a "middle man" between yourself and god. A completely redundant position really.

In most cases religion is thrust upon people(mainly the newly born) by parents, family, friends and locals. Yes, agree 100% peoples choices are always up there to be shot down, well, if they make a nob of themselves of course. You get too piss takie and you come across as a bitter and jealous.

And ye for the rest. Though there is no such things as a god, deity or whatever you think lives just beyond the clouds and around the back of the moon. I know this because if there was really a god, do you really think he would of created Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.

[TepidT2O]

The pope just kind of condoned violence.... Even though he said he didn't... I'm shocked.

[Bird Bird Bird The Bird Is The Word]

In most cases religion is thrust upon people(mainly the newly born) by parents, family, friends and locals. Yes, agree 100% peoples choices are always up there to be shot down, well, if they make a nob of themselves of course. You get too piss takie and you come across as a bitter and jealous.

And ye for the rest. Though there is no such things as a god, deity or whatever you think lives just beyond the clouds and around the back of the moon. I know this because if there was really a god, do you really think he would of created Jimmy Savile and Gary Glitter.

Absolutely, one was enough.

[Bird Bird Bird The Bird Is The Word]

The pope just kind of condoned violence.... Even though he said he didn't... I'm shocked.

Its the default c*nt position.

"I don't condone the violence and I believe in free speech but..."

then it gets very vague and they seem something implicit like...

"..actions have consequences and we should all be respectful."

[Broad Spectrum]

Tesco knife attack: Man who 'shouted white power slogans' arrested on suspicion of attempted murder in Mold supermarket


A man has been arrested on suspicion of attempted murder at a Tesco supermarket in Mold, North Wales, after allegedly shouting "white power" slogans and brandishing a "huge" knife.

The victim, a 24-year-old man, who is reportedly Asian and from Yorkshire, has been left with what police described as "serious, but not life-threatening" injuries after what is believed to have been a racially motivated attack.

A local man, 25, was arrested at the scene and taken into custody. Nobody else was injured in the incident, which happened shortly after 1pm today, but eyewitnesses described the alleged knife as being "like something out of Crocodile Dundee".

Colin Cooper, of Leeswood, told The Daily Post: "I heard a lot of shouting to start with. It (the alleged knife) was huge – like something out of Crocodile Dundee.

"They called for security over the loudspeaker. Then 30 seconds or a minute later this lad was being helped by a couple of staff saying "get me an ambulance".

"The lad attacked was Asian. He had his hands in front of his stomach.

"I couldn't tell whether his hands were cut from protecting himself or if he’d been stabbed."

Another witness, Rich Fay, 20, described hearing "screaming" on aisle two.

"Initially we thought it was schoolboys," he said. "In one arm the man had a knife and in the other I believed it was a hammer. I think they had tags on so he must have got them from the store."

North Wales Police have not yet confirmed if a weapon was used, but the Welsh Ambulance Service said a man had been taken to hospital with "serious injuries". The supermarket is expected to be closed for 24 hours.

[Broad Spectrum]

Unsure if others view that article as entirely relevant to the thread, but in light of recent events, thought I'd put it in here anyway.

[KiNki]

Its the default c*nt position.

"I don't condone the violence and I believe in free speech but..."

then it gets very vague and they seem something implicit like...

"..actions have consequences and we should all be respectful."

there's a cartoon for it already.



Victim blaming

[Bird Bird Bird The Bird Is The Word]

there's a cartoon for it already.



Victim blaming

The fact they veil it in implicit language makes it all the more sinister.

An idiot will just come out and say it, a real bastard will hide it.

[The Gulleysucker]

....Victim blaming

Exactly.

I've noticed several comments and articles being bandied around that seem to want to try to explain why these murdering bastards did what they did as if it's all the fault of the cartoonists for drawing the cartoons in the first place.

Now I wouldn't mind if these utterly deluded murdering bastards had wandered into the Charlie office and started throwing punches while shouting 'you insulted my sky fairy', that's fair enough, but to execute these cartoonists in cold blood with assault rifles is totally unforgiveable and their can be absolutely no excuse for what they did, none whatsoever, and I will gladly say 'fuck you' to anyone who says there is or uses weasel words to try to justify it in any way at all.

Those who do think there is ever some kind of excuse for this murderous rampage, and even offer one, no matter how small or subtely or with appeals to respect their sky fairy, should take a long cold look at themselves and their truly warped valuation of human life and ask themselves how they can possibly support a mindset that can ever justify murdering defenceless people for such a trivial thing.

Oh they disrepected us (and our beliefs!)... honestly it sounds like some 15 year old juvenile delinquent gang member trying to justify having stabbed some other kid because he laughed at his trainers.

Whatever happened to Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?

There's something gone very rotten somewhere in the State of mind of Islam.

[jambutty]

Seems to me that if the Prophet was insulted, he'd have managed to do summat about it, not send murdering swines to act up in his name.

Assuming to know what is offense to the Prophet sounds a fatwa offense to me, but what do I know?

[Alan_X]

This is interesting.

Thats interesting.

[Alan_X]

<snip>To illustrate his point, he turned to an aide and said: "It is true that you must not react violently, but although we are good friends if (he) says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch, it's normal.

Ah Ok.

Matthew 5

43: "You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.'
44: But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you,
45: that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous.

[Alan_X]

Exactly.

I've noticed several comments and articles being bandied around that seem to want to try to explain why these murdering bastards did what they did as if it's all the fault of the cartoonists for drawing the cartoons in the first place.

Now I wouldn't mind if these utterly deluded murdering bastards had wandered into the Charlie office and started throwing punches while shouting 'you insulted my sky fairy', that's fair enough, but to execute these cartoonists in cold blood with assault rifles is totally unforgiveable and their can be absolutely no excuse for what they did, none whatsoever, and I will gladly say 'fuck you' to anyone who says there is or uses weasel words to try to justify it in any way at all.

Those who do think there is ever some kind of excuse for this murderous rampage, and even offer one, no matter how small or subtely or with appeals to respect their sky fairy, should take a long cold look at themselves and their truly warped valuation of human life and ask themselves how they can possibly support a mindset that can ever justify murdering defenceless people for such a trivial thing.

Oh they disrepected us (and our beliefs!)... honestly it sounds like some 15 year old juvenile delinquent gang member trying to justify having stabbed some other kid because he laughed at his trainers.

Whatever happened to Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me?

There's something gone very rotten somewhere in the State of mind of Islam.

And they conveniently gloss over the murder of the people in the supermarket (no cartoons) or the policeman and woman executed in cold blood.

[Corkboy]

Where do rape jokes sit on your diagram of crossed lines?

That wasn't a joke.

[TepidT2O]

No, if only it were.

[CHOPPER]

Where do rape jokes sit on your diagram of crossed lines?

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/2_urvjCXg6c" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" class="bbc_link bbc_flash_disabled new_win">https://www.youtube.com/v/2_urvjCXg6c</a>

[Corkboy]

You like them though, don't you?  I remember from past threads

Quote them.

[Alan_X]

You like them though, don't you?  I remember from past threads... where do they sit on your diagram?

What is the point of this? Are you debating a particular point or just baiting a fellow member of the site?

[Corkboy]

This is interesting.

So I was thinking that this could be changed by adding one more line at the top, call it a Good Manners line. I think it's perfectly ok to publish material for general consumption which satirises religious beliefs but if I'm sitting down for tea in a Muslim's house, satirising his religion is just rude.

[Sir Harvest Fields]

What is the point of this? Are you debating a particular point or just baiting a fellow member of the site?

Uh id say something less polite to be honest!

[Corkboy]

Uh id say something less polite to be honest!

He didn't like me criticising Frank the Pope so he's rummaging around for ammo.

[Alan_X]

He didn't like me criticising Frank the Pope so he's rummaging around for ammo.

He'd do well to keep his head down - his past posting history is not pretty when it comes to apologising for child rapists... from what I remember there's something about a devil bird on spirits and it all being our fault...

[KiNki]

if I'm sitting down for tea in a Muslim's house, satirising his religion is just rude.

Or the opening gambit for conversation.

My father in law is a manc and orish, mocking and teasing is how we begin most convos after pleasantries about health and weather.

[Corkboy]

Or the opening gambit for conversation.

My father in law is a manc and orish, mocking and teasing is how we begin most convos after pleasantries about health and weather.

I have found that teasing people about their religious beliefs does not make them happy. Or else I'm not very good at it.

Dawkins quoted someone, name escapes but this would be the 1890s I think, who said that "one should respect a man's religious beliefs in the same way that one should respect his belief that his wife is pretty and his children clever".

[Corkboy]

He'd do well to keep his head down - his past posting history is not pretty when it comes to apologising for child rapists... from what I remember there's something about a devil bird on spirits and it all being our fault...

Here, I'll save him the bother.

It was the "Judge refuses to let Muslim defendant wear burqa in court" thread. Here's the joke...

the judge is wrong. If he forces her to take off the veil he'll have no choice but to rape her. That can't be allowed.

And my reply....

I thought it was funny. Rape normally isn't a subject for joking but RR deftly pointed out how insulting to men burqas can be.

Link.

If anyone thinks that was a joke at the expense of rape victims, they haven't understood it.

[The North Bank]

I don't think the pope has some sort of agenda in his comments. He's just a nice old man trying to keep the peace. Everyone has become so touchy lately. If someone says every action has a consequence, it's interpreted as condoning violence, when its actually just stating a fact.

[GreatEx]

Exactly.

I've noticed several comments and articles being bandied around that seem to want to try to explain why these murdering bastards did what they did as if it's all the fault of the cartoonists for drawing the cartoons in the first place.

Now I wouldn't mind if these utterly deluded murdering bastards had wandered into the Charlie office and started throwing punches while shouting 'you insulted my sky fairy', that's fair enough

You think it's fair enough to invade someone's place of work and start beating them up because you disagree with something they've published? Sorry, can't agree with that.

A better analogy would be if the CH journalists had stood outside a mosque, waving their Mohammed cartoons in people's faces, since that is the kind of direct antagonism that demands a response.

[Corkboy]

You think it's fair enough to invade someone's place of work and start beating them up because you disagree with something they've published? Sorry, can't agree with that.

A better analogy would be if the CH journalists had stood outside a mosque, waving their Mohammed cartoons in people's faces, since that is the kind of direct antagonism that demands a response.

No, it doesn't. The response is a choice.

[weebroalan]

there's a cartoon for it already.



Victim blaming

I think its a bit unfair on some people to label it as this.

If I purposely rock up to Old Trafford with a Munich banner and people kick the crap out of me and I'm left for dead how much actual sympathy would there be for my free speech?

There is an argument for respect in all of this.

If went spent all my time lampooning my Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist friends, poking fun at them and demeaning them etc then I would have no friends and would lead a very lonely and sad life.

I'm a little disappointed that people are so narrow minded to label everyone who argues for respect as secretively supporting the murder of the innocent cartoonists.

[Corkboy]

I can see Frank the Pope's view. If someone insults my mother, I am sure there aren't too many cops or judges who would mind me giving said insulter a slap. But that doesn't make it right. I also know that for many Muslims, the Prophet is more beloved than spouse or children (literally) so they claim to be in the same category with their (at best) long dead historical figure as me and my mum. I mean, that's just fucking nuts.

[The North Bank]

You think it's fair enough to invade someone's place of work and start beating them up because you disagree with something they've published? Sorry, can't agree with that.

A better analogy would be if the CH journalists had stood outside a mosque, waving their Mohammed cartoons in people's faces, since that is the kind of direct antagonism that demands a response.

If the nutters had any sense of logic they would have noticed how the magazine was losing money constantly,had a very small readership base and probably would've disappeared sometime in future, because multicultural France did not find it funny.
I guess once you reach a certain level of insanity you tend to do things that completely back fire at you.

[The Gulleysucker]

You think it's fair enough to invade someone's place of work and start beating them up because you disagree with something they've published? Sorry, can't agree with that.

Not really, it was perhaps a poor choice of words by myself.

I meant fair not as being a reasonable response, but as in fair enough,  as in I could understand emotions getting heated and spilling over into common assault ie I meant I could understand (although not condone) an explanation from apologists for these characters abhorrent behaviour if it was just a punch up that had occurred, but certainly not when it's a cold blooded execution. One way at least maybe leaves people and ego's bruised, both sides are equally armed, but the other, the way those bastards went about their slaughter, always results in coffins.

[Corkboy]

If the nutters had any sense of logic they would have noticed how the magazine was losing money constantly,had a very small readership base and probably would've disappeared sometime in future, because multicultural France did not find it funny.
I guess once you reach a certain level of insanity you tend to do things that completely back fire at you.

Yup. If some Muslim bloke had rocked up to Charlie Hebdo's offices and sat down outside for an hour or two with a sign saying what he thought of their cartoons, I'd have a lot of respect for him. Civilised, grown up disagreement.

[Alan_X]

I don't think the pope has some sort of agenda in his comments. He's just a nice old man trying to keep the peace. Everyone has become so touchy lately. If someone says every action has a consequence, it's interpreted as condoning violence, when its actually just stating a fact.

If he doesn't have an agenda then what's the point of him being pope? Christian teaching is that you turn the other cheek not smack someone in the mouth. The message is quite clear - defend religion, any religion, above all else.

[The North Bank]

I think its a bit unfair on some people to label it as this.

If I purposely rock up to Old Trafford with a Munich banner and people kick the crap out of me and I'm left for dead how much actual sympathy would there be for my free speech?

There is an argument for respect in all of this.

If went spent all my time lampooning my Catholic, Jewish, Muslim, Atheist friends, poking fun at them and demeaning them etc then I would have no friends and would lead a very lonely and sad life.

I'm a little disappointed that people are so narrow minded to label everyone who argues for respect as secretively supporting the murder of the innocent cartoonists.

Completely agree. The way I see it. The highest form of freedom of speech is knowing that you can offend anyone you want, and not doing it, exercising your right not to offend when you know you can. That is complete freedom.  Ones that take up the right to offend are not actually free. They are bound to a stereotype that they cant shake off.
Maybe its too soon to put forward alternative point of views because emotions are running high, understandably so, because of the horrific murders of people who chose to exercise their legal right to offend for a living.