What's new
By:

Islamists kill 12 people in France during attack on newspaper office.

stitches said:
No, that's not a wise position. The position should be - satirists, novelist, pundits, every single citizen of a free country should be able to portray anyone and say anything without threat to their life. No BUTs. No "but it's sacrilegious", no "but this offends me". Free speech is always free, not only when you agree with it. I don't agree with and find a ton of positions appalling and disrespectful and offensive, but I'd always defend the right of the people who hold them to be able to say them without threat of bodily harm or persecution from the state. No BUTs.

Also, of course there are exceptions. For example there are laws against slander and libel. Those are for knowingly spreading objectively false information about somebody that results in harm to that person. The "fire" and "terrorism" ones have similar connotation - knowingly spreading false information that might result in harm to people(there have been instances with numerous victims caused by the panic because of somebody knowingly shouted "fire" when they knew there was no fire).

But when it actually comes to artistic work and expression and actual positions of conscience I have absolutely no idea why any speech should be banned, or any violent action excused, or any attempts to suggest that those people might have been better off not speaking because of threat of violence be tolerated. Everybody should have the right to put their thoughts forth and let them flourish or die in the battlefield of ideas, not in actual battlefields with people being killed for what they've thought or said. If your ideas are not strong enough to survive the scrutiny/ridicule/jokes of others maybe the problem is not with the ones scrutinizing and ridiculing them.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying and respect your opinion but I disagree with it.
 
The Thriller said:
Maybe satirists shouldn't depict sacred religious figures kissing men on the lips?

I don't condone killing. But depicting Mohammad kissing the head of that magazine was asinine. You're asking for trouble if you ask me.

Free speech is great. But shouldn't there be some boundaries? Some things should be left alone. No joking about terrorism at airports, no screaming fire in theaters, and no depicting sacred figures in completely sacreligious and disrespectful ways.
Click to expand...

I bet that you would be much less for this if Sarah Palin was appointed the next censorship czar.
 
The Thriller said:
With responses like this it makes me wonder why we even post at all? Did you even read what I said?

I didn't say anything close to "as long as it doesn't offend anybody."

I think you should read and reread my post.

We put limits on free speech all the time. Free speech doesn't mean that you can say whatever the hell you want, anywhere, and whenever and not face consequences.

Try it, go to the nearest airport and start cracking jokes about 9/11. Go into the nearest black community and start shouting the n word.
Click to expand...

I read what you said and found it to be ridiculous. Anybody who wants to draw the prophet however they wish to portray him should be free to do so just as they do with Christ. Religious people can just as easily call that person an idiot and move on. This whole PC stance is ridiculous and people need to grow a pair.
 
Wow, what an impressive showing of defiance by the population of France (3.5 - 4 million people) and solidarity by many world leaders (Germany, Spain, Russia, UK, Turkey, Israel, Jordan, Palestine...).

Extremely disappointed that no senior US officials, particularly the President, attended the rally and march. IMO, the President, Sec of State and Atty Gen (already in Paris!) should have been there at the rally. Our representative was our ambassador to France. Smh...
 
Stoked said:
Extremely disappointed that no senior US officials, particularly the President, attended the rally and march. IMO, the President, Sec of State and Atty Gen (already in Paris!) should have been there at the rally. Our representative was our ambassador to France. Smh...
Click to expand...

Agreed - Obama should have been there. Although I can't help but laugh at all these right wing pundits who 10 years ago wanted to do everything from change the name of French Fries to Freedom Fries to remove France as a permanent member of the UN Security Council are now killing Obama for disrespecting our great allies the French.
 
candrew said:
Agreed - Obama should have been there. Although I can't help but laugh at all these right wing pundits who 10 years ago wanted to do everything from change the name of French Fries to Freedom Fries to remove France as a permanent member of the UN Security Council are now killing Obama for disrespecting our great allies the French.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree, that stuff was asinine. Freedom fries...hahaha, idiots.
 
This wouldn't have happened in Texas. At least not as many people would have died, and still some people want to get away with being able to carry concealed weapons? Pleeeease
 
Jamezz said:
This wouldn't have happened in Texas. At least not as many people would have died, and still some people want to get away with being able to carry concealed weapons? Pleeeease
Click to expand...

What? No idea what you are trying to say here.

If you are saying this wouldn't happen in Texas then I'll be the first to tell you that it already has. Fort Hood.

If this is an arguement against concealed carry then that is foolish as they never tried to conceal carry. They jumped out of their car with AK47s...
 
Jamezz said:
This wouldn't have happened in Texas. At least not as many people would have died, and still some people want to get away with being able to carry concealed weapons? Pleeeease
Click to expand...

You mean like the armed police officers that were killed stopped it?
 
Stoked said:
What? No idea what you are trying to say here.

If you are saying this wouldn't happen in Texas then I'll be the first to tell you that it already has. Fort Hood.

If this is an arguement against concealed carry then that is foolish as they never tried to conceal carry. They jumped out of their car with AK47s...
Click to expand...

Quite the contrary, I'm all for conceal carry. That's what I'm saying, if someone in the bdg had some kind of gun power at least they could have tried to fight back. True that it's quite a mismatch when you talk about AK47's. We're only going to see more of this in 'soft' Europe, where I come from btw.

In Spain for example we've been asking for trouble for a long long time, with the laughable 'open doors' immigration policy. Some towns in the region of Catalonia and in France for that matter are already a majority Muslim. The problem with this will come when the Muslim try to implement anti-constitutional laws. I'm one that's not for stereotyping but how many times have I heard complaints about the already established laws in a given European country. If you don't like it, then GTFO.
 
Last edited:
Not to mention that I think it could very well have been staged. Not like it would have been the 1st time an event like this is (911, Madrid and London bombings etc...)

This is like heading back to the Crusades, there might be a Knight's Templar revival even.
 
The Thriller said:
Maybe satirists shouldn't depict sacred religious figures kissing men on the lips?

I don't condone killing. But depicting Mohammad kissing the head of that magazine was asinine. You're asking for trouble if you ask me.

Free speech is great. But shouldn't there be some boundaries? Some things should be left alone. No joking about terrorism at airports, no screaming fire in theaters, and no depicting sacred figures in completely sacreligious and disrespectful ways.
Click to expand...

Even for your death? This comment is despicable. If someone can't laugh at themselves I feel for their miserable existence. Those people need some humor in their lives.
 
Jamezz said:
Even for your death? This comment is despicable. If someone can't laugh at themselves I feel for their miserable existence. Those people need some humor in their lives.
Click to expand...
I think that all thriller is really trying to say is just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you always should. You should think about consequences before you say something (or write a comic in this instance)

Like you could go up to ufc champion jon jones and call him a ***** *** bitch made ******...... it is your free speech right.
But he will probably kick your ***
 
fishonjazz said:
I think that all thriller is really trying to say is just because you have the right to say something doesn't mean you always should. You should think about consequences before you say something (or write a comic in this instance)

Like you could go up to ufc champion jon jones and call him a ***** *** bitch made ******...... it is your free speech right.
But he will probably kick your ***
Click to expand...

And rightfully so, but he won't kill you, and if he does then HE will face the consequences. I agree that there's responsibility behind your actions while exercising your freedom of speech, but so what's next, a Comic Watch Force? This is beyond ridiculous.
 
Jamezz said:
And rightfully so, but he won't kill you, and if he does then HE will face the consequences. I agree that there's responsibility behind your actions while exercising your freedom of speech, but so what's next, a Comic Watch Force? This is beyond ridiculous.
Click to expand...
I agree it's beyond ridiculous. But we know that the hornets nest of Islamist extremists is out there and that they are very very irrational and violent when it comes to religion.
So making fun of islams prophet is a risk. Maybe a risk that would be better off not taken.
It's extremely stupid that there are people out there that can get so offended by a silly cartoon to the point of murdering a bunch of innocent people. Unfortunately those people are out there. Hopefully they (violent murdering extremists) all die
 
Why is "Islamist" a denigration? And what is it a denigration of? It's a word with very specific meaning that as used in the context of this thread is arguably pretty accurate.

Islamist does not mean Muslim. It means a proponent/activist for reordering of government and society in accordance with laws prescribed by Islam(Sharia law). Not all Muslim people are Islamists.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MVP
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top