Notices
Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: Freedom of speech and religion

  1. #1 Freedom of speech and religion 
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    A while ago a heated debate started about how far freedom of speech should go concerning religion. On one side are people who argue that freedom of speech is absolute and should not be limited in any way. On the other side it's argued that freedom of speech should be limited to protect people from insults and hate. The latter for example reprimand the Danish newspaper that ridiculed Islam.

    So what's your opinion? Should freedom of speech be an absolute right, or should it be limited when religious people feel insulted?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    I think freedom of speech means you will offend someone at some point, to limit it is not allowing freedom of speech

    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.

    Restricting peoples views is a downward slope. Religion is just someones theological choice and is no different from arguing someones choice of a political party.

    When your insulting someones race, sex, sexual preferences etc thats when i think it goes into a problem area. But religion isn't one of those :-D


    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    I think freedom of speech means you will offend someone at some point, to limit it is not allowing freedom of speech

    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.

    Restricting peoples views is a downward slope. Religion is just someones theological choice and is no different from arguing someones choice of a political party.

    When your insulting someones race, sex, sexual preferences etc thats when i think it goes into a problem area. But religion isn't one of those :-D
    Muslims believe any critisism (and sometimes even debate) on their religion is offensive, such comments will always provoke hatred, rage, and an application for a fatwa. They have a different mindset. In some ways it's like the age old battle between men and women, neither can understand why the other behaves like they do. It never used to be a problem simply because communication between the groups was limited, now with the internet anybody can stir it up, with their views being available around the world. It's going to get worse I think. Best just debate privately and not publish.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    I think freedom of speech means you will offend someone at some point, to limit it is not allowing freedom of speech

    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.

    Restricting peoples views is a downward slope. Religion is just someones theological choice and is no different from arguing someones choice of a political party.

    When your insulting someones race, sex, sexual preferences etc thats when i think it goes into a problem area. But religion isn't one of those :-D
    Muslims believe any critisism (and sometimes even debate) on their religion is offensive, such comments will always provoke hatred, rage, and an application for a fatwa. They have a different mindset. In some ways it's like the age old battle between men and women, neither can understand why the other behaves like they do. It never used to be a problem simply because communication between the groups was limited, now with the internet anybody can stir it up, with their views being available around the world. It's going to get worse I think. Best just debate privately and not publish.

    I believe in standing up for freedom of speech. If you cant critise Islam because of fatwas, they'll just move the goalposts and pressure other freedoms too

    Any religion that cant take critisism must be pretty weak. Why must we change our ways to suite another religion if they cannot do the same in return. Its all Take, Take and no give
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,169
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.
    That is potentially just about every possible instance.

    I favour unrestricted freedom of speech in every circumstance. This includes the right, so often used in such discussions, to shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre. Such a right should also be accompanied by the right to be sent to prison for a considerable number of years for attempted murder.

    While the right to say what one wishes should be unrestricted, the right ot judge people on the basis of what they say should also be unrestricted. Thus one might decide that the Danish cartoonists lacked good taste. We might also decide that the those objecting to the cartoons lack any sense of balance. As always, Shakespeare said it best - "A pox on both your houses."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.
    That is potentially just about every possible instance.

    I favour unrestricted freedom of speech in every circumstance. This includes the right, so often used in such discussions, to shout "Fire" in a crowded theatre. Such a right should also be accompanied by the right to be sent to prison for a considerable number of years for attempted murder.

    While the right to say what one wishes should be unrestricted, the right ot judge people on the basis of what they say should also be unrestricted. Thus one might decide that the Danish cartoonists lacked good taste. We might also decide that the those objecting to the cartoons lack any sense of balance. As always, Shakespeare said it best - "A pox on both your houses."

    its a case of double standards, A religious person can rubbish an athiests beliefs but the same in the other direction and the response is like your just slept with their grandmother. And its just a theology at the end of the day, and in the west thats still legal :-D

    The danish cartoonists one thing but the murder of the dutch artist was even more discraceful.
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    The only time it shouldn't be allowed is when it incites hatred.
    I think that the current system in the U.S. is a good one; you can say anything you want so long as it doesn't directly and immediately incite violence or endanger people’s safety. You can’t ban speech that simply offends people, because what offends people varies hugely from one person to the next and you could probably find at least one person who was offended by virtually anything. Similarly, there are no laws against hate speech – only laws against performing certain hateful acts.

    Punishing people for speech seems very close to punishing people for “thought crime,” where people are punished for simply holding a certain belief even if they haven’t actually done anything.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    its a case of double standards, A religious person can rubbish an athiests beliefs but the same in the other direction and the response is like your just slept with their grandmother. And its just a theology at the end of the day, and in the west thats still legal
    What a load of rubbish.

    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    The danish cartoonists one thing but the murder of the dutch artist was even more discraceful.
    Absolutely! The murder should be condemned and the murderer caught and punished. But the cartoonist is still dead. So, don't you think it wise from now on to be a bit more careful in this matter. Sure this may be a very good reason to dislike their religion and people, but perhaps there are safer ways to express this.

    The smallest meekest person can always be pushed too far and can find the means to exact terrible revenge, therefore is it not wise to treat everyone with respect as best we can?


    You know I am getting the impression that in Islam or Arab culture all the emphasis is on public rather than personal morality. It seems that appearances are more important than truth. I see a little of this same difference in Japanese culture. And if you think back, appearances even used to be a lot more important in western culture than they are now.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    its a case of double standards, A religious person can rubbish an athiests beliefs but the same in the other direction and the response is like your just slept with their grandmother. And its just a theology at the end of the day, and in the west thats still legal
    What a load of rubbish.

    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    The danish cartoonists one thing but the murder of the dutch artist was even more discraceful.
    Absolutely! The muder should be condemned and the murderer caught and punished. But the cartoonist is still dead. So, don't you think it wise from now on to be a bit more careful in this matter. Sure this may be a very good reason to dislike their religion and people, but perhaps there are safer ways to express this.

    The smallest meekest person can always be pushed too far and can find the means to exact terrible revenge, therefore is it not wise to treat everyone with respect as best we can?


    You know I am getting the impression that in Islam or Arab culture all the emphasis is on public rather than personal morality. It seems that appearances are more important than truth. I see a little of this same difference in Japanese culture. And if you think back, appearances even used to be a lot more important in western culture than they are now.

    Im not one to back down to threats from these type of extremist people, i can remember the exact saying but something like "for evil to succeed all good men have to do is nothing" or something along those lines :wink:

    There were alot of people died from the US, UK and other countrys to give us the freedom to speak our minds and it sometimes feels like political correctness is trying to take it all away

    Im not saying dont be diplomatic or curtious about things, but if i feel that a religious group/person is preaching and knocking my beliefs in no god and the rules of science and that perticular religion is wrong on a certain subject, its my right to say this.

    If i turn round and say i believe the koran and bible are ficticious, i have a right to do say based on my beliefs and opinions.

    My opinions have been like this for 15years+ and not just cause its topical, my opinions are that NO god exists, no matter what religion that is, and its not pointed at any one religion. The reason ive focused on the koran alot is because some of the statements in its name have been terrible and very poorley researched and down right rude and ignorant

    Eg the west only knowing about the existence of a "soul" about 100years, instead of from 200ish BC

    Also the double standard isn't rubbish :wink: . If a religious person tells me im talking rubbish and there IS a god and i say the opposite in return, you get the argument "you offending my religion"


    I think that the current system in the U.S. is a good one; you can say anything you want so long as it doesn't directly and immediately incite violence or endanger people’s safety. You can’t ban speech that simply offends people, because what offends people varies hugely from one person to the next and you could probably find at least one person who was offended by virtually anything. Similarly, there are no laws against hate speech – only laws against performing certain hateful acts.
    Scifor Refugee, yeah the uk legal systems very similar, as long as you dont cross the race, sexuality, age discrimination :-D But Religion is fine to critisise for theological reasons
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Also the double standard isn't rubbish :wink: . If a religious person tells me im talking rubbish and there IS a god and i say the opposite in return, you get the argument "you offending my religion"
    Well that does clarify for me what you were trying to say quite a bit. But the rubbish part is when you characterize all religious people as doing this. They don't. So say rather that, when religious people go preaching that atheists are evil and demonic and turn around and say "don't you dare offend my religion", then these people are definitely guilty of a double standard. I have seen the same kind of double standard perpetrated by atheists, who go around talking trash about religion to everyone and then turn around and complain about evangelists spouting their judgemental stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Im not one to back down to threats from these type of extremist people, i can remember the exact saying but something like "for evil to succeed all good men have to do is nothing" or something along those lines :wink:

    There were alot of people died from the US, UK and other countrys to give us the freedom to speak our minds and it sometimes feels like political correctness is trying to take it all away

    Im not saying dont be diplomatic or curtious about things, but if i feel that a religious group/person is preaching and knocking my beliefs in no god and the rules of science and that perticular religion is wrong on a certain subject, its my right to say this.

    If i turn round and say i believe the koran and bible are ficticious, i have a right to do say based on my beliefs and opinions.
    Indeed I quite a agree. There is balancing act involved here, for the there is a fine line between standing up for what you believe and going out and picking fights with people. Let us say therefore that we should pick our fights with some caution when we are sure it is really worth it.

    Islam does seem rather hotheaded to us at the moment. To us it looks like they are the ones going out and "picking a fight". But sometime this kind of thing can improve immensely when we come to understand them better.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11 Re: Freedom of speech and religion 
    墨子 DaBOB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    A while ago a heated debate started about how far freedom of speech should go concerning religion. On one side are people who argue that freedom of speech is absolute and should not be limited in any way. On the other side it's argued that freedom of speech should be limited to protect people from insults and hate. The latter for example reprimand the Danish newspaper that ridiculed Islam.

    So what's your opinion? Should freedom of speech be an absolute right, or should it be limited when religious people feel insulted?
    Haha this is a good one. In case you didn't realize, freedom of speech is an absolute right. No one can tell you what to think or what to say (you can only believe that they are telling you). As far as it being a law I would say that of course we should have freedom of speech. There are always gonna be those who are less considerate of others and how else can they express themselves without their freedom of speech. The worse thing about freedom of speech in my opinion is those who strut around saying worthless garbage "just because they can" (like those people who buy guns just because they can). My only hope is that someday they learn that with freedom comes responsibilty and respect.
    Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only realize the truth. There is no spoon. Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. -Spoon Boy
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard SkinWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Grand Prairie, TX
    Posts
    2,377
    The notion that religion should somehow be immune to ridicule and criticism that accompanies other human endeavors and institutions such as politics and pseudoscience is preposterous. I look forward to the day when religious ideologies and positions in the United States become embarrassing ones that won't be shared publicly. Much the same way belief in things like astrology or bigfoot or UFOs is. Public leaders who hold such beliefs are compelled to keep them private and not overtly base their decision making on them -and if its discovered that they do, then they get sacked at the next election.

    In addition, the Danish cartoons were so benign as to be ridiculous in the reactions that superstitious Muslims had over them. Ironically, the underlying message of some of them was that Islam is violent. Muslims took umbrage to this and did what?: firebombed danish businesses and threatened to murder Danes and other westerners. Dumbasses. They deserve ridicule and to be the laughing stock of the world every bit as much as Christian fundies in the U.S. that go on and on about Creation in the classroom.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Also the double standard isn't rubbish :wink: . If a religious person tells me im talking rubbish and there IS a god and i say the opposite in return, you get the argument "you offending my religion"
    Well that does clarify for me what you were trying to say quite a bit. But the rubbish part is when you characterize all religious people as doing this. They don't. So say rather that, when religious people go preaching that atheists are evil and demonic and turn around and say "don't you dare offend my religion", then these people are definitely guilty of a double standard. I have seen the same kind of double standard perpetrated by atheists, who go around talking trash about religion to everyone and then turn around and complain about evangelists spouting their judgemental stuff.

    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Im not one to back down to threats from these type of extremist people, i can remember the exact saying but something like "for evil to succeed all good men have to do is nothing" or something along those lines :wink:

    There were alot of people died from the US, UK and other countrys to give us the freedom to speak our minds and it sometimes feels like political correctness is trying to take it all away

    Im not saying dont be diplomatic or curtious about things, but if i feel that a religious group/person is preaching and knocking my beliefs in no god and the rules of science and that perticular religion is wrong on a certain subject, its my right to say this.

    If i turn round and say i believe the koran and bible are ficticious, i have a right to do say based on my beliefs and opinions.
    Indeed I quite a agree. There is balancing act involved here, for the there is a fine line between standing up for what you believe and going out and picking fights with people. Let us say therefore that we should pick our fights with some caution when we are sure it is really worth it.

    Islam does seem rather hotheaded to us at the moment. To us it looks like they are the ones going out and "picking a fight". But sometime this kind of thing can improve immensely when we come to understand them better.

    Yeah sorry mitchellmckain, i didn't mean every religious person but just a general argument. I know of some religious people who can pick fun of their own religion to a point. Some even like "life of brian" and just see it for what it is, a bit of fun

    Some dont have that sense of humour or sense at all :wink: over reacting with violence over another persons views and spitting their dummys(pacifier for the US folk :wink: )
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Guest
    Freedom of speech in a religious context, allows atheists to debate the existence or otherwise of God on the steps of the Al-Ghadir Mosque in Tehran after friday prayers.

    You are free to say what you like, but for your own safety you might like to choose carefully where, when, and to whom you address your remarks.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Freedom of speech in a religious context, allows atheists to debate the existence or otherwise of God on the steps of the Al-Ghadir Mosque in Tehran after friday prayers.

    You are free to say what you like, but for your own safety you might like to choose carefully where, when, and to whom you address your remarks.

    not very free then
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Guest
    Ever heard the expression "Nothing is free"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    I know of some religious people who can pick fun of their own religion to a point. Some even like "life of brian" and just see it for what it is, a bit of fun
    I haven't seen the "Life of Brian" yet. Maybe someday. I have read and enjoyed "The DaVinci Code" despite its strong anti-Christian sentiments, and I am looking forward to seeing the movie. Oh and I really enjoyed "The Last Temptation of Christ". I was particularly amused by the part where apostle Paul tells Jesus to his face that the historical Jesus is of no importance (poking fun at theologians who have said something like this).
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    I know of some religious people who can pick fun of their own religion to a point. Some even like "life of brian" and just see it for what it is, a bit of fun
    I haven't seen the "Life of Brian" yet. Maybe someday. I have read and enjoyed "The DaVinci Code" despite its strong anti-Christian sentiments, and I am looking forward to seeing the movie. Oh and I really enjoyed "The Last Temptation of Christ". I was particularly amused by the part where apostle Paul tells Jesus to his face that the historical Jesus is of no importance (poking fun at theologians who have said something like this).

    life of brian's one of my favourites but youve got to be very shallow skinned to find offence in it. Jerry springer the opera also had massive complaints and protests but also its a bit of fun and too much is being read into it.

    I dont know if the DaVinci code could be called totally anti-christian, and the thought of a mortal called jesus who had an offspring is plausible

    I believe similar, i believe there possible was a man called jesus who was probably a great leader at the time of the romans. But son of god.....

    No(in my opinion)

    But the son of god, miracles etc were probably down to exagerations by his followers that(like chinese whispers)got altered over time to the stories that are in the bible now.

    He was probably the Che Guevara of his times :-D (in my opinion :wink: )
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Guest
    I think that a person called Jesus may indeed have existed, I would not like to debate his parentage. In the Bible there is the parable of the good samaritan. Today if almost anyone found a person in those conditions, (robbed,beaten,injured etc), at least in the west they would probably help. Such an individual act would not therefore rate much today. I believe from this it is possible to see that conditions in those days may have been so harsh that almost anything other than bludgeoning someone to death might be considered a kindness. A bit extreme but I'm sure you get the point. Remember also the handshake was to show that you had no weapon in your right hand.


    Life of Brian? - It's not about christ, nor does it mock him. Only one sentence is directed at Jesus in the film if I remember right, it's at the sermon of the mount where some whizz yells "Oi, speak up a bit, can't hear a word". Well worth watching, and to get all the humour, watch it several times..
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    I think that a person called Jesus may indeed have existed, I would not like to debate his parentage. In the Bible there is the parable of the good samaritan. Today if almost anyone found a person in those conditions, (robbed,beaten,injured etc), at least in the west they would probably help. Such an individual act would not therefore rate much today. I believe from this it is possible to see that conditions in those days may have been so harsh that almost anything other than bludgeoning someone to death might be considered a kindness. A bit extreme but I'm sure you get the point. Remember also the handshake was to show that you had no weapon in your right hand.


    Life of Brian? - It's not about christ, nor does it mock him. Only one sentence is directed at Jesus in the film if I remember right, it's at the sermon of the mount where some whizz yells "Oi, speak up a bit, can't hear a word". Well worth watching, and to get all the humour, watch it several times..

    when it came out, they were screaming blasphemy and monty python did a sketch to mock it. which was pretty funny :-D
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Scifor Refugee, yeah the uk legal systems very similar, as long as you dont cross the race, sexuality, age discrimination :-D But Religion is fine to critisise for theological reasons
    That's actually a key difference. In the US the government can punish you for discrimination if you do things like refuse to rent apartments or give jobs to people because of their race/sex/religion/etc. In the UK you can be punished for simply saying mean things about people based on their race/sex/religion, even if the statements themselves don't cause any demonstratable harm to anyone. I would say that freedom of speech is far more restricted in the UK than the US.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    Scifor Refugee, yeah the uk legal systems very similar, as long as you dont cross the race, sexuality, age discrimination :-D But Religion is fine to critisise for theological reasons
    That's actually a key difference. In the US the government can punish you for discrimination if you do things like refuse to rent apartments or give jobs to people because of their race/sex/religion/etc. In the UK you can be punished for simply saying mean things about people based on their race/sex/religion, even if the statements themselves don't cause any demonstratable harm to anyone. I would say that freedom of speech is far more restricted in the UK than the US.
    The Uk, theres no problem with religion, but race/sex/age is

    We can insult Religion if we so wish without any laws broken but as you say we have to offer equal oppertunitys for jobs/housing etc

    A funny thing happened last week. A muslim police man was given a job in the police force in the equal oppertunitys system. Then a Nutty imam says it goes against the koran to belong to a "non muslim force" and therefore he shouldnt have had the job in the first place. But if he wasn't offered the job because of religion the same imam would have turned round and said its discrimination

    you cant win
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    you cant win
    I think that is the idea. That is, uness we consult the Koran before everything we do, then we can't win.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    In the US the government can punish you for discrimination if you do things like refuse to rent apartments or give jobs to people because of their race/sex/religion/etc. In the UK you can be punished for simply saying mean things about people based on their race/sex/religion, even if the statements themselves don't cause any demonstratable harm to anyone. I would say that freedom of speech is far more restricted in the UK than the US.
    I didn't know that, and actually I'd prefer the US system. I think the problem of systems such as the UK one (forbidding serious insults) is that it starts with something reasonable (like not denying the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide), but ends up with all kinds of little details (including religion).

    As most posters I think it should be perfectly legal to mock religion, as it's legal to mock any human idea. If someone claims dinosaurs live on the Sun then it should be allowed to laugh about it and draw cartoons to satirize the idea.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    Quote Originally Posted by Scifor Refugee
    In the US the government can punish you for discrimination if you do things like refuse to rent apartments or give jobs to people because of their race/sex/religion/etc. In the UK you can be punished for simply saying mean things about people based on their race/sex/religion, even if the statements themselves don't cause any demonstratable harm to anyone. I would say that freedom of speech is far more restricted in the UK than the US.
    I didn't know that, and actually I'd prefer the US system. I think the problem of systems such as the UK one (forbidding serious insults) is that it starts with something reasonable (like not denying the Holocaust and the Armenian genocide), but ends up with all kinds of little details (including religion).

    As most posters I think it should be perfectly legal to mock religion, as it's legal to mock any human idea. If someone claims dinosaurs live on the Sun then it should be allowed to laugh about it and draw cartoons to satirize the idea.

    No you miss read my comments(or i confused you ), you can mock religion or any belief system in the uk but not race,age or sex. which i think is pretty much a european thing

    The only time the law gets involved in the UK is if you say something like "kill all jews" then is obviously inciting racial hatred. But its perfectly legal to disagree with religion and religious beliefs

    One of our politicians this week spoke out and said that muslim womens full facial covering should be abolished as its detrimental to intergration, They also speak openly against radicals without any problem

    Obviously we cant go around shouting racist statements like the klan in the uk but thats a race issue and not religious
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    1,893
    Quote Originally Posted by captaincaveman
    No you miss read my comments(or i confused you ), you can mock religion or any belief system in the uk but not race,age or sex. which i think is pretty much a european thing
    I would point you toward the UK's Racial and Religious Hatred Act of 2006. The right to criticise religion in the UK does not appear to be much more secure that the right to criticise people's race or sex.
    The only time the law gets involved in the UK is if you say something like "kill all jews" then is obviously inciting racial hatred. But its perfectly legal to disagree with religion and religious beliefs
    There have also been cases of people being prosecuted in the UK for simply using "hate words". There was one case where a guy called his representative (I believe it was the house of commons) and urged him to support tighter immigration laws. During the conversation he used some offensive terms to refer to various ethnic groups and said that he thought they should be kept from immigrating to the UK. The guy was clearly a racist idiot, but he didn’t say anything along the lines of “kill all the Jews.” He ended up being prosecuted for it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    墨子 DaBOB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    1,674
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Ever heard the expression "Nothing is free"
    Beautiful.... This explains much of Buddhism I think. True freedom (or nervana) means complete lack of any and all cravings. Then you are in fact FREE!!! But untill then you are right, "nothing is free".
    Do not try and bend the spoon. That's impossible. Instead... only realize the truth. There is no spoon. Then you'll see that it is not the spoon that bends, it is only yourself. -Spoon Boy
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Professor Pendragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    1,085
    But how about something like the Danish Cartoons, or that theater play in which Mohammed is decapitated. Would they be allowed in the UK?

    Quote Originally Posted by DaBOB
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Ever heard the expression "Nothing is free"
    Beautiful.... This explains much of Buddhism I think. True freedom (or nervana) means complete lack of any and all cravings. Then you are in fact FREE!!! But untill then you are right, "nothing is free".
    C'mon DaBob, that's offtopic and you know it. Next time I delete it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Guest
    I seem to remember the danish cartoons were objected to because they depicted the prophet mohammed in full face. I thought this was out of order because there are thousands of muslim images of mohammed dating right back to the start of Islam. It was just another case of islam hypocracy.


    e.g

    http://www.myfreedomofspeech.org/200...ammed-in-full/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Pendragon
    But how about something like the Danish Cartoons, or that theater play in which Mohammed is decapitated. Would they be allowed in the UK?

    Quote Originally Posted by DaBOB
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Ever heard the expression "Nothing is free"
    Beautiful.... This explains much of Buddhism I think. True freedom (or nervana) means complete lack of any and all cravings. Then you are in fact FREE!!! But untill then you are right, "nothing is free".
    C'mon DaBob, that's offtopic and you know it. Next time I delete it.

    i think legally they would be allowed in uk, i think the reason they wern't, wasn't because of law but not to offend, but that could change now that people are getting sick of these demands put on them. Its part of british culture to do this. God, jesus and world politicians are regually in Uk papers in character form and its not a big deal. Its another case of people being too over sensitive

    The big thing at the moment is the full face covering of muslim women, recently a teaching assistant was asked to remove it as the children couldn't see her face and were struggling to learn speech technique's.

    She is now going to the human rights courts saying its her religion when its not anything to do with islam and pre-dates it by years

    All muslim faith schools that have to take on non muslims are trying to make the non muslim girls wear headscarfs as its part of their uniform and when the same argument happened with a muslim girl who was told to take it off for a western school, she said it effects her human rights

    Then theres the case of a muslim pharmacist who refused to give the morning after pill to a 30 something year old woman because its against his religion

    Or the taxi drivers refusing to pick people up with alcohol in their shopping bags for same reason

    These are the kind of things that make people fight back and say f**k it, if i offend someone

    The problem at the moment is muslims are getting touchy about things encroaching into their way of life. But are demanding we change ours to suit

    So i've got to the point of saying if it offends you Tough sh*t, freedom of speech has to be total else it will be ebbed away
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •