Prophet Muhammad Controversy

[ecapdeville 0]

Whilst we

[bassaam 0]

I had a damn sandwich for 4 Pounds while I was in London, 4 Pounds are almost 92 mexican pesos, a FORTUNE! I eat a complete and extense meal with 40 mexican pesos. (4 US dollars).

EXPENSIVE but lovely city...ahh I miss London...

Yeah man, London's awesome!

though if cheap, good food and filling is the criteria, nothing beats Pakistan. India is close, but too little meat!

[bassaam 0]

Freedom of speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/24...tone/index.html

[AutoRacer5 0]

Can't offend anybody, the world is falling to PCism.

[Max Mosley 2]

Freedom of speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/24...tone/index.html

In light of recent events (cartoons, Irving, your link) I'm beginning to agree with you that jews sometimes get special treatment over muslims. As I've said before both examples are ridiculous and are understandably feeding resentment amongst the muslims. My response would be to remove their protection rather than add Islam to the list of taboos. Perhaps Dryden can help:

But life can never be sincerely blest:

Heav'n punishes the bad, and proves the best.

The Jews, a headstrong, moody, murm'ring race,

As ever tri'd th'extent and stretch of grace;

God's pamper'd people whom, debauch'd with ease,

No king could govern, nor no God could please;

(Gods they had tri'd of every shape and size,

That god-smiths could produce, or priests devise:)

These Adam-wits, too fortunately free,

Began to dream they wanted liberty:

And when no rule, no precedent, was found

Of men, by laws less circumscrib'd and bound,

They led their wild desires to woods and caves,

And thought that all but savages were slaves.

They who, when Saul was dead, without a blow,

Made foolish Ishbosheth the crown forego;

Who banisht David did from Hebron bring,

And, with a general shout, proclaim'd him king:

Those very Jews, who, at their very best,

Their Humour more than loyalty exprest,

Now, wonder'd why, so long, they had obey'd

An idol-monarch which their hands had made:

Thought they might ruin him they could create;

Or melt him to that golden calf, a state.

[funkejay 0]

Freedom of speech?

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/02/24...tone/index.html

Not quite the same thing Bassaam....

The mayor signed a contract which precluded him from bringing his office into disrepute, and it was held that his comments did that very thing. No one is suggesting that he was not free to say what he did, but if you voluntarily enter into a contract which says your employer can fire you for saying certain things, or acting in a certain way, then the freedom to contract allows you to do so. Similarly, if you then breach that provision of your contract, your employer is entitled to rely upon the contract you signed and fire you. It's a simple matter of contracting certain self-imposed limits on your freedom of speech.

If the mayor had not wanted to do that, he could have negotiated a better contract.

In light of recent events (cartoons, Irving, your link) I'm beginning to agree with you that jews sometimes get special treatment over muslims. As I've said before both examples are ridiculous and are understandably feeding resentment amongst the muslims. My response would be to remove their protection rather than add Islam to the list of taboos.

This may be true, and if so, I would agree with Murray. The answer is not to reduce freedoms to their lowest common denominator, but rather to remove the protections that some enjoy over others.

[cavallino 2]

If the mayor had not wanted to do that, he could have negotiated a better contract.

This may be true, and if so, I would agree with Murray. The answer is not to reduce freedoms to their lowest common denominator, but rather to remove the protections that some enjoy over others.

Different perspectives Jay, I tend to expect the same unwritten contract against irresponsible journalism that should exist for each journalist. Damn I seem to keep changing my opinion on this cartoon business

[monza gorilla 1]

Freedom of speech? I'm reasonably happy with freedom of thought. I really couldn't give a tinker's cuss (lovely old English expression, that!) what a man's (or a woman's, of course!) spiritual beliefs are. It's their own business. This thread has revealed many shades of opinion, and many strongly held beliefs - Wez for example (not singling you out there, just using your views to illustrate the point my friend). It has also revealed varying levels of tolerance for the beliefs and ideals of others, and there's the rub.

[funkejay 0]

Different perspectives Jay, I tend to expect the same unwritten contract against irresponsible journalism that should exist for each journalist. Damn I seem to keep changing my opinion on this cartoon business

Really, cav, an unwritten contract? Between who, the journalist and his readers? And just how did they negotiate that contract?

You're confusing a term of a legally binding contract between a Mayor (who is a civil servant) and his employer (a branch of the government), with the nebulous relationship between a journalist (operating in the private sector) and his potential readers (who are his customers). There is no comparison between the two. One has voluntarily accepted (as a term of his employment) a legal obligation not to bring the government into disrepute, while the other has no such obligation at all.

[Max Mosley 2]

Alas, perhaps the moment has passed but I remembered a good article on evolution vs creationism from scientific american magazine. Perhaps Ash and Wez might find it interesting to see a mainstream scientific view...

Was Mr Darwin right?

[bassaam 0]

I still find it remarkable, especially funkejay, that you guys are having trouble letting go of the notion of Freedom of Speech.

Can't blame you though, it has been grilled into you guys from a very very young age. I remember learning about it in Kindergarden in Miami, we used to draw an American Flag and write Freedom of Speech, and then make the Statue of Liberty on the side.

I have three observations I want to share with you guys:

First, a philosophical one

Is freedom of speech an end in itself, or a means to an end. I would like to assume the latter, that freedom of speech was constituted to promote peace, knowledge, rights etc... . Because freedom of speech is instilled into us at a very young age, for many of us it become an end in itself. This is because we forget the reason for freedom of speech, but start assuming freedom of speech to be synonymous with every thing good.

Making things like Freedom of Speech an end in itself, we almost end up creating a new religion. With the ethos of this religion lying in the American Constitution.

Second, a practical outlook

Does freedom of speech actually exist? I personally think that Freedom of Speech is an ideal that really doesn't exist (much like democracy, captialism, communism etc... but that is an entirely different debate). You don't need to search very hard for this, I have already provided links saying the same. Ever heard a muslim cleric being sent to prison then being bashed up in Guantanamo for hate speech? Try opening up your legislation and finding all the major bans that exist against Freedom of Speech.

Third, a sort of an implied observation from the previous two

Can we, as a human race, actually live with Freedom of Speech? I think not! At times, for practical reasons you are better off staying shut. There are tons of ways that Freedom of speech can be abused and is. You don't need to investigate much to figure out how.

Hence, I personally feel, all images, cartoons, potraits etc... of the Holy Prophet should be banned. Call it hate speech, call it anything. It achieves NO purpose, is not ESSENTIAL for communication and hurts the emotions of 1/5 (maybe more) of human population.

[Max Mosley 2]

Well I'd say freedom of speach, while also being a force for good, is an end in itself. I want to live in a society where one is free to air one's views and that is always challenging its own preconceptions. Even if we lived in a world with no obvious problems I would still want to question things - I think a desire to analyse everything and improve is a fundamental human characteristic. Also I don't think you can say in advance what "speach" will achieve the goals you set for free speach.

We don't have complete freedom of speach. Personally I draw the line at deliberate incitement to violence. However I believe that it generally isn't and shouldn't be a crime to merely offend people. The examples you give all have other reasons for being banned, most of which I think are ridiculous as I've said before. Muslim clerics aren't jailed for offending christians, or they shouldn't be, but for inciting or even carrying out violence. Irving was jailed under a law designed to deal with racist ideas that had just caused WWII, but I think this law is an embarassment and should be scrapped. Etc.

[AutoRacer5 0]

Can we, as a human race, actually live with Freedom of Speech? I think not! At times, for practical reasons you are better off staying shut. There are tons of ways that Freedom of speech can be abused and is. You don't need to investigate much to figure out how.

Hence, I personally feel, all images, cartoons, potraits etc... of the Holy Prophet should be banned. Call it hate speech, call it anything. It achieves NO purpose, is not ESSENTIAL for communication and hurts the emotions of 1/5 (maybe more) of human population.

We can live with it if some people do not take everything literally. Remember the old saying "believe half of what you hear and everything you see?

Sure freedom of speech is abused by some, but its the freedom that counts. Let me use your logic against you:

All Anti-Semitic cartoons and Anti-Christian cartoons should be banned from appearing.

Don't you see what you are doing? You are limiting freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The cartoons did achieve something: It has shown how radicalized the Islam religion has become. What if a little kid wants to know what Muhammad looks like. Can someone draw him a picture? NO! why? Because its not holy! Doesn't make sense, now, does it?

Anti Catholic and Anti Christian cartoons hurts my emotions, but I blow them off. One I found was funny, it was Jesus walking from a 99 cent store to a 98 cent store, and underneath was "Jesus Saves". I found that humorous, and I constantly make fun of my own faith. Why? Because I, unlike you, have a sense of humor. You must understand that you probably fall under the radical wing of your faith by your speech. Look at the book I posted the link to earlier.

/rant

[hobbit 0]

I to think it was blown out of preportion. The riots about it were very stupid. Very over the top dont get me wrong it was a bad thing to do but overreacted to much