Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
We are not talking about 2 or 5 people finding it offensive, just add a "billion" to the "2+" then you have a problem.
So what? The point remains the same. Their lives, their decisions. You cannot compel everyone to abide by your standards and be deferential all the time to what you hold dear.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
There are plenty of people out there making irreverent cartoons and videos that someone else may find offensive or insulting. Mostly people do not give a fig to them. And in a free society, you cannot really police what someone else is doing unless their words or actions threaten someone else.** You cannot impose your sensibilities and your standards on everyone else**. Even if you did, there will likely always be some crazy person out there who will go against the stream and may make you feel insulted.
So what? The point remains the same. Their lives, their decisions. You cannot compel everyone to abide by your standards and be deferential all the time to what you hold dear.
I believe US does not allow nude people on streets, do we?
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
I believe US does not allow nude people on streets, do we?
It's not illegal under federal law, it's up the states (and yes, in some states you can walk around naked).
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
I believe US does not allow nude people on streets, do we?
The US also doesn't allow people to rape, rob, and murder.
There are places where it is perfectly legal and permissible to go nude. And no one is stopping you from making a case for public nudity. That's what is called free speech. You can make all the cartoons or videos you want, arguing for public nudity, criticizing the government and making fun of people who do not agree with you. Others may find that insulting and offensive but the right of free speech guarantees that you will not be punished for saying what you want.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
It's not illegal under federal law, it's up the states (and yes, in some states you can walk around naked).
I have not come across such 'permission' of total nudity on streets, anyways point is there are laws that are for 'everyone', even the freedom of speech does not mean you can hurl insults, you can make/voice your opinion but that is different from making insults I believe.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
The US also doesn't allow people to rape, rob, and murder.
There are, however, designated places **where it is perfectly legal and permissible to go nude. And no one is stopping you from **making a case for public nudity. That's what is called free speech. You can make all the cartoons or videos you want, arguing for public nudity, criticizing the government and making fun of people who do not agree with you. Others may find that insulting and offensive but the right of free speech guarantees that you will not be punished for saying what you want.
Again, you are abusing freedom of speech here. If you want to make a case for a designated place for people insulting each other by all means do it.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
Again, you are abusing freedom of speech here. If you want to make a case for a designated place for people insulting each other by all means do it.
You are confusing nudity with speech. Freedom of speech doesn't equate absolute laisseze faire. You can, however, argue for what you want. That's free speech.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
The Constitution of the United States explicitly forbids the government from curtailing freedom of press, speech or religion. The government is not--and CANNOT be--in the business of preventing a citizen from thinking in a particular manner or saying something, even if that something is deemed offensive by someone else in some part of the world. That, of course, does not mean that the American public or the government condones 'offensive' speech. Many Americans who have come to hear of this "movie" have been dismayed or disgusted. And let’s not forget that President Obama and others in the US administration have condemned it. Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the UN, for example, called it "hateful and offensive.” And Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, condemned in as "reprehensible and disgusting.”
Please don't hide behind the constitution and freedom of speech, these are just excuses to justify the biased and anti muslim beliefs held by many people. Nowadays since 9/11 it has become ok to hate muslims and to insult, abuse, attack, hurt, upset, anger, push, spy on them, to curtail their liberties and to demonise them. We are the new jews.
Muslims have nothing against the U.S but are only against the small band of people that have hijacked the control of the U.S.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
You act as if Muslims are the only ones offended by others in the U.S. Have you never heard of the protests that the Westboro Baptist Church holds against Jews, Homosexuals, and U.S. soldiers?
So Muslims are being highly offended by a small group of people, welcome to the club. You won’t be the last to join.
Westboro Baptist Church
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
In his instructions to the jury, U.S. District Judge Richard D. Bennett stated that the First Amendment protection of free speech has limits, including vulgar, offensive and shocking statements, and that the jury must decide "whether the defendant's actions would be highly offensive to a reasonable person, whether they were extreme and outrageous and whether these actions were so offensive and shocking as to not be entitled to First Amendment protection".
**
See also Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire , **a case where certain personal slurs and obscene utterances by an individual were found unworthy of First Amendment protection, due to the potential for violence resulting from their utterance.
In response to the protests conducted by Westboro members at funerals, a bill was introduced in the Indiana General Assembly that would make it a felony to protest within 500 feet (150 m) of a funeral. The bill provides penalties of up to three years in prison and a $10,000 fine for those found to be in violation of the law.
On May 23, 2006, the state of Michigan banned any intentional disruption of funerals within 500 feet (150 m) of the ceremony. Violating the statute would be a felony, punishable by up to two years in prison and a $5,000 fine for the first offense and up to four years in prison and a $10,000 fine for a subsequent offense.
On May 17, 2006, the state of enacted Senate Bill 1144, the "Let Them Rest In Peace Act", to shield grieving military families from protests during funerals and memorial services of fallen military service members. A first-time violation of the Act is a Class C misdemeanor, punishable by up to 30 days in jail and a $1,500 fine and a Class 4 felony for a second or subsequent offense, which is punishable by one to three years in state prison and a fine of up to $25,000.
On May 29, 2006, President George W. Bush signed into law the Respect for America's Fallen Heroes Act, prohibiting protests within 300 feet (91 m) of the entrance of any cemetery under control of the National Cemetery Administration from 60 minutes before to 60 minutes after a funeral. Penalties for violating the act are up to $100,000 in fines and up to one year imprisonment.** The bill garnered overwhelming bipartisan support in Congress with a 408–3 vote in the House, with 21 not voting, and a unanimous vote in the Senate.
**
On January 11, 2011, the state of Arizona held an emergency legislative session to pass a bill barring protests within 300 feet of a funeral and within an hour from its beginning or end. The bill was swiftly signed into law ahead of the January 12 funeral of those killed in the 2011 Tucson shooting
On August 2, 2012, Congress passed a bill that included restrictions on demonstrators at military funerals. The bill says that demonstrators are not allowed to picket from 2 hours before the funeral service until 2 hours after, and requires that protestors stay at least 300 feet away from grieving family members.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
The above I noticed from the link that you sent. This just proves that if the U.S wanted to take action it can do so. You can see the western hypocrisy, unless you are a paid propagandist in which case you have to portray the master in good light.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
The above I noticed from the link that you sent. This just proves that if the U.S wanted to take action it can do so.
Yes, Congress has taken action many times and the Supreme Court has over turned them many times, it's the way the system works. The Federal government has no power to stop the film that is upsetting Muslims, nor should they.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
Yes, Congress has taken action many times and the Supreme Court has over turned them many times, it's the way the system works. The Federal government has no power to stop the film that is upsetting Muslims, nor should they.
I don't think that you have read your own link.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
I don't think that you have read your own link.
I've read the Supreme Court ruling and can tell you what will happen to the bill that Congress passed if it becomes law (it currently is not).
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
I've read the Supreme Court ruling and can tell you what will happen to the bill that Congress passed if it becomes law (it currently is not).
Can you provide me with any links showing any of the laws being struck down, that are enacted and that are mentioned in my earlier post?
Also can you inform me of any limitations of the first amendment?
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
SNYDER v. PHELPShttp://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/10pdf/09-751.pdf
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
The link seems like a case. It does not seem like any law is being struck down. I say this without reading it. I think SC allowed the protests based on the protests involving matters of public concern.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
Please don't hide behind the constitution and freedom of speech, these are just excuses to justify the biased and anti muslim beliefs held by many people. Nowadays since 9/11 it has become ok to hate muslims and to insult, abuse, attack, hurt, upset, anger, push, spy on them, to curtail their liberties and to demonise them. We are the new jews.
Muslims have nothing against the U.S but are only against the small band of people that have hijacked the control of the U.S.
You are over exaggerating the islamophobia in the US. It exists, no one is denying that, but the laws that protect freedom of religion and freedom of speech also allowed Muslims to build a mosque in Tennessee, and build an Islamic Community Center near ground zero, in the face of extreme opposition. So yes, some in the US hate Muslims, but the very laws and culture that protect Muslims and allow them to fight (to some extent) for their rights also allow this lunatic to make his movie.
Is the US perfect? Hell no. And if you want to discuss their shortcomings I am happy to do so. I am not an American, but America does more for a "hate minority", as you claim Muslims are, than Pakistan or Saudi Arabia have ever done for their minorities.
One more thing, yes there is a double standard when it comes to free speech, but the concept still exists and many Americans do not agree with their government's handling of Bradley Cooper, the Patriot Act, and the President's increased executive powers. Freedom of speech is what allows citizens to question their government.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
Wow, what a thread you started. Has anyone actually addressed your question, or are we still dealing with the inane and obvious?
Yes, there is hypocrisy if you frame the situation in the right light. In some cases, the West does have a double standard with respect to limiting free speech based on hurt sentiments.
Then you have France. They do whatever the hell they want…logical consistency be damned.
Re: Freedom of speech & Western hypocrisy.
I am exaggerating the Islamophobia? Just go on any website...particularly a newspaper and look at the comments made when it concerns Islam or some muslim country. Just because you don't personally see it does not mean that it does not exist. Look at the actions of the government...and they speak for themselves.
Pakistan and Saudia don't do much for the majority so talking about a minority is a bit too much to ask, however the minorities are not the subject of ridicule, fear, hate and demonisation. There are some isolated insistences where minorities may be targetted but that is due to a dysfunctional state and criminal elements rather than anything else. You don't have the well off middle classes demonising a religion and all those that may practice it.