Free speech or Hate speech?

[royalflush313]

So unless you have been under a rock for the last few days, you have heard of the infamous Cartoon dilemma :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4682388.stm

So should the cartoons be considered freedom of expression or is it hate speech?

Suppose every single person in Denmark were not offended by the cartoons; if it offends others in other countries, where should national law take into account of international politics?

IMO, those cartoons are hate speech.
But this is a scenario of two wrongs, even if the cartoons could be categorized as blasphemous hate speech, protesters canoot possibly be given the consent to condone any violence.

What do you guys think?

[Avus E30]

I say its distasteful and the publishers should have know the reaction it was going to cause but its up to them to stir shit up. it probably wasnt a good idea in the world scope but I say if they want to why not.

[hamann318is]

With the amount of Americans that use "hate speech," it's most likely free speech. Distasteful yes, stupid yes, but why shouldn't he have a right to say what he wants?

[royalflush313]

I should've worded it better.

Hate speech/free speech in terms of what they should be, not what it is by the current law/international law.

There's a difference between exercising religion / talking about their religion and saying that one religion is better than another (which the cartoons are essentially saying).

The law on free speech / hate speech couldn't be anymore ambiguous. It's hard for anyone to distinguish between the two.
If a speech that will incite an act that is objectively wrong (whatever that may be), it should be hate speech. Having said that, whether if some form of provocation is involved, something that is objectively wrong can't be justified as a result of any speech. So in a world where no-one broke the law, there would never exist such a thing as hate speech - hate speech only exist so far as there is physical reaction. Or no?

So in the end of the day, ideally, any form of speech shouldn't justify any heinous acts, but the reality is, people do stupid shit when invoked.

If I formed a group, which objected to let's say South Park, and everytime it offended us, we went on to set fire to those who watch the show, is the TV show promoting hate speech?
Sounds stupid, but in the world where opinions and morals are as subjective as they can be, who is it say that one person's strong opinion regarding religion has more weight than someone who is strongly disgusted by a show or music?

I'm so confused. I need help.

[Ryan Stewart]

So? where are the comics? I bet they were pretty funny.

Fuck em if they dont want other people characterizing Mohammed. Fuck em if they cant take a joke. It hardly gives them the right to destroy property and threaten lives. Jesus should kick their asses.

[Habla]

Spoken like a true ignorant American. America, fuck yeah! U-S-A! U-S-A!

[Avus E30]

This problem is that the offended group here tends to be easily provoked to violence. Most other groups in the world don't immediately strike up the rock throwing and riots. Be that as it may i disagree with the cartoons offensived nature just because there is no reason to "poke the bear".

[Ryan Stewart]

Spoken like a true ignorant American. America, fuck yeah! U-S-A! U-S-A!

WOrd son.

Actually I disagree with a lot about our country but, serisously, it doesnt give me the right to burn your fucking house down and pelt you with rocks.

I havent seen these comics but if they are resorting to violence just because someone used images of Mohammed in pictures then fuck em. Im not a fan of Christians either but at least they arent setting shit ablaze over the depiction of Jesus on Southpark.

Of course this doesnt apply to all muslims, just the ignorant ones. Im pretty sure I could show the cartoons to my roommate and all he would do is continue to punish our toilet after "Taco Tuesday."

[Avus E30]

this is the cartoon in the danish newspaper that starter the whole thing recently

[royalflush313]

this is the cartoon in the danish newspaper that starter the whole thing recently

well that's just one of them...

No-one is justifying the fire and other shit that happened afterwards.
I think that some formal apology needs to take place on both sides.

But my question was if such cartoon should be categorized as hate speech.

If I were to publish a picture of Jesus fucking a donkey in the newspaper in Canada or US, it would be a huge issue. Though such a picture would not be allowed in the newspaper in the first place.
Now, would that be a breach of free speech?

[Avus E30]

well that's just one of them...

thats just the one I have seen most on the news and so on. I don't doubt that there are others that are equally offensive. I agree that there were defenitely mistakes made on both sides. The cartoons are obviously of the nature that would upset the radical believers, but the violent reaction is not necessary.

[h0lmes]

Shit, at least it wasn't us who published those cartoons. I know that sounds selfish but if they are that pissed off at Denmark, and with the view they have of us, we would definately be fucked.

[Charlie]

Free Speech.

Quit blowing yourself and innocent women and children up. Quit crashing planes into buildings. Quit bombing buses and subways. Quit trampling 500 people every year at your "pilgrimmage" when you start chucking rocks at each other.

Quit this bullshit, and we'll stop making fun of your dumb fucking "religion". Denmark and France have been dealing with a huge upswing in illegal muslim immigrants, and the corresponding drastic increase in violent crime. Seeing as neither of these nations have made any outward motions towards islamic countries, the residents are justifiably pissed.

Yes, I am aware of the basic tenants of Islam that prevent any image of the prophet Muhammed being produced. Fuck them. Christians get the basic tenents of their religion mocked every single day in popular culture, you don't see "fatwas" and riots for those.

-Charlie

[Ryan Stewart]

If I were to publish a picture of Jesus fucking a donkey in the newspaper in Canada or US, it would be a huge issue. Though such a picture would not be allowed in the newspaper in the first place.
Now, would that be a breach of free speech?

Jesus has been satirized repeatedly. Shit, he is a character on one of the crudest and most offensive shows on TV. One whole episode made fun of him being a charlatan. His crusifiction has also been the butt of jokes. Vishnu and Buddah have been hit also. Shit Catholics are made fun of on a daily basis.

Like Charlie said, if people weren't blowing shit up in the name of Mohammed and Allah then maybe the rest of the world wouldnt associate them together. Its kind of like how people still associate the inquisition with the Catholic Church.

[nando]

Free Speech.

Quit blowing yourself and innocent women and children up. Quit crashing planes into buildings. Quit bombing buses and subways. Quit trampling 500 people every year at your "pilgrimmage" when you start chucking rocks at each other.

Quit this bullshit, and we'll stop making fun of your dumb fucking "religion". Denmark and France have been dealing with a huge upswing in illegal muslim immigrants, and the corresponding drastic increase in violent crime. Seeing as neither of these nations have made any outward motions towards islamic countries, the residents are justifiably pissed.

Yes, I am aware of the basic tenants of Islam that prevent any image of the prophet Muhammed being produced. Fuck them. Christians get the basic tenents of their religion mocked every single day in popular culture, you don't see "fatwas" and riots for those.

-Charlie

it's funny because they bitch and moan about people having that view about them, but as soon as somebody pokes at them they start blowing shit up again.