So the legal defense is that I burned a book, drew a cartoon, pissed on the cross, etc, etc. but I did not intent to incite violence, I uploaded the video to YouTube because I thought it was funny. Should the people behind the draw Mohamed day be arrested also?
No i believe that peopel ahve a right to hate. Whetehr your geert wilders or a radical Imam.I also dont think the government should be regulating what you can and cannot wear. Im sorry if personal freedom offends you.
I read (CNN I think, or the economist) that most (2/3 I think) of Americans are against the ban on the Burka. 4 or 5 European countries (Germany and France included) are in favor (Majority of the polled)
the people who need to be held responsible are the one's interfering with other people's pursuit of life, liberty and happiness (especially the life part - that's kind of a prerequisite for the other two). not the people who are exercising their constitutional rights.
I was listening to the BBC yesterday, and a French person defending the ban was going on and on about the shared culture and how Muslims needed to respect that. I guess personal freedoms and liberties aren't part of the "shared" French culture. seemed a bit ironic to me.
i agree you share the culture but no one should force you. I think immigrants in this country should speak english otherwise go back to your country . i wouldnt though want the government to force them into citizenship classes or jailing them if they dont learn english.
I think immigrants in this country should (and do) have the freedom to learn the language, or keep their own - whichever suits them best. just don't expect the rest of us (including the Government) to go out of our way to accommodate your choice not to learn English. too bad so sad if that prevents you from getting an education, get a job, complete basic government forms, etc.
me to however i do agree with religious exceptions in public places because of the first amendment. Nobody should be jailed for not wanting to speak english.
Immigrants to the UK now need to have a basic understanding of English as a pre-requisite to entry. I don't think it applies to asylum-seekers though. P.S. I hate how "asylum-seekers" has become a dirty word in the UK.
That is always the issue; people should have personal freedoms, responsibilities. What when they make the wrong choices? Telling them oh well you made your bed now lay on it, is one option. But most develop countries try to set up welfare, social entities to take care of those people. In the long run, we all end up paying for people that make bad decisions. Other wise we come across as cruel. Then again, what if people do the right thing and still fall bad and end up needing help? How do we tell them apart?
they have the freedomm to make wrong choices . it not the governments job to be there mommy and daddy.
I suppose you can try to give them an opportunity to help themselves. don't reward bad choices. what most Governments do is try to make them whole, and in the process either perpetuate their mistakes, or make their situation worse.
I am (clearly) not a lawyer but there is some line in the sand than should be drawn. In the classic example, one could argue that if people didn't panic, than no one would have been hurt. Personally, I don't think book burning, cartoons, or speech should be limited except in obvious circumstances in which such speech would likely directly result in others being hurt. But this view is not universal and I am attempting to keep the discussion going so I can judge where the line in the sand should be drawn. And no soccermilitant, personal freedom doesn't offend me. Smelly socks and bad breath do, however.
it wouldn't be. i really think you are glossing over the context. i doubt you'll be arrested for your piece of performance art
if others are harm then how is that the fault of the person doing the speech? Unless theysay 'go over here and kill that person" in no way should it be restricted no matter how offensive it is.
So if you go on a killing spree because of it, then we should arrest people with stinky feet, or only if they intentionally left stinky socks for you to smell?
That is why the dudes from Islamic revolution that just insinuated that some one could kill the south park creators get away with their hate speech, because they do not directly call for someone to kill them, they just insinuate, same for Neo Nazi radio/internet celebrities.
and yet, you get arrested in the US when you choose to exercise your personal freedom to go topless. heck, the whole nation goes ape-shaped because of a nipple on prime-time TV. seems to me that Americans are not that much more principled with the whole personal freedom thing, just that the cultural priorities are different.
i agree . American have become hyprocrates. I blame liberalism and conservatives they both brainwashed the american public hat big government is good.
Yes that is why the champion of small government France has much liberal rules regarding nudity. I am all for nipples on TV!
if only it were offensive acts that people found offensive. regrettably, there isn't a one-to-one relationship between people being offended and offensive acts.