Started by Que, February 20, 2022, 12:59:09 AM
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Quote from: Florestan on Today at 08:42:49 AMMy point exactly.I do tell and do enjoy jokes about Hungarians, Roma people, Jews, Scotttish people, Romanian people, Italians and what not. I've always taught, and I do teach, and I am teaching, ny son that we are all human beings, no matter the color of our skin, or the language we talk, or the religion we believe/not believe in.The burning of a religious text is a clear, obvious and incontrovertible indication that one not only hates that particular religion, but that they do want to publicly show their hate. And if they burn it in front of an embassy of a nation whose vast majority profess that religion, then it is a clear, obvious and incontrovertible indication that one hates that nation, too.That any nation calling themselves civilized should allow such hateful behavior to go unchecked in the name of free speech leaves me truly speechless.
Quote from: absolutelybaching on Today at 11:27:07 AMI don't agree.
Quote from: absolutelybaching on Today at 11:27:07 AMSo long as my disagreement and hatred are constrained within the limits of civil discourse: live with it.
Quote from: Florestan on Today at 12:01:39 PMWhat if, as is often the case, the limits of civil discourse are trespassed? What then, pray tell? Who is entitled, if anybody, to keep one's discourse within the limits oi civility?
Quote from: 71 dB on Today at 04:11:43 AMAre you saying I am not allowed to destroy my STAR WARS blu-rays, because Disney owns the copyrights?
Quote from: Fëanor on Today at 05:09:38 AMI agree that's hypocritical -- someone ought to go and burn a Tanakh in from of the Israeli embassy just to put the matter to the test in the courts.Well OK, I'm mostly kidding. However in principle I defend to right of anyone to criticize their own or anyone else's religion: it might be hate speech in a specific context but it isn't inherently so. What are we to make of the laws of a country like Pakistan were it is a capital offence to "offend" the Prophet or sully the Qur'an?
Quote from: BasilValentine on Today at 06:00:58 AMFlag burning is legal in the US. No one is required to recite the pledge of allegiance. No one is required to worship veterans. I can burn a stack of bibles without repercussions. In fact, a local thrift store gives bibles away for free and I use those thin crispy pages as kindling in my wood stove. Have you seen the hilarious new trend of satanists delivering opening prayers at school board meetings?Perhaps every culture has its superstitions. It's the ones willing to kill over them that concern me.
Quote from: absolutelybaching on Today at 12:30:27 PMThe limits of civil discourse are that one should not feel imminently threatened, or actually be threatened.That you are offended or your feelings are hurt: tough luck.Should your speech involve incitement to violence, or threaten violence, or be part of an acutally violent act, then you suffer the legal consequences. Short of that, you are good to go, no matter how much my feelings may be hurt.I don't know that it is "often the case" that the limits of civil discourse are often trespassed. I've frequently had 'eff off fag' shouted at me, but I've not often felt that this would translate into actually getting out of their car and pummelling me to the ground. I think it quite rare that even virulent speech trangresses those particular boundaries.
Quote from: BasilValentine on Today at 01:25:21 PMstochastic terrorism
Quote from: Madiel on Today at 01:20:07 PMI'm saying that you don't own Star Wars. Which would be equivalent to what you said about owning holy scriptures.
Quote from: Florestan on Today at 10:28:58 AMLadies and gentlemen,I just made Todd reply anything other than "Incorrect."Let's party!
Quote from: Todd on Today at 08:41:06 AMYour hypotheticals are detached from reality. The diplomatic fuss between Turkey and Sweden is not really about Koran burning. That is a convenient public pretext. The most substantive public issue involves Turkey's claims of Sweden harboring political enemies of Turkey (eg, Gülenists). Another obvious motive of Erdoğan is to leverage anti-Western sentiment in his country to deflect from domestic issues, such as obscene inflation and botched economic policies across the board. There is also a strong possibility that Erdoğan sees Sweden as a threat to the Turkish arms industry. Sweden has one of the most advanced arms industries in Europe, and full integration into NATO would mean that Swedish arms would be more widely sold, potentially eating into Turkey's market share before it could grow its non-NATO market sufficiently. Canada and Romania do not have similar issues to work through.
Quote from: Madiel on Today at 01:22:38 PMI wasn't talking about whether it was legal. There are plenty of things that are legal that can get you into a lot of trouble with people, rather than the law.
Quote from: LKB on Today at 03:46:22 PMFirst sentence: Incorrect.
Quote from: 71 dB on Today at 03:29:08 PMIf you burn a book, you burn one copy of book which hopefully is your property you have paid for. It is not burning the content. The "content" (intellectual property) is in possession of the copyright owner, safe and sound.. I don't own Star Wars, but I am allowed to destroy the Blu-rays I have bought and paid for if I want (I don't). I am also allowed to burn the books I own. Then again, I don't own any "holy books." I haven't talked about owning holy scriptures. Who "owns" the rights to holy books anyway? Who has the right to print copies of them and sell them? This is all about BURNING BOOKS YOU OWN.
Quote from: 71 dB on Today at 04:41:19 PMI'm done with the book burning thing.
Page created in 0.032 seconds with 27 queries.