free speech

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by martin, Sep 26, 2012.

  1. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    my argument was never about laws. it was about the obama adminstration presuming to speak for me about religion and art. the government should not weigh in about art, but that is no big deal.

    be they most definitely should never weigh in about religion, which is exactly what they have been doing.

    also, your argument all along was that the speech was inflammatory, thats what made it reprehensible. clearly it is inflammatory for that darling little girl to say what she did, as it caused violence.
     
  2. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    You ranted on free speech, chief.

    The government is not here to cater to your personal philosophy. Any government which ignores religion when conducting foreign policy would be incompetent, which is why none of them ignore it.

    I'm not surprised that you cannot see the difference. First, the girl's mission to promote female eduction was promoting democracy not hate. The ragheads film was intended to dengrate and insult Islam in a hateful fashion and to cause the kind of international trouble that now exists. It caused trouble for the US who needed to respond and did so appropriately.

    Secondly, the film was being interpreted as a United States film rather than a private film from an Egyptian Copt. It required a response form the US clarifying its position. The girls mission was not portrayed in the media as a United States effort.
     
  3. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    Intent is not relevant.
     
  4. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Only in martinworld.
     
  5. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    In Martin world all ideas are acceptable. Marts world does not prosecute thought crimes.
     
  6. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    No thought crimes have been prosecuted. You hold free speech for yourself, but deny the same to The President.
     
  7. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    you do not understand. by examining the intent of free speech we are implying that there is a "right" or "wrong" when it comes to art and ideas. that has been my point all along.

    this little girl who "caused" the violence, she didnt really cause anything. speaking is always ok. the gys who shot her are the bad guys. same thing with the youtube thing. you shouldnt judge art this way.

    also i think it is a violation of separation of church and state to call the video reprehensible.
     
  8. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    No, I understand very well. It's all about philosophy to you. Your philosophy, of course. Pragmatism, consequences, the realities of the real world never come into it.

    Philosophically, I can agree with much of what you say. But in the practical matter of the USA versus the ragheads, you are blind to practical reality, and a friend of Abdul.
     

Share This Page