Turn on thread page Beta

Would you support laws against people denouncing Islam? watch

  • View Poll Results: Answer however many you like
    I would support laws that criminalise criticism of Islam
    10
    5.21%
    I would support laws that criminalise vilification of Islam
    17
    8.85%
    I would support laws that criminalises any negative speech against Muslims
    16
    8.33%
    I would not support any of the above.
    162
    84.38%

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    You missed out the option to introduce a law that makes it compulsory to criticise religion.




    Only in barbaric and backward countries like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In the west we have freedom of speech, which quite rightly includes the right to criticise and mock religions.
    Freedom is so counterproductive. The more rights someone has to do/say/wear something, the more rights someone has to oppose it because technically they are exercising the same right to do/say/wear as they please.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sweet n Sour)
    Freedom is so counterproductive.
    Why don't you go and live in North Korea then? Or Saudi Arabia?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Why don't you go and live in North Korea then? Or Saudi Arabia?
    I never said I didn't want freedom.

    I just pointed our critiques of the judicial system and legislature :erm:



    Isn't that me exercising my right to freedom of speech?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KingBradly)
    Would you support laws that protect Islam and stop people being able to criticise Islam or mock sensitive elements such as Muhammad?

    Would you also support laws that make it illegal to speak negatively about Muslims?
    Well if it's offensive to be racist, sexist, homophobic etc then why should we laugh off mean things that offend Muslims? (The same should apply to other religions too btw) if you're gonna protect Muslims, protect other religions too.
    I wouldn't support the law, but I wouldn't reject it either.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by angelcake123)
    Well if it's offensive to be racist, sexist, homophobic etc then why should we laugh off mean things that offend Muslims? (The same should apply to other religions too btw) if you're gonna protect Muslims, protect other religions too.
    I wouldn't support the law, but I wouldn't reject it either.
    Criticism and negative speech about religion are not the same thing as hate speech. Don't even try to falsely equivocate the two.

    Second off, race, sex, etc. are things we people are born with and cannot change. Religion is a choice. It should have as much protection from criticism as a bloody hairstyle or a jacket.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Basically do you believe in freedom of speech lol
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I cant quote but..
    The fine line between criticism and negative speech is subjective

    Yes religion is a choice but even so, why should we disrespect each others choices? Just because I grew up deciding to believe in Santa, that doesn't mean i should have been bombarded with insults about Santa. (Just an example, i acc never believed in santa lmao)

    Many muslims would agree that their religion is sacred. Whilst many people would agree that a jacket is not sacred. Don't try to falsely equivocate the two.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by angelcake123)
    I cant quote but..
    The fine line between criticism and negative speech is subjective
    Yes religion is a choice but even so, why should we disrespect each others choices? Just because I grew up deciding to believe in Santa, that doesn't mean i should have been bombarded with insults about Santa. (Just an example, i acc never believed in santa lmao)

    Many muslims would agree that their religion is sacred. Whilst many people would agree that a jacket is not sacred. Don't try to falsely equivocate the two.
    You are still unable to understand the difference. Hate speech is not the same as negative speech. Stating that "X" part of "Y" religion is sexist is not hate speech.

    Designating belief systems as protected is silly and dangerous. Should we also ban negative speech against pasta because some people are Pastafarians and members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and find Pasta and Ramen sacred (this is a real and registered belief system)? Can I start a religion based on Apple products and stop people from speaking ill of Steve Jobs and Iphones?

    It's a dangerous precedent. You cannot pick and choose which religions to protect. Either you support all of them, or you give them all the ability to be targeted under free speech. It doesn't matter that fewer people find jackets sacred, those people can and will demand to have the same protections and their claim would still be perfectly valid.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    ISLAM A BAD.

    I would not support that. British Muslim parents should stop sending their kids to Syria, Iraq etc to fight jihad.

    Mad and radical mullahs/clerics should have their long beards set of fire then thrown into jails filled with 6 ft plus 14 stone plus, rugby playing gay men for the rest of their lives.

    May those gay men do to them what they intend to do to 72 virgins in paradise.

    Don't quote me.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    As a law student I'm all for the right to free speech. However, some people and organisations use this *right* to say things that are racist and bigoted. Most can be dismissed or debated and proven to be bo****ks (gay rain, bongo bongo land etc) but a lot are sailing pretty close to the line of legality and free speech.

    Essentially people should be able to say what they like and I think we should be very careful about involving the law but equally, as a society I think we should use our own free speech to get rid of the haters
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fango_Jett)
    You are still unable to understand the difference. Hate speech is not the same as negative speech. Stating that "X" part of "Y" religion is sexist is not hate speech.

    Designating belief systems as protected is silly and dangerous. Should we also ban negative speech against pasta because some people are Pastafarians and members of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and find Pasta and Ramen sacred (this is a real and registered belief system)? Can I start a religion based on Apple products and stop people from speaking ill of Steve Jobs and Iphones?

    It's a dangerous precedent. You cannot pick and choose which religions to protect. Either you support all of them, or you give them all the ability to be targeted under free speech. It doesn't matter that fewer people find jackets sacred, those people can and will demand to have the same protections and their claim would still be perfectly valid.
    :Lol: I think I made it quite clear that I understand the difference between criticism and negative speech. However, everyone's definition of criticism and negative speech is subjective whether you like it or not. Therefore, when it comes to accepting criticism but banning negative speech, one may argue that they are just providing criticism whilst the other would accuse the other of negative speech.

    I also initially made it clear that all religions should be protected (not just islam). As humans we should all respect each other and each others beliefs, even if we don't agree with it. This thread was directed towards Muslims so I don't know why you're going off the tangent with pastafarians and sacred jackets.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Islam is a satanic backward death cult that should be banned. Its not a religion and its constant whining over almost every possible insult like you have just done makes good people even more sick of the pandering and political correctness that has given this evil so much leverage but people are starting to wake up to the dangers of this perverse paedo-mysogyno-homophobic death cult.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fango_Jett)
    Hate speech vs negative speech
    So you seem to be all clued up about the differences between the two so if I provide a couple of examples, could you categorize them?

    - We should burn the beards of radical and mad mullahs.

    - It is an undeniable fact that Islam breeds extremism and we should eradicate it from our society.

    - Those that act on their sexual feelings for those of the same gender, will burn in hell.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm41)
    So you seem to be all clued up about the differences between the two so if I provide a couple of examples, could you categorize them?

    - We should burn the beards of radical and mad mullahs. A joke, obviously

    - It is an undeniable fact that Islam breeds extremism and we should eradicate it from our society. An reasonable opinion (though I don't subscribe to all of it myself) though it could descend into illegality if the eradication were violent

    - Those that act on their sexual feelings for those of the same gender, will burn in hell. A silly superstitious belief.
    Done.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    Done.
    Err, categories being "hate speech" or "negative speech".

    You can't just go around inventing categories whenever you feel like it but yeah, your post really contributed to the thread.

    Perhaps you should read instead of jumping around like a jelly bean?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by angelcake123)
    :Lol: I think I made it quite clear that I understand the difference between criticism and negative speech.
    The point is that there isn't necessarily a difference between the two. If I make the reasonable assertion that Islam is barbaric because it supports slavery and the oppression of women, then I am being both critical and negative to Islam. This is not illegal.

    What is illegal (and wrong) is saying things that incite hatred or violence, such as Kill the infidels or Kill Rushdie or Burn Moslems.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm41)
    Err, categories being "hate speech" or "negative speech".
    In that case they are all negative, obviously, even the joke.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    In that case they are all negative, obviously, even the joke.
    Could you take those examples and explain to us all, how exactly are they not hate speech but rather, negative speech?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Errm41)
    Could you take those examples and explain to us all, how exactly are they not hate speech but rather, negative speech?
    The first is an obvious joke. The second is a political position. The third is a preposterous superstitious belief. Enough said.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Good bloke)
    The first is an obvious joke. The second is a political position. The third is a preposterous superstitious belief. Enough said.
    So obvious jokes cannot be hate speech?
    A political position cannot be hate speech?
    A superstitious belief cannot be hate speech?
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.