Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NaTaLiiA513)
    Like I said I'M NOT SURE. If you think France is a "Free Country" and that the politicians and govt. are always going to be the good guys then I'm afraid you're going to be in for a shock. Govt. do this. There is not one govt. on the planet that is not corrupt. It's just the way of the world.
    if you want critisise the french govmnt for being manipulaitve, then to b consistent u must do so for the islamic influences that are many times more manipulative
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    They use "scrape goats". It's happened before (example; My Lai) and it can happen again.

    (Original post by lucaf)
    Yes yes 9 11 was an inside job and suchwhat :rolleyes:
    When did I mention 9/11? Are you ok there? Live in your dream land full of butterflies and unicorns for all I care. You certainly don't know what you're talking about.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HarryBarney)
    Oh yeah they left a shoe behind. :/. A shoe.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The prince should make every muslim in the land try it on til they find the one it fits.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tsukuyomi)
    The double standards and hypocrisy
    You obviously don't understand what freedom of speech actually means in France and Britain. We have freedom of speech within the law not absolutely. The same is actually true in the USA, which has a much-vaunted constitutional right to free speech.

    Those who argue for complete freedom of speech simply have not thought through the pitfalls that would bring. For instance, shouting Fire! as a joke in a crowded cinema would very likely result in injury or death. It is, therefore against the law to do so.

    Similarly, it is illegal to incite people to hatred, or to commit hate crimes or crimes such as murder. If you defame someone you may be liable to be sued by that person.

    However, criticising someone within the law, mocking them or their beliefs, drawing attention to their hypocrisy or the flaws in their arguments are all, very reasonably, not illegal. Blasphemy is no longer illegal in Britain.

    Religions and religious sensibilities should not be protected for many reasons, not least among them being the difficulty of defining what belief is a religion and what is merely a superstition. Many people nowadays claim to be adherents of fictitious religions such as Jediism and Pastafarianism as well. I would argue that all religions are merely formalised superstitious beliefs, except for the fictional ones but, let's face it, they all started as fictional ones.

    If we didn't have these freedoms we would invite return to the situation that prevailed in earlier times (and which the terrorists want now) whereby minorities could not practise their religions at all.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elhm1800)
    Well thats quite subjective isnt...and judgmental

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Of course religion is irrational, what's rational about it?
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Those terrorists are killing all of Muslims. What will happen if people who hate Islam use the same way?

    Those Muslim terrorists love the words " an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth"?

    If they love those words, all of Muslims will surely be in danger. People around the world will hate Muslims more each day. That's what Muhammad really wants?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    can we ( the free West) not express our freedom without offending other cultures and religions ?

    Charlie Hebdo or Private Eye and the like could easily carry on being entertaining
    by directing satirical news towards our politicians and show biz people.
    Why extend this to sacred figures whom we know little about.

    I don't think we should have the freedom to offend.

    Having said that, no one should be killed for this of course !
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acefrogman)
    can we ( the free West) not express our freedom without offending other cultures and religions ?

    Charlie Hebdo or Private Eye and the like could easily carry on being entertaining
    by directing satirical news towards our politicians and show biz people.
    Why extend this to sacred figures whom we know little about.

    I don't think we should have the freedom to offend.

    Having said that, no one should be killed for this of course !
    are we really free lol? Aren't we being spied on by our own governments? They use terrorists as a fear for the general public and in secret they introduce new laws that affects everyone's freedom as a result of "terrorist" attacks.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by joe01223)
    are we really free lol? Aren't we being spied on by our own governments? They use terrorists as a fear for the general public and in secret they introduce new laws that affects everyone's freedom as a result of "terrorist" attacks.
    you are probably right ! It's just that we are constantly told we are free and I had believed it ! except we can put 3 fingers up in the air without getting arrested, as they do in Thailand.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dexa)
    Who else think that the newspaper was stupid to almost bring this onto themselves? Why do something that you know will provoke a reaction from extremists? My sympathies to those who suffered for this.
    Girls are stupid to wear nice clothes because it provokes rape. People are stupid for buying nice houses because it provokes burglary. You could have said either of those and still not sounded any more stupid


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by acefrogman)
    can we ( the free West) not express our freedom without offending other cultures and religions ?

    Charlie Hebdo or Private Eye and the like could easily carry on being entertaining
    by directing satirical news towards our politicians and show biz people.
    Why extend this to sacred figures whom we know little about.

    I don't think we should have the freedom to offend.

    Having said that, no one should be killed for this of course !
    neither paper could be regarded as 'entertainment' they both have tiny circulations, they are in the business of satirical major institutions, as is the tradition of western democracy to be able to do so without censorship for hundreds of years. the cartoons may not actually be that funny but they have right to lampoon public figures or figures of history , which mohammed is.

    if you want to create some offense in your head as islamists do, you can, but only in your head.
    ironically not only have islamist proved the magazines point of the irrationality of the mohamedian ideology led to, but it also gave that magazine more world coverage than it has ever had in all of its time. Islamists didnt have enough braincells between them to work that one out.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    People are stupid for buying nice houses because it provokes burglary.Posted from TSR Mobile
    So do you disagree with these poster campaigns, for example? Do you consider them to be apologising for thieves and an affront to freedom of expression and private property rights?

    The ideology is that people should and will remain passive in the face of the most vile and offensive remarks because they all believe in unconditional free speech and a 'sticks and stones' principle, but this is obviously not the case. The ideology is that people can walk along the streets at night with valuable possessions on show without any fear of being mugged, but this is obviously not the case, so the government is advising people to be conscious of the fact that not everyone respects their ideology. Where should the balance between an ideology and reality be set?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saywhatm8)
    So do you disagree with these poster campaigns, for example? Do you consider them to be apologising for thieves and an affront to freedom of expression and private property rights?

    The ideology is that people should and will remain passive in the face of the most vile and offensive remarks because they all believe in unconditional free speech and a 'sticks and stones' principle, but this is obviously not the case. The ideology is that people can walk along the streets at night with valuable possessions on show without any fear of being mugged, but this is obviously not the case, so the government is advising people to be conscious of the fact that not everyone respects their ideology. Where should the balance between an ideology and reality be set?
    Yes I do disagree with those, it's essentially victim blaming. When you do something completely legal you don't deserve to have an illegal action against you, to suggest you brought it on yourself relieves the responsibility on the people who've broken the law


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Wade-)
    Yes I do disagree with those, it's essentially victim blaming. When you do something completely legal you don't deserve to have an illegal action against you, to suggest you brought it on yourself relieves the responsibility on the people who've broken the law


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    But people are going to continue to break the law, regardless of how much you proclaim your rights. Who would receive more ridicule:
    • The person who leaves their laptop unattended in a café with a sign saying "I have private property rights and you are legally obliged to respect them."
    • The person who doesn't leave his laptop unattended for the fear of having it stolen?


    Does the thief care about your rights? Knowing the answer is no, how should you react? By leaving your laptop with a sign or by self-limiting your rights to preserve your best interests?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lucaf)
    Corrupt but not stupid, what politician would risk it being found out?



    Yes yes 9 11 was an inside job and suchwhat :rolleyes:



    Yes, it is about men fighting for power. And if you let other men stop you from drawing a ****ing cartoon then they are the ones with the power. The ones who who are willing to kill for a drawing are the ones who are trying to assert the dominance of their ideology on others, the people drawing the cartoons are showing they are not willing to be cowed.

    Why do you act like it is childish to stand up for your freedoms?

    If you think this is just about a cartoon and all that mumbo jumboa about standing up for your imaginary freedoms you are deluded.
    This is a deep social issue that has been simmering for centuries.
    Lets say these terrorists are of algerian descent.
    Ok so for 200 odd years their forefathers were ****ed over by the french,women and children slaughtered and raped. Their grandparents or their parents moved to france and were ****ed over by the french and slaughtered, they were born in 1990's and no apologies have been issued and they continue to be ****ed over by the french, then you get these stupid cartoonists causing trouble antagonising them looking for trouble this is what happens. You obviously have no idea what france as a country has done over the years and no nothing about algerian and french relations.
    Its all relevant.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    We must remember that immigration and multiculturalism is a blessing.

    I think integration into society by Muslims is inevitable.
    It's what happens over time when different types of people live
    closely together: they draw from each other's
    experiences and eventually become more like each other.

    We are a moderate, tolerant country. This is the 21st Century,
    where our capital city is now less than 50% white and the most tolerant
    and diverse on earth, where gay marriage is not just accepted but
    celebrated, and where our greatest Olympic hero (Mo Farah) is a black
    Muslim man of Somali background.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by saywhatm8)
    But people are going to continue to break the law, regardless of how much you proclaim your rights. Who would receive more ridicule:
    • The person who leaves their laptop unattended in a café with a sign saying "I have private property rights and you are legally obliged to respect them."
    • The person who doesn't leave his laptop unattended for the fear of having it stolen?


    Does the thief care about your rights? Knowing the answer is no, how should you react? By leaving your laptop with a sign or by self-limiting your rights to preserve your best interests?
    I'll repeat what I said, by claiming that a person is at fault for a crime being committed against them. Try going to a thread about rape and telling all the femnazi's that women are in anyway at fault for being raped because they wore revealing clothes


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Skip_Snip)
    Of course religion is irrational, what's rational about it?
    'If I leave (or even start thinking critically about) my religion, my family/community will shun me or worse... let's stick with religion'

    ...sounds quite rational, to be fair. Though it seems to be only the few who even get to the stage of that thought crystallising.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    You know, the biggest 'fringe benefit' of working in South East Asia isn't the food, the cheap alcohol, the girls, or the weather. I can honestly say the biggest benefit is that I can actually go weeks without seeing a muslim, and when these animals do start kicking off they get the beatdown they deserve.

    It's only in the West these scum are accepted, with a load of liberal hand wringing about 'tolerance' and 'diversity'. Everyone else in the world absolutely cannot stand them. They get turned away from bars and clubs, no one outside their own kind talks to them, the girls wouldn't be seen dead with one. They're shunned by society here, and I have no sympathy whatsoever as they bring it all on themselves.



    ZOMG MOHAMMMMMMED ALLAH BOOOOOOM!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Couldn't care less tbh. Doubt they would give a damn if it happened in a non ethnically European country.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: January 22, 2015
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
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.