Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    Proud of that one?
    What the . . .
    Offline

    11
    (Original post by Perry)
    all these laws that attempt to defend muslims, against criscisms of their religion and way of life?
    Don't actually see any laws that do that. Sorry.

    I was also wondering y muslim pple are so religious, even the younger people?
    To paraphrase:
    "Why are people of one particular religion, so religious?".

    Because it's their religion, maybe? Hell, I don't know why I'm answering.


    Perry, freedom of speech exists. Look at this thread, it's a valuable example. You have the freedom to express your views, even when largely/entirely unfounded and unconstructive. Luckily, we also have freedom of speech, which we all choose to rightly exercise in telling you that this thread is *****.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    Actually I have to state I think its disgusting that a simple question as a post cannot be made without the need for certain members to challenge and analyse everything the person says. Free speech...I don't think so. You should be ashamed. :mad:
    This is exactly what free speech is!
    Being able to do what you have said (challenge and analyse) is an example of free speech!
    Perry used their free speech to ask, we are using ours to tell them that the thread was just plain stupid!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    PERRY - Note: Most the people who disagree with you and take some sort of 'insult' here are...yep you've guessed it :rolleyes:
    I'm not muslim. I'm half scottish half english and had a christian upbringing (well reasonably).

    Frankly i think you're implication is ridiculous, as if only muslims would think that perry's comments were inflammatory and generalised rubbish. :mad:
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    freedom of speech is a right everyone should have IMO... but the fact is people dont know their limits and say things which then knock onto others peoples freedom to avoid abuse etc etc...
    if people knew their limits id have nothing against freedom of speech, but when its an idiotic or abusive comment, it sometimes makes you wonder if everyone deserves it...
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Proud of that one?
    Lara was pretty funny, yeh. The forumers didn't force her off through ridicule, she got banned for racism.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deej2)
    Freedom of Speech is more the ability to moan about the administration (government), the state, way things are in general. NOT a chance for people to spread religious hatred, biggotry, or views which are likely to offend people. Its a common mis-conception.
    In conclusion - Freedom of Speech is the right to moan if one wants, it is not a right to openly offend or insult someone.
    Freedom of speech is the freedom to say anything. What you are on about is represive speech. And to point out something, BNP members have more hatred swung at them than muslims, so would you agree with a "incitment to BNP hatred law" in order to protect BNP members from being "offended" since according to you freedom of speech
    is not a right to openly offend or insult someone
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deej2)
    In conclusion - Freedom of Speech is the right to moan if one wants, it is not a right to openly offend or insult someone.
    It is actually. Free speech doesnt end when you offend.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Straight Talker)
    Get your facts right before you spout utter nonsense.
    Rocks, throwing, glass houses.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    It is actually. Free speech doesnt end when you offend.
    10/10 you are totally right, frre speech means FREE
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vienna)
    It is actually. Free speech doesnt end when you offend.
    Ok, in theory, Free Speech doesnt end when someone gets offended, but rather unfortunately, in reality it most often does.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by deej2)
    Ok, in theory, Free Speech doesnt end when someone gets offended, but rather unfortunately, in reality it most often does.
    I really liked the way the lib-dems stuck up for freedom of speech for the National Front in newcastle.http://icnewcastle.icnetwork.co.uk/e...name_page.html
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hey LC01, general question - do you believe that whites have any right to live in South Africa, New Zealand and Australia?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    Hey LC01, general question - do you believe that whites have any right to live in South Africa, New Zealand and Australia?
    Lol..he won't answer..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Well, I'm not one to pressure people into answering questions.

    A lack of an answer would say an awful lot though.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    Hey LC01, general question - do you believe that whites have any right to live in South Africa, New Zealand and Australia?
    Thats up to their governments to decide, nothing to do with us. Although if I ruled the entire world, I would take the whites out of south africa and give it totally to the blacks, as for australia and new zealand they are too white now to change them back.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Does the BNP not advocate racially homologous nation states? And my original question was totally hypothetical, devoid of circumstantial considerations.. do whites have the right to live in SA, Aus and NZ?

    Yes or no?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tonight Matthew)
    Does the BNP not advocate racially homologous nation states? And my original question was totally hypothetical, devoid of circumstantial considerations.. do whites have the right to live in SA, Aus and NZ?
    Does the BNP not advocate racially homologous nation states?
    We belive that mono-racial societies are more stable, but we also keep our noses out of other peoples countries.
    And my original question was totally hypothetical, devoid of circumstantial considerations.. do whites have the right to live in SA, Aus and NZ?
    Thats a hard question to answear, should they have gone there and out bred the natives in the first place? the answear is no. Do they have a right to live there now, well now that they are the majority,the country is theirs so yes.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Do they have a right to live there now, well now that they are the majority,the country is theirs so yes.
    So if the majority of Britain was to be inhabited by Muslims, it would become "their country"?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by LC01)
    Do they have a right to live there now, well now that they are the majority,the country is theirs so yes.
    I wonder if this logic will be applied when Muslims are the majority in Britain (in a couple of months time according to the BNP isn't it?)
 
 
 

1,335

students online now

800,000+

Exam discussions

Find your exam discussion here

Poll
Should predicted grades be removed from the uni application process
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.