• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Take heed, Dubya...

CFLarsen

Penultimate Amazing
C
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
42,371
Freedom of speech holier than religion

Freedom of speech is more important than consideration for religious sensitivities for most people

Freedom of expression should always take priority over religiously based traditions or rules, according to the results of a new poll.

In a poll conducted by consultancy firm Rambøll Management and published in national daily Jyllands-Posten today, 56 percent of those responding said that freedom of speech was always more important.

For a third, 33 percent, whether one was more important than the other depended on the situation. Six percent said that freedom of expression was never more important than respect for religion.

The poll was conducted as part of the national debate sparked by Jyllands-Posten's decision to publish 12 drawings of the prophet Mohammed on 30 September.

In the poll, 54 percent of respondents said they felt it was acceptable that the newspaper published the drawings. A quarter, 25 percent, said the newspaper should not have done so.

Source
Click to expand...

Isn't it great to live in such a country? :)
 
"Should not have done so" is not the same thing as "government should have prevented..."

The important part of free speech is the right to use speech to try to affect other peoples' behavior. This includes mockery and satire as a key part of this. :eek:
 
Were the pictures posted as some kind of story or just to piss off Muslims?

That princess Mary is a hottie.
 
Kopji said:
Were the pictures posted as some kind of story or just to piss off Muslims?
Click to expand...

They were printed, because it was revealed that some illustrators of (IIRC) a book about Mohammed had backed down from drawing Mohammed himself for fear of retaliation from extremist Muslims.

So, the newspaper asked 12 cartoonists if they would draw Mohammed. Which they did.
 
CFLarsen said:
We are discussing free speech. Don't you think that it's marvellous that Denmark allows such drawings?
Click to expand...
I'm not certain what this has to do with Bush? I would agree that it is marvelous to live in a country with free speech. In the United States the Supreme court voted unanimously that it was ok for Larry Flynt to fabricate a story that was defamatory to the Reverend Jerry Falwell because of free speech concerns. For anyone who hasn't seen People vs Larry Flynt I recommend it highly.

I'm still not certain what this has to do with Bush but it is marvelous that the United States allows freedom of speech.

Isn't a discussion of free speech more appropriate in the Politics forum?
 
RandFan said:
I'm still not certain what this has to do with Bush but it is marvelous that the United States allows freedom of speech.
Click to expand...

You try to publish 12 cartoons of Mohammed in US newspapers. Or, of course, express your feelings about Bush on a Tshirt when going on an airplane.

RandFan said:
Isn't a discussion of free speech more appropriate in the Politics forum?
Click to expand...

Perhaps. The mods can move this thread if they want.
 
CFLarsen said:
You try to publish 12 cartoons of Mohammed in US newspapers. Or, of course, express your feelings about Bush on a Tshirt when going on an airplane.
Click to expand...
I see anti-Bush "speech" every day of my life. "Bush Lies" are on the bumper stickers of cars everywhere. People speak out against the president on TV, radio, in newspapers, on T-Shirts, in public schools, etc., etc. I voiced my objection for the T-Shirt on the plane incident. But the Plane ISN'T public and the owners of the plane and the business are within their rights to regulate what happens on their plane even if I don't like it.

As to your first sentence. My tax dollars paid for a statue of Jesus Christ to be placed in a vat of urine. My tax dollars paid for a depiction of the so-called Virgin Mary using cow dung. Not only are attacks against religion allowed in my country but my country funds those attacks. I have no idea whatsoever if I could or cold not publish cartoons of Mohamed in the US Newspapers. US newspapers print what THEY feel is newsworthy. Your argument is NOT proof of anything. In any event, the US Newspapers are NOT the government. Censorship would only apply if the government prohibited the papers from so publishing anything and you have zero evidence that this has ever happened. Your argument is completely without foundation.
 
Go on an airplane with a critique of Bush on your Tshirt and see what happens.
 
CFLarsen said:
Go on an airplane with a critique of Bush on your Tshirt and see what happens.
Click to expand...
Asked and answered. More importantly, dumb, really dumb argument Larsen. I can say anything I want about Bush anwhere but in a private setting. Anti Bush propaganda is everywhere in America as it should be. However, people can't go into a place of business and spread their propaganda without permission from the owners of the place of business. THEY, the business owners have the right to decide what is and is not appropriate. You are simply one of the most obtuse individuals I have ever seen.
 
RandFan said:
Asked and answered. More importantly, dumb, really dumb argument Larsen. I can say anything I want about Bush anwhere but in a private setting. Anti Bush propaganda is everywhere in America as it should be. However, people can't go into a place of business and spread their propaganda without permission from the owners of the place of business. THEY, the business owners have the right to decide what is and is not appropriate. You are simply one of the most obtuse individuals I have ever seen.
Click to expand...

Key: "But in a private setting".

Bush owns the United States of America?
 
CFLarsen said:
Key: "But in a private setting".

Bush owns the United States of America?
Click to expand...
Not by any stretch of the imagination.

"We the people..." --US Constitution, PREAMBLE

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. --Bill of Rights, Amendment I

"government of the people, by the people, for the people" --Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln

Examples:
TV Show That's My Bush mocked George Bush
TV Show Mad TV regularly mocks George Bush
TV Show SNL regularly mocks George Bush
TV Show the Daily Show regularly mocks George Bush

Jay Leno, David Letterman, Craig Ferguson, etc. all regularly mock George Bush.

If you honestly think George Bush owns America and suppresses free speech then you have been living under a rock. I know that you live in Denmark but this stuff is available on cable, satellite, DVD and on the Internet.
 
CFLarsen said:
You try to publish 12 cartoons of Mohammed in US newspapers.
Click to expand...

If a newspaper decided to publish those cartoons, fear of government reprisals would not deter them, I can guarantee.

Newspapers are free to publish whatever they want, as long as they don't deliberately libel private individuals.

Public figures are held to a different standard, and as such are eaiser to mock in print and on TV. The President, being the most public of public figures, is probably the least protected person under the law when it comes to people making disparaging remarks about him.
 
Last edited:
Ok I'm a little confused. Why would cartoonists be willing to draw Mohammad for a newspaper but not a book?

I guess their point has been made: They've needed to hire a guard for their offices and the cartoonists now get death threats.

Check - Humiliated Muslim extremists can be violent and dangerous.

Christians doing the will of God sometimes invade other countries without thinking much about it first - trusting the Lawd O Mitey. I'd bet if we started criticizing some they'd come back with all kinds of gibberish about us being unpatriotic and stuff.

Check - Christians can be dangerous when well armed and on a mission from God.

I have to agree with Randfan this time though. There does not seem like a general 'freedom of speech' issue in the US. Agreed we might be more likely to think of printing a dozen pics of Mohammad sort of like shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater.
...And George Bush is probably a great supporter of free speech, as long as he does not have to see it. I have not decided if, that as a defacto cult leader he personally approves of protesters being shuffled out of his sight... or if it is only his overzealous followers who hate protest of their revered leader. Judging from George's genuine surprise whenever confronted with the occasionally 'missed' protester or opposition, I suspect his followers protect him out of reverence.

...LANCASTER, PA - December 9, 2004 - The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania filed a federal lawsuit today on behalf of five men who were arrested after they stripped down to thong underwear and formed a human pyramid in anticipation of President Bush’s motorcade procession through Lancaster County.
http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/aclu12092004/
Click to expand...
...Earlier this year, the ACLU again filed a lawsuit against the Secret Service and a White House official for ordering the arrest of a young couple who wore anti-Bush t-shirts at a presidential rally in Charleston, West Virginia. Jeff and Nicole Rank were initially charged with trespassing on the public grounds, even though they had tickets for the event, but the charges were later dropped and the couple received a public apology from the mayor and the city council. The lawsuit seeks a public admission that the federal agents acted illegally by ordering the arrests.
http://www.aclu.org/FreeSpeech/FreeSpeech.cfm?ID=17172&c=86
Click to expand...
...Also strangely absent from the report on the Bush's Oregon visit were the protesters in Medford. Those who carried protest signs in that Southern Oregon city were herded into a parking lot surrounded by police, while Bush supporters were allowed to line the Presidents car route.
http://www.grumpyvoices.com/2002_08_01_archive.html
Click to expand...
...President Bush has never been an advocate of the First Amendment. Even when he was governor of Texas, he prohibited demonstrations on the walkways in front of the governor's mansion, an area that had traditionally been used for peaceful protests.

As president, Bush has widened his restrictions on demonstrations against his policies. Anti-Bush protesters are now relegated to what are euphemistically called Free Speech Zones. These areas are cordoned off as far as a mile away from the president and the main thoroughfares, so that Bush cannot see the demonstrators, or their signs of protest, nor hear their chants.

The free speech enclosures are only for those who disagree with the administration's current policies. Those citizens who carry pro-Bush signs are allowed to line the street where the president's motorcade passes.

Free speech zone

Members of the Secret Service or local law enforcement officers under orders of the Secret Service demand protesters move into a free speech area.

Peter Buckley, of Oregon, a former Democratic candidate for Congress, attended a presidential appearance. After being herded into a fenced-in free speech area, he wrote in an opinion piece for the Oregonian: "We were not allowed anywhere near any kind of position where the president, or the media which follows him, would see or hear us. This is not America. This in not the land of the free and the home of the brave. This is some other country. I'm a patriotic American. I want the country I was raised to believe in, a country strong enough for political discourse and debate, with leaders courageous and decent enough to have the willingness to listen to all citizens, not just those who parrot their own views. ... The effort being made to hide political opposition in this country is more than cowardly, it's un-American."
http://www.rense.com/general45/otr.htm
Click to expand...
...I, on the other hand, an old ex-Infantry veteran from long ago, was forced to stand 100 feet from Dalrymple Drive, in the direct Louisiana summer sun, hidden behind some of the beautiful giant oak trees growing alongside Dalrymple Drive at Highland Road, even though I had planned, with several other groups, to protest along the curbside on Dalrymple Drive.

But because I was not "pro-Bush", and because I carried a sign, I wasn`t allowed to do what I planned. A sign of protest? How devious! How DANGEROUS! It`s enough to suspend the Bill Of Rights, right? WRONG!
http://baltimorechronicle.com/052704FreeSpeechZones.shtml
Click to expand...
 
Kopji said:
...And George Bush is probably a great supporter of free speech, as long as he does not have to see it. I have not decided if, that as a defacto cult leader he personally approves of protesters being shuffled out of his sight... or if it is only his overzealous followers who hate protest of their revered leader. Judging from George's genuine surprise whenever confronted with the occasionally 'missed' protester or opposition, I suspect his followers protect him out of reverence.
Click to expand...
I don't know. I have voiced my concern myself over this issue. If Larsen had made THIS point I would have agreed that it is an important issue. I can't imagine anything more important than redress and protest. However this particular issue doesn't exactly fit his thesis.

Good point!
 
RandFan said:
Not by any stretch of the imagination.

"We the people..." --US Constitution, PREAMBLE

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances. --Bill of Rights, Amendment I

"government of the people, by the people, for the people" --Gettysburg Address, Abraham Lincoln

Examples:
TV Show That's My Bush mocked George Bush
TV Show Mad TV regularly mocks George Bush
TV Show SNL regularly mocks George Bush
TV Show the Daily Show regularly mocks George Bush

Jay Leno, David Letterman, Craig Ferguson, etc. all regularly mock George Bush.

If you honestly think George Bush owns America and suppresses free speech then you have been living under a rock. I know that you live in Denmark but this stuff is available on cable, satellite, DVD and on the Internet.
Click to expand...

"...but in a private setting".
 
CFLarsen said:
"...but in a private setting".
Click to expand...
Yeah, "...but in a private setting". Do you have a point? I have given you ample evidence that freedom of speech is alive and well in America and all you can do is regurgitate "...but in a private setting".

Is there something wrong with that? {sheesh}
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom