The beginning of the end of free speech

billy the kid

There's such a thing as a principled position on freedom of speech and freedom from religion. There's no reason I should be expected to honor a religious belief. That case should be made to the public in an intelligent, thoughtful manner.

The court was trying to leave the people of a country to make their own decision. There are more principles involved than the one you focused on.

 

We point it out when we think we see it.

 

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/european-human-rights-court-defaming-muhammad-not-protected/
Quote:
Defamatory statements about the prophet Muhammad are not covered by free-speech protections, the European Court of Human Rights ruled Thursday.

The Strasbourg-based court found that insulting the prophet “goes beyond the permissible limits of an objective debate” and “could stir up prejudice and put at risk religious peace.”

In its ruling, the court rejected an Austrian woman’s claim that her previous conviction for characterizing Muhammad as a “pedophile” violated her free-speech rights, finding instead that the Austrian court had “carefully balanced her right to freedom of expression with the right of others to have their religious feelings protected.”

In a series of public seminars, the women cited Muhammad’s marriage to a six-year-old girl, which, according to Islamic lore, was consummated when she was nine, as evidence of his pedophilia.

End quote

Therefore you cannot insult the prophet.
Canada also has law which prohibits the insulting of the prophet.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10015/canada-blasphemy-laws

 

It's usually the done thing to accompany a vid with a narrative, so that it provides a basis for discussion.

 

I defy any of 'the usual suspects' to deny that simple truth?

 

It is messed up on both accounts. We are almost - if not there already in some respects - at the "thought police" stage of Orwellian glory.

The safeguards against totalitarianism have been removed and the canaries in the coal mine of totalitarianism are screeching loudly.

 

When speech that relates the truth is banned - it is a problem. All kinds of speech which is viewed by Christians as defamatory to Jesus is allowed - much of which is speculation. The fact that Muhammad was "with" a very young girl is recorded fact.

 

Their timing is impeccable.

 

Sure, try denying the Holocaust in many European countries! Jews ended free speech, if indeed we ever had it!

 

plus hes white so hes twice as guilty

 

It can hardly be called a conspiracy by Jews. Britain's Home Secretary at the time was Michael Howard, himself a Jew and he decided against making holocaust denial illegal in the UK.

 

I'm parodying the way the op and other posters blame Muslims for the end of free speech, there never has been free speech in Europe. I did not call it a conspiracy by Jews Alexa, just pointed out another way free speech was attacked.

 

Yes, just feels a bit like conspiracy to me. I don't agree with holocaust denial being illegal and believe Howard was right not to ban it here. The reason he gave was also correct, that it would result in those denying it being able to call themselves victims. I think it has given rise to a fair amount of resentment in France.

I know you like to parody other posters with their Muslim stereotypes. Problem I see is that most of the people who are up to that here are not Jews, usually Christian Zionists and the new far right who are against Muslims as 'the other' and with that have bought into supporting Israel. The two do generally go together. Actually one of the strongest supports for Tommy Robinson is The Middle East Forum


https://www.albawaba.com/news/why-us-middle-east-forum-funding-tommy-robinson-1170222

Daniel Pipes and what not. They were part of the extremist anti islam network from which Brevik got his inspiration for his terrorism in Norway.

I really don't think they will get what you are doing. Most likely they will either believe you are antisemetic or make a note so that they can use that against Jews later. No offence, I just feel in a few years there will be an open antisemitism going on as well and believe it is important to be absolutely clear on your position - for or against prejudice and stereotypes.
I expect you to continue as you wish. I may as I did today sometimes feel inclined to make a comment.

Finding out the root cause of these prejudices is of course worthwhile. Nowadays it appears to be political and as far as Muslims are concerned almost always to stem from extremist Zionists as with the Middle East Forum working to get a criminal such as Robinson not only into a UK Party or even Leader of such as some are suggesting, but even intent on getting him speaking to Congress.

 

"The Court noted that the domestic courts comprehensively explained why they considered that the
applicant’s statements had been capable of arousing justified indignation; specifically, they had not
been made in an objective manner contributing to a debate of public interest (e.g. on child
marriage), but could only be understood as having been aimed at demonstrating that Muhammad
was not worthy of worship."

The very nature of religion requires the ability to demonstrate that someone or some thing is not worthy of worship, without it you get wooden horses (from the gods) through the gates full of men that will kill you. That is why a real Christian must support freedom of speech to blaspheme Jesus, because that can be forgiven, the Holy Spirit is the only thing (Matthew 12:30-32) that could not be blasphemed and be forgiven. What is the spirit? By it's vary nature, the process of determining it, it is liberty. Without the ability to say someone is not worthy of worship we have false prophets, and the spirit of liberty is destroyed.

“Mat 7:15 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves.
Mat 7:16 Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles?
Mat 7:17 Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit.
Mat 7:18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit.
Mat 7:19 Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire.
Mat 7:20 Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them. “

"The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of [those that believe the wooden horse is an offering to the goddess Athena]." (Clinton)

"We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of [those that follow Koalemos the god of stupidity]." (Obama)

 

How about if everyone had Liberty?

 

The members of EU are going regret creating it one day.

 

WOW, AIPAC Europe really screwed up letting this one get through.

 

Or, if the video has a clear narrative with the thread - it doesn't need to be further clarified.
The vid shows the VERY slippery slope of the new Canadian law that FORCES people, by threat of criminal prosecution, to call someone by their preferred pronoun.
He points out succinctly both the ludicrous and dangerous result of controlling speech, opinions and discussion.

 

Europe has pretty similar laws concerning Jews and antisemitism and holocaust denial. What both Jews and Muslims have in common is being minorities who have before or are in danger of prejudice and violence due to being said minority. Given that it makes sense that the views on Islam which will be given credibility are those from people who have studied it and know what they are talking about. - a little look at the article illustrates its anti Muslim bias.

Here is the thing though. I don't think the US is much better. While it may be true that you are allowed to say absolutely anything you want about Muslims, it is not or has not been true about Israel - it isn't even antisemitism. It is Israel. Even a Jew who says things that some choose to label unacceptable finds himself unable to find employment commensurate with his qualifications and ability. So in the States there is a strong punishment for not having the 'correct' view on Israel. Now many of your States have made it illegal to support BDS. Indeed Puerto Rico had to sign that it would not get involved with BDS before it would get any help from the US, such as it has got, from the Hurricane damage. I suspect, although it seems to be less noticed by Americans that the US possibly has some of the strongest control over speech in the West. The UK seems to be doing well though thanks to our courts. They have been refusing to allow things to be considered a crime when the main intention is to remove our democratic right to freedom of speech. I do not think you do well in the US over this even if you are able to call Muslims every degradation under the sun. Rather it would appear you are conditioned who to hate. On that Europe is better as it is giving the same protections to both Muslims and Jews.

 

that leaves out every candidate for the last 40+ years, & all the future ones

 

Like they did back the then the press destroyed a good man who tried to warn us of the danger of communism infiltrating our politics, media and learning institutions. Gen. Joseph McCarthy was a great American.

 

Are you advocating the return of 'good manners'? Could be a little late for an idea that revolutionary.

 

He never opposed free speech. It's the leftists who do that.

You seem completely unaware of history, despite it being so easily researched on the internet.

 

You feel there is free speech in Muslim run countries?

 

He was right about communism, an ideology responsible for the deaths of over 100 million people. Now the "McCarthyism" they employ is being used against anyone who may question "Islamism" or "sexism", as just a couple of examples, but anything 'politically incorrect', to use the tired cliche, is open to attack.