16 Jan '15 07:18>
The stronger the reactions to these cartoons get, the more cartoons need to be published. And the more insulting they need to get.
How do feel about “Life of Brian”, Suzianne?
How do feel about “Life of Brian”, Suzianne?
Originally posted by bbarrI agree, who said I may not agree with that you said, but will fight to the
I love the fact that although we disagree on quite a lot of the "big topics", I'm completely confident that if anybody were to try to shut me up, you'd be on my side. This is something very American and very important; also, personally, moving. We have the right to belittle! But, you know, maybe we should only rarely exercise that right...
Originally posted by KellyJayEvelyn Beatrice Hall
I agree, who said I may not agree with that you said, but will fight to the
death for your right to say it?
Originally posted by bbarrI found Americans in large part to be silent about the curtailment of freedom of speech in its economic interests zone of South America for decades and other places where it had cooperating tyrannies in place like Indonesia 1965-1998. Personally, I'd say a "very American" thing I have observed over the years is the sometimes wide gap between its rhetoric and its policy when it comes to the human rights and freedom of speech of non-Americans when it has tried to export and impose "very American" stuff. Do we agree on this "big topic"? 🙂
This is something very American and very important; also, personally, moving.
Originally posted by KellyJayBut do you really believe it, KellyJay?
In her biography on Voltaire, Hall wrote the phrase: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" (which is often misattributed to Voltaire himself) as an illustration of Voltaire's beliefs
Originally posted by Great King RatWhy isn't the degree to which they have been insulting (already) not enough?
The stronger the reactions to these cartoons get, the more cartoons need to be published. And the more insulting they need to get.
Originally posted by Great King RatYou are under a misapprehension. Such things as these recent cartoons are deeply, deeply insulting to many hundreds of millions of people who wouldn't dream of going around killing people for drawing them.
Most of what has been published isn’t insulting by the standards of civilized people who don’t go around killing people for drawing a cartoon.
Originally posted by Great King RatIn conservative cultures, and societies new to democracy, the "only way" to further the basic human right of freedom of speech is to use it to be as harshly insulting as possible even while its application to the basics in life in so may places is still fledgling and fragile? Is it really the "only way"?
The ultimate goal is to make sure that even the harshest of cartoons will only make the entire Muslim community shrug and say “Whatever”. The only way out is through.
Originally posted by FMFThe point I was trying to communicate is that even though it may be “deeply, deeply insulting” to them right now, it can - and will - go much, much further than this still. Their skins need to be thickened because of this.
You are under a misapprehension. Such things as these recent cartoons are deeply, deeply insulting to many hundreds of millions of people who wouldn't dream of going around killing people for drawing them.
Originally posted by Great King RatThe skins of people who are fighting for or depending on human rights around the world need to be thickened by French cartoonists? Is that what you mean? It's a genuine question. People who find the insults insulting must actually not be insulted by them, that's your aim? Or when you say "Their skins need to be thickened", you are referring only to the people who are willing to murder and people and die while murdering people?
The point I was trying to communicate is that even though it may be “deeply, deeply insulting” to them right now, it can - and will - go much, much further than this still. Their skins need to be thickened because of this.
Originally posted by FMFThe right for the Charlie Hebdos of this world to publish cartoons that may offend should be indisputable. The only way to do this is to keep publishing – offending, if you will.
In conservative cultures, and societies new to democracy, the "only way" to further the basic human right of freedom of speech is to use it to be as harshly insulting as possible even while its application to the basics in life in so may places is still fledgling and fragile? Is it really the "only way"?
Originally posted by FMFThe skins should be thickened of those that are currently murdering, but also of those that are currently “deeply offended”. One can find something insulting, while simultaneously shrugging and saying “whatever”. The world can be an offending place, get used to it.
The skins of people who are fighting for or depending on human rights around the world need to be thickened by French cartoonists? Is that what you mean? It's a genuine question. People who find the insults insulting must actually not be insulted by them, that's your aim? Or when you say "Their skins need to be thickened", you are referring only to the people who are willing to murder and people and die while murdering people?
Originally posted by Great King RatI agree. Muslims must be made to understand that their particular beliefs are not sacrosanct in any way. If they want to believe that a pedophilic warlord is the wisest and most important human that ever lived, they're entitled to that belief, but I shouldn't have to screen my wording just to not upset someone. If they believe that you'll go to hell for drawing pictures, that's fine. I don't believe as they do, so I'll draw pictures of whatever the hell pleases me. Well, I would, if I could draw without being ridiculed. 😕
The point I was trying to communicate is that even though it may be “deeply, deeply insulting” to them right now, it can - and will - go much, much further than this still. Their skins need to be thickened because of this.