Music Banter - The French Massacre - Do We Stand Up For Free Speech?

Music Banter (https://www.musicbanter.com/)

- Current Events, Philosophy, & Religion (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/)

- - The French Massacre - Do We Stand Up For Free Speech? (https://www.musicbanter.com/current-events-philosophy-religion/80443-french-massacre-do-we-stand-up-free-speech.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oriphiel (Post 1535763)

Common sense? Hold on a second... do you really think that these journalists didn't have common sense? Do you really think that they didn't know what they were doing, by criticizing one of the most dangerous groups on earth? Nuts to that. They knew exactly what they were doing. They were standing up to a group that routinely murders people, the only way they knew how; by using their talents as cartoonists/journalists. They put their lives on the line to show the world that people don't have to submit to bullies, and all you and Trollheart have to say is that they're foolish for having prodded the hypothetical hornet's nest?

Quote:

Those hornets were going to sting people regardless of what anyone did. At least these journalists did what everyone else was too afraid to do, and took the first step in removing the nest. Terrorism groups should be shunned and held responsible for their actions.

Remove a terrorist nest and another one springs up, You're not dealing with a tinpot regime here, where if you remove the head the whole rotten structure comes tumbling down, but with an idealogy that seems to have limitless fanatics willing to die for it, how can you possibly combat that?

Also going on about terrorists in this case being held for their actions is ridiculous as well, as these people just don't give a **** about being caught or dying for their cause. People can only be held responsible for their actions if they fear death or incarceration, these people are willing to blow themselves up for their cause, so death in battle or a prison sentence is hardly going to deter them. The only way to deal with terrorists is to either eliminate the cause that they're fighting for (which is an issue in itself) or reach a compromise if they're the more amenable type...... like they're just in it for the money.

Quote:

Basically, our arguments come from our differing ideologies. I have nothing but sympathy for people who suffer simply for expressing themselves. You both obviously think that expression should have limits, which is reasonable. But as long as people don't abuse their right to express themselves by using it to hurt others

But that's just it, hurting others is just not done physically but in a critical manner as well as was supposedly done here.

Quote:

which these journalists didn't do, how can you be so cavalier about their deaths, heavily implying that they "had it coming"?

If I was to walk down the road wearing a blue football top, in a street that was dominated by fans of a team that wore a red football top and the rivalry between the two was hateful, I wouldn't be surprised if I got beaten up.

Has anyone posting in this thread actually read the Quran?

Please note, I'm not looking to get into an argument, just curious.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Josef K (Post 1535778)

Side note: I only just noticed that your avatar moves. Whoa. Like you, I'll try to keep my response brief.

The basic problem I have here is that you're painting with really broad strokes, and you refuse to acknowledge the diversity of people's beliefs and their personal relationships with religion. You start out by asserting that religion is entirely made up of lies - you couldn't possibly know that, and neither could I, but whatever, it's impossible to argue about. Next you talk about how religion is indoctrination, but of course it isn't entirely. Many people choose religion for themselves, and many people don't believe that religion should be unquestioned. You say people need to acquire joy from real things and real life, but if someone's religious experiences are real to that person, I don't see what business you have telling them they can't get joy out of it, and you also see religion as having no depth beyond blind acceptance of whatever you're told. This isn't the case. Many people are attracted to religion because it gives them a sense of community. Many religions have interesting dialogues on morality. Many people get real strength and real joy out of what you see as these fake things. I don't see why it's your place to tell other people that they can't do something that's good for them. Of course there are extremists enabled by religion, but attacking all religious people and all religions for that is a bridge too far.

As for religion not being true and real, very good points were being made in this thread.
http://www.musicbanter.com/current-e...ve-stigma.html
Especially GuitarBizarre's reasoning was, as far as I remember, very good and how I might or would want to have phrased it, if my English was as good as my German or Russian.
Community, morality, joy and all other positive effects of religion are not exclusive to it and thus don't justify a worldview, that is untrue and harmful.
I don't walk around telling religious people their religion is stupid without being asked, that would be pretty insensitive, but I don't see why I shouldn't think and state that something I think is wrong and harmful for the reasons listed in my previous post should be fought and eventually abolished.

I haven't read it. Although I've read the bible and seen how many people (who call themselves Christian) will distort the messages and /or cherry pick from them to further their own personal agendas.

I'm going to assume it's the same with Muslims and the Quran.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth (Post 1535780)

itt muslims can't be expected to act like civilized human beings so nobody better offend them or else you have it coming when they go jihad on your ass

>>>>>>>>>>>

Went in.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1535524)

Extremely bad analogy.

How about the woman that counsels a group of convicted rapists? How should she dress?

Or the only white dude living in a black neighborhood. Should he wear a "N*ggers Suck" T-shirt while taking a walk just because it's his right? Sure, go ahead and wear it buddy. Just don't complain when you get your ass whipped.

The point is that just because there's a practical reason to not do something, should that rule your actions if doing so kowtows to a group of people who are violating your basic moral principles?

I mean if the Klan was being attacked in the streets by black people demanding that they should not even be able to say Klan things, I'd support the Klan's right to be *******s even if I deplored their message. Assuming of course that these Klan messages were not advocating actual violence against minorities.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord (Post 1535793)

The point is that just because there's a practical reason to not do something, should that rule your actions if doing so kowtows to a group of people who are violating your basic moral principles?

Let me ask you this. In the wake of what's happened, another magazine pops up declaring they are determined to carry on the message and they are hiring. Would you take a job with them?

The reason not to do it was to stay alive. Or, they should have done more to protect themselves against a very dangerous and lethal threat.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pet_Sounds (Post 1535787)

Has anyone posting in this thread actually read the Quran?

Please note, I'm not looking to get into an argument, just curious.

Bits and pieces. Why?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chula Vista (Post 1535795)

That's a different question (i.e. am I a coward?). Would I have the balls to do what they did? Questionable. I also don't know that I'd have the balls to take fire in Afghanistan. But I certainly support the bravery of people who do have those balls. Regardless if I have the balls to do what those magazine dudes are doing (or whether I agree with their specific agenda), I still support their integrity for standing up for what they believe in. They may or may not be racist pricks, but I will applaud them if they don't bow down to pressure from extremists and publish their next issue with the same intent and content as their last.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Unknown Soldier (Post 1535783)

They were practising the concept of free speech, regardless of the consequences. Of course they weren't expecting to be killed for their opinions but it must've lingered in their minds, but surely common sense should prevail when their opinions put them into a high risk category as this did. The magazine criticizes various groups, but most groups are not going to resort to murder to show their disdain for what has been written. Extremists/terrorist or whatever you want to call them, operate on their own agenda and yes the writers and those involved in the magazine should've been aware of this and used common sense and backed off what they were doing, didn't they like get death threats?

Also Who do you think is going to protect them from the vengeance of these terrorists, the police? the army or perhaps the anti-terrorist squad there? Nobody is going to protect them properly and again they should've been aware of that.

Remove a terrorist nest and another one springs up, You're not dealing with a tinpot regime here, where if you remove the head the whole rotten structure comes tumbling down, but with an idealogy that seems to have limitless fanatics willing to die for it, how can you possibly combat that?

Also going on about terrorists in this case being held for their actions is ridiculous as well, as these people just don't give a **** about being caught or dying for their cause. People can only be held responsible for their actions if they fear death or incarceration, these people are willing to blow themselves up for their cause, so death in battle or a prison sentence is hardly going to deter them. The only way to deal with terrorists is to either eliminate the cause that they're fighting for (which is an issue in itself) or reach a compromise if they're the more amenable type...... like they're just in it for the money.

But that's just it, hurting others is just not done physically but in a critical manner as well as was supposedly done here.

If I was to walk down the road wearing a blue football top, in a street that was dominated by fans of a team that wore a red football top and the rivalry between the two was hateful, I wouldn't be surprised if I got beaten up.

I'll be brief; I don't support violence. A person can walk down a street wearing whatever shirt they want, they don't deserve to be killed. And if someone says something that offends another person, they don't deserve to be killed. Fighting against terrorists and bullies is something that will never end, but guess what? Such is the way of life. Everything simultaneously repeats and fades away. But just because our lives are brief doesn't mean we shouldn't try to make the most out of the time we have. And just because violence is an inevitability doesn't mean that we shouldn't do what we can to prevent needless deaths. I will always support the freedom of expression, even if people choose to use that freedom to be complete jerks towards each other. Because the best society, in my mind, isn't the one where everyone is nice to each other; it's the one where people get to decide whether they want to be nice or mean, without having to worry about someone killing them for their thoughts.

But hey, it's the endless debate, right? Let's simply agree to disagree. But try to remember that the freedom of expression is one that you're enjoying right now, as you argue with me. Without it, we wouldn't even have the ability to be discussing this topic right now. Losing that freedom, even in small pieces over a long period of time, is a horrible tragedy.