It's not ok. But you're allowed to do it and you're free to call anyone who does that a massive idiot. And the matter ends there.
Gun shots outside Parliament: Police shoot assailant following car attack on Westminster Bridge
- Thread starter Untied
- Start date
It's not ok. But you're allowed to do it and you're free to call anyone who does that a massive idiot. And the matter ends there.
Mocking a belief is not the same thing as marginalising or bullying the people who hold it.
in your opinion. Criticise and satirise are different. One is critical and the other is ridicule. Those are the actual meanings of the words. Also no one is saying that a respectable critic of someone's belief is a bad thing. I encourage it. What I am clearly talking about the salient point that youy should not be allowed to be free to insult people or bully them because yeah "free speech" There are so many scenarios where we would frown upon certain behavior and would not jump to "free speech" as a defense of it.
You've never watched an episode of South Park have you?
According to local media, a car has tried to drive in high speed on to the busiest sopping street of the city. This attack was stopped by police officers, after which a second car has been found with supposedly weapons on board.
Very vague information...
Apart from anything else, this extraordinary sensitivity to mockery is massively counter-productive. Like the kid in school who freaks the feck out at the slightest provocation. It intrigues people and makes them more likely to push his buttons. It's a fundamentally immature way to behave IMO.
Your way off the mark mate. Just because someone who is disabled decided to laugh at himself does not make it acceptable for you or anyone else to laugh at them for their disability. That's a terrible example. So I look forward to your stand-up gig and the disabled jokes
I want you to go on the bus later today and make fun of the disabled people on there and lets see how that goes?
Good point. I guess the less sensitive you become to mockery the less you will be mocked.
lol. I have, some of the first season and I even saw the movie all those moons ago.
It got too much and became a race to the bottom of how "outrageous" the could get. There are certainly funny parts in it for sure.
Ok, so only disabled people can make jokes about being disabled. Then you must agree you muslims should be able to mock their own faith without fear of retribution, right? Do you think it's fair that different rules apply to people of different religious faiths?
I think we'd all agree that bullying is bad, but ridiculing is not bullying, satirising is not bullying, insulting is not necessarily bullying. I can ridicule someone if I like due to some belief that they hold that I think is ridiculous. That might be because they think Liverpool will win the league next year or whether they believe in any sort of god or not. The reason it shouldn't be stopped is because its all subjective.
a muslim would not mock their own faith if they actually believed in it? What would they mock? "oh I believe in a God but I think he's silly" Not sure what scenario makes sense here mate. If they did they would be misguided by all accounts.
Bit of a non-sequitur there... How old is your sister, yes or no?
Why are you determined to take things to the extreme?
I'm sorry, but that's nonsense. Free speech has always been about speech that people don't want to hear, whether it's a lot of people or a few powerful people. Free speech never had anything to do with nice, polite and friendly comments that bothered no one.
In case of muslims or other religions, it also has little to do with offence. They claim to be offended when after a long and hard search they've found something to be offended by. It's not even that they take offence easily, it's usually the product of hard work. Fundamentalist christians traditionally read the sleasiest novels from writers with a bad reputation to find something to offended by, or go to sleasiest little shops to find some extremely untastful porn on the top shelf in the darkest corner and complain they have been offended. The easiest thing would be to avoid those free expressions, but they refuse to avoid it, they demand it's not there for anyone. Charlie Hebdo is another example, if you don't want to be offended, cancel your subscription. It had little circulation, without searching for it fanatically one wouldn't find offence.
That's why blasphemy isn't about offending people, but about offending gods and prophets. It's not about offence, it's about information control and thought control. Also people who aren't offend have to protected, because it's their belief that has to protected from criticism and ridicule, it can't take free speech, it's too weak for that. Don't make people think, don't have speech that make them question beliefs, because it weakens the religion. They won't stop if they're not offended, they will only stop if you and I have no access to speech, expression or even thought that questions or ridicule their belief. They won't allow me to draw a cartoon of Mohammed and show it to my atheist friends and burn it afterwards. They won't condone it if I was insulting their prophet in my own living room, even if I'd close the windows so no passing muslim would accidentally overhear it, it still wouldn't be all right. It has nothing to do with them beeing offended, it has everything to do with them controlling what I read, hear or see.
Yep and Hispanics and Spanish are all the same and Portugal is a country in central america - not a joke people here are really geographically ignorant.
A fruit salad is not an apple but it contains them.
Ridiculing someone about their belief is bullying my friend. Your line of questionable reasoning would only make sense if someone did it once and left it alone. The salient point here is that persistent ridicule and "satirizing" is bullying. When you consistently aim them at either an individual or group then it is bullying and incitement. There is no way around it.
btw that bit in bold is outrageous. No one actually believes that not even pool fans
People should be free to mock whatever the feck they like and not expect a violent reaction.
We're miles off topic, so I should probably shut up but your refusal to acknowledge obvious flaws in your argument is frustrating.
A disabled man should be allowed to make jokes about being disabled. Obviously. This may be offensive to other disabled people but that's the price we pay for freedom of speech. Similarly , if someone is born a muslim they should be allowed to make jokes about the religion into which they were born. Even if this offends other muslims. For the exact same reason that the disabled comedian is allowed to mock disability. Surely you can't disagree with any of this?
Once we accept this is all reasonable we get into the whole mess of making different rules about freedom of speech for people who are disabled, or people of certain faiths. Which is a crazy way to run any society. Freedom of speech has to apply to everyone, equally. For obvious reasons.
Love it "people who are not offended have to be protected" but people who are offended can be left to the dogs?
incoherent rant of a post mate. Take a break.
welcome to 4 hours ago...
I'm not seeing the equivalence between a philosophical position and a physical or mental disability?
Thats one thing I can agree with.
it's also somewhat amusing that you're frustrated with the fact that I hold a different opinion to you. Is free speech only reserved for the select few?
Family guy
South Park
Wtf is going on in this thread?
I wanted to read the news about what happened and it's just full of bullshit.
Maybe I need to post that Liverpool crowd gif.
I wanted to read the news about what happened and it's just full of bullshit.
Maybe I need to post that Liverpool crowd gif.
So I've come back to this post and read the hadith's, where did you get that story just above the hadith from? The story doesn't match the hadith's, so unless you can verify the story the post is BS.
Yes I fully expect that he would have, however how far would he have reached before doing so, also extremely fortunate that he was only armed with a knife and not a gun.
@EyeInTheSky any thoughts on post #691?
Thats one thing I can agree with.
it's also somewhat amusing that you're frustrated with the fact that I hold a different opinion to you. Is free speech only reserved for the select few?
Eh? I take it you're not familiar with arguably the most famous quote ever made about freedom of speech?
It's not a hadith, it's commentary from wherever he ctr+c and ctr+V from. Who have interpreted the hadiths quoted at the bottom of his post in a certain way.
What a wierd discussion. This has gone from a terrorist attack to people arguing for the freedom to be a dickhead and mock the disabled. I'm not sure what argument you think you're making against religion and religious extremism but whats being presented is just defense for plain old intolerance...which you know is the issue itself.
So now I can call you a massive idiot for making fun of my beliefs and the matter ends there? Btw you are confusing freedom of speech with being offensive. Bellend.
I don't want to guess what your point is. Please elaborate my friend.
Did the woman who fall in the river survived?
Sensitivity about mockery might be immature, but that’s not the problem. The problem is that someone like Flemming Rose needs to have permanent personal protection. The problem is that a certain form of ridicule of Islam created very real violence in Europe. The problem is that individuals who mock Islam – when it gets enough attention – might have their life ruined. The problem is that consequently we see self-censorship creeping in.
The discussion is about freedom of speech. A fairly standard tangent in threads like this, for obvious reasons. But a tangent all the same.
Did you spot that too? I have seen this BS peddled by a couple of groups on the net so I recognized the poster for what they are. I was going to come back to them when they open the thread about it separately.
Also the second quotation at the bottom is not a hadith, it's a quote from Ibn Hisham who was a biographer.
There's no confusion. Freedom of speech includes the right to be offensive.
That is indeed how it works. Now if people used internet to vent their frustrations more often instead of mowing down people or blowing them up the world would be a better place. Unfortunately people like to model themselves and follow the teachings of a vile man who was a murderer and pedophile among other things. More's the pity.
They do make fun of the disabled people which in my opinion shouldn't be permitted, let them make fun of the politicians, movie stars and athletes but not the weak and even religion, but I do watch south park