OrionTheWolf
Posts: 7803
Joined: 10/11/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MissMorrigan
We aren't talking about a quiet chat wherein she's voicing her opinions on her subject of choice, OTW. She is using the media as a political platform to incite racial hatred towards a group that have a legal entitlement to reside in France. While popeye can continue to bandy back and forth that religion isn't a race, and he's right about that, he's also missing a point in this, the point being that this isn't really about religion at all - it's about cleansing France of its 'foreigners', in this instance, muslims which she considers to be a 'foreign influence' and a destructive one. Just about any group that isn't fundamentally french or in keeping with her own religious beliefs is a target for this lady and she uses her husband's standing to drive her malevolence home.
These are her thoughts and opinions. Silencing this will not make the thoughts and feelings go away. Only directly addressing these kinds of issues can you make a dent. It requires education, but tolerance should not be forced on someone for their thoughts.
quote:
The laws are distinct. We DO uphold freedom of speech - just not at any cost. The cost in this instance is incitement to racial hatred.
You are flat wrong here. All of what happens before, including inhibiting freedom of speech, can be used as precedent. So when someone decides to speak out on something that you strongly agree with, you will then see how unjust and unfair it is. She is not causing hatred. Words will only insite that which is already there. Words are an exchange of ideas and opinions. Words are just words and people need to stop blaming words, for what is in people's hearts. Guess it is better they remain silent and we never know who actually feels this way.
quote:
This time, I'm going to quote you, OTW: "As long as it does not cause direct harm to the community (fire in a crowded theater) or incite to commit a criminal act (You should all kill whitie, and hang them from a bridge)." And therein is the answer to your own question. It's about intent.
BULLSHIT! It is about action, and controlling the action. The intent I see from what she says, is to stop what she sees as a problem for her country. She did not state they should be shot, enslaved or any other criminal activity.
quote:
One can voice one's opinions. One cannot use them to commit intentional harm - the intent in this case is to remove a group's fundamental rights to reside without prejudice and restriction to their civil liberties in France, which is something Bardot is attempting to prevent. Change 'whitie' to 'foreigner'.
You need to do some studying and understanding of direct and indirect, as far as persuasion goes. There are some good psychology articles on it.
Now I challenge you to bring a direct quote from that story that shows where she is trying to convince others to commit a criminal act. Put up or admit it is just your emotional knee jerk reaction to disagreeing with her stance. Hell I disagree with her stance, but in the US she would still have the right to say it. Government should not be able to restrict the flow of ideas, no matter how much someone may disagree with it.
Here are some web sites on Free Speech:
http://en.allexperts.com/q/1st-Amendment-Free-342/hate-speech.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
http://www.aclu.org/studentsrights/expression/12808pub19941231.html
http://www.tjcenter.org/
Quotes from some of these:
"If the arguments of the present chapter are of any validity, there ought to exist the fullest liberty of professing and discussing, as a matter of ethical conviction, any doctrine, however immoral it may be considered. (1978, 15)"
"If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. (1978, 16)"
In closing I would like to paraphrase something I read on one of the websites above:
Our forefathers died so that we could have these rights, do you have the courage to allow and use it?
quote:
ORIGINAL: OrionTheWolf
See what you get when you restrict speech because it is "hate" speech. Can the woman not voice her opinion, whether it meets the political correct rightness or not?
_____________________________
When speaking of slaves people always tend to ignore this definition "One who is abjectly subservient to a specified person or influence."
|
RE: Brigitte Bardot on trial for Muslim slurs - 
Profile
?
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread