|
11539. iiibbb - 4/27/2015 7:23:41 PM But I relate. 11540. judithathome - 5/4/2015 7:27:28 PM Terror Attack In Garland, Texas
After the killings in Paris last year, the idiots in Garland schedule an art show featuring cartoons about Mohammad? What sort of fools DO that??? 11541. judithathome - 5/4/2015 7:28:56 PM Evidently, THIS sort of fool:
Pamela Geller 11542. iiibbb - 5/4/2015 7:42:19 PM Got to be careful about blaming victims... same argument raised against women who are raped or blacks who are noncompliant with police officers. Too easy to say "if they didn't ___________....."
... even if said victims might have been asshats. 11543. judithathome - 5/4/2015 8:09:59 PM Blaming victims? Are we talking about the same story?
Are you saying sponsoring that art show was a GOOD idea? 11544. iiibbb - 5/4/2015 9:53:52 PM Is a woman walking home at night a good idea?
No matter how ass-hattish... nobody deserves to die for drawing an insulting cartoon of a religious symbol. 11545. iiibbb - 5/4/2015 9:55:37 PM Are you part of the "he shouldn't have run from police" camp regarding Freddie Gray? 11546. judithathome - 5/5/2015 1:34:18 AM I'm not so sure anyone deserves to die for walking home at night but I do think the venue made a huge mistake scheduling that art show in Garland, Texas and that they should have researched the woman who arranged to have it shown there...
And I have no idea where you get the idea that I think Freddie Gray deserved to die...for ANY REASON. Where the eff did THAT come from??? And I'd thank you to kindly stop alluding to what "I THINK" when you clearly can't understand what I mean when I come right out and express it. 11547. judithathome - 5/5/2015 1:37:13 AM I was coming back here to post something funny....I hope no one takes it as meaning I hate women candidates running for office or anything other than this is a humorous use of the internet:
Carly Fiorina Dot Org:Click Me 11548. vonKreedon - 5/5/2015 5:22:05 PM It's an interesting conversation on the left regarding the right to expression and the rights of the marginalized. I'm with I3B3, the left should be on the side of freedom of expression irregardless of the cultural impact of the expression. Yes, the cartoon contest is specifically designed to insult and provoke, but that's the nature of such expression, see Piss Christ or Holy Virgin Mary or Guernica, in fact that such expression results in such violent attempt to repress it means, IMO, that there's a need for more such expression, not less.
11549. judithathome - 5/5/2015 6:17:36 PM Fine...you guys are right and if those two fools had entered with guns blazing or driven a truck loaded with bombs into the venue and killed 2,000 people...or say, flown an airliner into the venue to make a point...we'd just say, "Oh well, at least freedom of expression is protected."
And on the anniversaries of the day the plane flew into the venue, we'd smile at one another and say "At least freedom of expression is okay."
Or maybe we should have just sent someone into the crowded venue yelling FIRE...
I guess you guys think it's hunky-dory for Westboro Baptist Church to picket soldiers funerals, too...lovely. 11550. alistairconnor - 5/5/2015 7:09:42 PM Well, the Garland business is a tough one for me. Not because I think displays of "Muhammad cartoons" should necessarily be banned, obviously... But the keynote speaker was Geert Wilders, Dutch far-right politician and notorious islamophobe. This tells me all I need to know about this "art show".
Free speech, sure. But intent counts. There have to be limits. Incitement to religious hatred for its own sake is off limits for me.
(And if you say "But Charlie Hebdo", I am happy to explain in detail why it's different.)
11551. judithathome - 5/5/2015 7:27:02 PM Well, I fault the people in charge of the venue for not recognizing that this might be an incendiary event...had they looked the lady up on the internet, they'd have seen what she was all about and maybe decided "Hey, this could get dicey...we'll pass."
People still have the right to disagree with those who want to spew hate, right? Or do we have to shelve that in order to insure THEIR rights are not abused? 11552. iiibbb - 5/5/2015 8:37:43 PM Free speech trumps violent response.... I don't care how hateful it is or what anyone says. I'd rather have them say it so it can be openly ignored or publicly mocked.
Having grown up in the South... I much prefer open hate speech over an environment where bigots know to bide their tongues. It makes it easy for me to decide who not to spend time on. 11553. judithathome - 5/5/2015 9:55:54 PM Fine...then I guess you think the attacks on the Twin Towers were okay...because that was an expression of their "free speech". 11554. judithathome - 5/5/2015 10:33:25 PM And according to ISIS, this attack was an expression of THEIR freedom of expression...so now we're supposed to support THAT, too?
Personally, I don't believe that...I think they are just jumping on this pathetic event to claim THEY did it...however, if we here in this country support free speech over all else, we have to say they have that right. 11555. iiibbb - 5/6/2015 12:34:09 AM Obviously I am talking about speech / press... Not violent acts. 11556. vonKreedon - 5/6/2015 5:34:54 PM Judith - There is an obvious difference between free expression by racist assholes through a cartoon contest and religious fanatics crashing hijacked planes into buildings. That you are tempted to conflate the two illustrates the weakness of the anti-expression argument.
11557. judithathome - 5/6/2015 5:52:53 PM Well, pardon me. I didn't do well in "debate" in school.
I have seen people make the same argument, though...people who did do well.
Would I be better on firmer ground had those guys in Garland killed a few hundred people while "freely expressing themselves?" 11558. judithathome - 5/6/2015 5:54:20 PM Scratch "better" up there...see, I can't even type things correctly! ;-)
|
