Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-02-2015, 07:25 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 06:42 PM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 03:51 PM)BnW Wrote:  Deported for what? For sneaking into the country? Sure. For breaking laws? Absolutely? For exercising the types of freedoms western democracies have been exporting at the end of a gun since the end of World War 2? You've got to be fucking kidding me.

For being an immigrant who refuses to live by the laws of the land.

I personaly go a step further and say that you should also be deported if you are the son of an immigrant who was raised by your parents to reject the values and laws of the country you live in.

Fascinating. What about an immigrant who is living by the laws of the land, including the right to peacefully assemble and voice a contrary opinion. Because, that's what we're talking about here. People exercising their legal rights to object to the current rules. That's what democracy is all about. That you and I think their idea is oppressive and ridiculous doesn't change the fact that a) they have not violated the law and b) they have a right to peacefully object and protest.

And from that, we get into a discussion about deporting them and taking their rights away.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 07:45 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 07:25 PM)BnW Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 06:42 PM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  For being an immigrant who refuses to live by the laws of the land.

I personaly go a step further and say that you should also be deported if you are the son of an immigrant who was raised by your parents to reject the values and laws of the country you live in.

Fascinating. What about an immigrant who is living by the laws of the land, including the right to peacefully assemble and voice a contrary opinion. Because, that's what we're talking about here. People exercising their legal rights to object to the current rules. That's what democracy is all about. That you and I think their idea is oppressive and ridiculous doesn't change the fact that a) they have not violated the law and b) they have a right to peacefully object and protest.

And from that, we get into a discussion about deporting them and taking their rights away.

There is a big difference between an individual believing someone is oppressive and someone actualy being oppressive.

Those who threaten people who practice free speech - are oppressive!

[Image: RPYH95t.png]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 07:57 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 07:04 PM)BnW Wrote:  I'm not playing any card. I'm asking where the line is and if you're willing to apply it equally.

"Is it just brown people who are Muslims?" is not the racist card? Uh-huh, sure.

Quote:And, all my examples are about freedom of speech. My entire point is about the right to object to these things.

My point is about them wishing to limit existing freedom of speech. They are the threat to freedom.

Quote:As for what is or is not comparable to freedom of speech, your the one advocating taking that right away. If you're ok with people not having the right to assemble and protest, I can't imagine you object to other rights being curtailed.

I ask it again: where is the line and whom does it apply to.

I was very clear that this is about immigrants wishing to change the fundamental nature of the country.

Immigration is a choice and permitting it is at the discretion of the destination country.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 08:16 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 07:45 PM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  Those who threaten people who practice free speech - are oppressive!

I absolutely agree with this statement. The problem is, it cuts both ways.

People who shoot cartoonists over their work are oppressive. People who are part of majorities who seek to deport and criminalize the peaceful protest of a minority group who is an expressing an unpopular opinion are also oppressive.

But, I could not agree with you more on this statement.

Just to be clear here, I don't live in an ivory tower where real world events and consequences don't penetrate or impact me. I am well aware of what is happening in the world and the threat posed by religious fundamentalists, especially Muslim fundamentalists. I get the the implied threat from these people even in a peaceful protest. I don't take my positions in a vacuum without considering the real worl impacts.

But, for me, here is the point: we are nations of laws where everyone is equal under the law. Or, we are not. You can't pick and choose who has rights and who does not. The story that kicked this discussion off was about a peaceful protest by Muslims are are asking that what they view as an insult to their religion be outlawed. Personally, I completely disagree with their stance and think that the right to comment or satirize their religion - and any religion - is fundamental to a free society. The fact that they are asking for this right means they don't what it means to live in a free society. I fully understand that. But, so what? Whether they get it or not doesn't mean the right doesn't apply to them?

In the US, in the past we've had a whole lot of handringing and acrimony over the right to burn the American flag. There have been no shortage of people claiming that this should be illegal and it's not really a protected right. They have lost on this issue time and time again. And, they have done more than just protest. They have tried to pass laws and go to court to stop people from exercising their right to this type of speech (for the record, I think people who try to make a point by burning a flag are idiots, but that doesn't detract from their right to do it). At no point has anyone EVER suggested criminalizing their protest. At no point has anyone EVER suggested stripping people of their citizenship or deporting people for disagreeing with the right to free speech and to make an ass out yourself by burning a flag. I assure you, that's not just happenstance.

In the 90s, the Brooklyn Museum featured a picture that showed the Virgin Mary covered in elephant shit. It caused a whole lot of yelling and then mayor Guilliani threatened to pull the museum's city funding and tax exempt status if they didn't pull it down. They refused and went to court .. and won. Because, that's what freedom of speech is. There was a lot of protests, etc. Did those protestors value our fundamental cherished rights and laws? Was what they were complaining about really any worse than what the Muslims in the UK were complaining about? If you're honest about this, you'll admit it's the same thing. And yet, no one would ever dare suggest that these people be deported, etc.

Chas got angry because I suggested race played a role in this. But, I absolutely think it does. Well, maybe not race, per se, but religion certainly does. This is judged differently because they are Muslims.

And that takes me back to my original point: we are all equal under the law, or we are not. We can't complain that Muslims are not living within the norms and laws of our society, and then seek to punish them when they react in accordance with our laws. No, you don't have to let immigrants in to your country and you should think carefully about who you are letting in. But, the people that live there have rights and protections under the laws of those countries. Certain things are fundamental to democracy. You can't pick and choose who those rights apply to. Once you do that, once you start to believe that all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, you've lost the war. We're told that this "war on terrorism" is about fighting for our freedoms and our way of life. Well, then, we better damned well be living those ideals along the way for this to be worth it. As I see it, we are so close to losing all that because of our fear and hatred.

So, yes - I get it. I get what drives you and Chas and others to react as you do. I get it. But, I don't agree. I'm not willing to concede that we have to give up on our fundamental principles to win a war of ideas against a 5th century AD culture.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
09-02-2015, 08:30 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 08:16 PM)BnW Wrote:  
(09-02-2015 07:45 PM)The Germans are coming Wrote:  Those who threaten people who practice free speech - are oppressive!

I absolutely agree with this statement. The problem is, it cuts both ways.

People who shoot cartoonists over their work are oppressive. People who are part of majorities who seek to deport and criminalize the peaceful protest of a minority group who is an expressing an unpopular opinion are also oppressive.

But, I could not agree with you more on this statement.

Just to be clear here, I don't live in an ivory tower where real world events and consequences don't penetrate or impact me. I am well aware of what is happening in the world and the threat posed by religious fundamentalists, especially Muslim fundamentalists. I get the the implied threat from these people even in a peaceful protest. I don't take my positions in a vacuum without considering the real worl impacts.

But, for me, here is the point: we are nations of laws where everyone is equal under the law. Or, we are not. You can't pick and choose who has rights and who does not. The story that kicked this discussion off was about a peaceful protest by Muslims are are asking that what they view as an insult to their religion be outlawed. Personally, I completely disagree with their stance and think that the right to comment or satirize their religion - and any religion - is fundamental to a free society. The fact that they are asking for this right means they don't what it means to live in a free society. I fully understand that. But, so what? Whether they get it or not doesn't mean the right doesn't apply to them?

In the US, in the past we've had a whole lot of handringing and acrimony over the right to burn the American flag. There have been no shortage of people claiming that this should be illegal and it's not really a protected right. They have lost on this issue time and time again. And, they have done more than just protest. They have tried to pass laws and go to court to stop people from exercising their right to this type of speech (for the record, I think people who try to make a point by burning a flag are idiots, but that doesn't detract from their right to do it). At no point has anyone EVER suggested criminalizing their protest. At no point has anyone EVER suggested stripping people of their citizenship or deporting people for disagreeing with the right to free speech and to make an ass out yourself by burning a flag. I assure you, that's not just happenstance.

Not true. Many on the right wanted U.S. flag burning to be made illegal.

Quote:In the 90s, the Brooklyn Museum featured a picture that showed the Virgin Mary covered in elephant shit. It caused a whole lot of yelling and then mayor Guilliani threatened to pull the museum's city funding and tax exempt status if they didn't pull it down. They refused and went to court .. and won. Because, that's what freedom of speech is. There was a lot of protests, etc. Did those protestors value our fundamental cherished rights and laws? Was what they were complaining about really any worse than what the Muslims in the UK were complaining about? If you're honest about this, you'll admit it's the same thing. And yet, no one would ever dare suggest that these people be deported, etc.

Chas got angry because I suggested race played a role in this. But, I absolutely think it does. Well, maybe not race, per se, but religion certainly does. This is judged differently because they are Muslims.

I got angry because you implied race had something to do with it for me.

Quote:And that takes me back to my original point: we are all equal under the law, or we are not. We can't complain that Muslims are not living within the norms and laws of our society, and then seek to punish them when they react in accordance with our laws. No, you don't have to let immigrants in to your country and you should think carefully about who you are letting in. But, the people that live there have rights and protections under the laws of those countries. Certain things are fundamental to democracy. You can't pick and choose who those rights apply to. Once you do that, once you start to believe that all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others, you've lost the war. We're told that this "war on terrorism" is about fighting for our freedoms and our way of life. Well, then, we better damned well be living those ideals along the way for this to be worth it. As I see it, we are so close to losing all that because of our fear and hatred.

So, yes - I get it. I get what drives you and Chas and others to react as you do. I get it. But, I don't agree. I'm not willing to concede that we have to give up on our fundamental principles to win a war of ideas against a 5th century AD culture.

There is no fundamental difference between barring entry of a would-be immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country and deporting an immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 08:50 PM (This post was last modified: 09-02-2015 09:02 PM by Blackout.)
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
Quote:"Is it just brown people who are Muslims?" is not the racist card? Uh-huh, sure.
Chas, for you it may not be, but a lot of people in European countries, particularly in Britain, Germany, France and Austria have a far right conservative agenda that consists in hating any immigrant that doesn't look white. For these people hating Muslims is justified because they are outsiders, look brown, are savages and practice a different religion. It isn't the typical skeptic atheist criticism. In my country these nationalists are all worried that a very peaceful Muslim community is building a Mosque in the capital, and they have never done harm to anyone. All of this to say - Yeah, statistically Islam is the religion which causes greater harm, but we should be careful with our assertions against Muslim immigrants, because the line between criticism to ideologies/religion and xenophobia/racism becomes blurry sometimes.

Let's look at the example of the argument that Muslims don't adopt our values therefore they should be sent back to their land - Do you see a problem with this? I'll tell you what it is --> It's the same argument used against any minority, any non-white non-native citizen ("They are savages, multiculturalism sucks and we should deport them back to their land").

If you want to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Islam and what we call Islamophobia just notice if the person says "I don't like Islam" or "I don't like Arabs". You can't deny that in the west people associate someone brown looking with a beard to Islamic religions even if that person has no religious affiliation whatsoever.

Quote:There is no fundamental difference between barring entry of a would-be immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country and deporting an immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country.
Funny that immigrants are legally entitled to equal treatment under the law... So if you want to deport immigrants who don't fit western values that means you'll deport any native that doesn't fit those values at all. This includes Christian fundies, terrorists, murderers, sex offenders, the list goes on... Do you want to go down that path? The same argument you are using is used (as I've said) to deport any minority that is not native to the land and has a difference race/culture. Don't go down that way. How do you propose knowing which immigrants will fit western values? You do know that the EU doesn't permit that kind of discrimination, right? This means that first and foremost, EU citizens are equal regardless of their native country, and secondly outside immigrants are also accepted and can't be discriminated against because of their nationality. If we add the fact some immigrants acquire citizenship and their descendants will consequently acquire it by birth, your proposal seems wishful but impossible. Maybe in the United States immigrants don't have the same rights as the remaining citizens, but the United States is not the best role model to the rest of the world. In the EU immigrants are already discriminated against and there's far right parties that promote hate against them. Immigrants face workplace and job discrimination, immigrants are poorer, are profiled because of their race, the list goes on... I don't know what do you intend with your measure but it seems, at least, prejudiced against other cultures. There are many natives that cause trouble, far more than immigrants, and no one is deporting them.

I'll bet the biggest criminals in your country are probably (1) Native born (2) Very rich (3) White (4) Not Muslims, probably Christians (5) Are not in jail

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 10:02 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
Chas

My comment on race was not intended to be directed at you as an individual. I wasn't calling you a racist. But, generally, I think race plays a big part in people's motivations.

Regarding your comment about who wanted laws banning flag burning, that's my point. Many people disagreed with our rights and protested about it. That's exactly why I brought it up.

To your last point, I obviously disagree.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-02-2015, 10:53 PM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
I don't understand how criticism or opposition to a religion has become confused with racism.

Racism is judging somebody based on their physical characteristics, or place of birth... When we get down to it, religion is nothing more than somebody's opinion. They are free (in the West anyway) to change their minds at any time.

I can ridicule a fascist, a communist, a libertarian or a conservative all day long if I want to, and not face any accusation of being bigoted. But attach a fairy tale character to that ideology, and suddenly I'm insensitive, and/or racist? The only conclusion I can draw, is that religion is an easy target for criticism, and to openly ridicule it is seen as "mean".

Well, if they want the right to convert people to their beliefs, then people deserve the right to make an informed choice. Maybe these guys are full of shit, maybe they're trying to con people? So maybe it would be wise if we allow people to voice their concerns and objections to this belief system?

Of course not all Muslims, Jews or Christians are violent or radical... But nobody can reasonably deny that there are aspects of this religion which inspire people to commit atrocious acts. Its written in black and white in the very texts they claim are the foundations of their morality. This needs addressing...

Until every religion on earth publicly acknowledges and addresses the aspects of their faith which either condone or encourage atrocious acts, I will continue to regard them all with deep suspicion.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Sam's post
10-02-2015, 06:52 AM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
(09-02-2015 08:50 PM)Blackout Wrote:  
Quote:"Is it just brown people who are Muslims?" is not the racist card? Uh-huh, sure.
Chas, for you it may not be, but a lot of people in European countries, particularly
<snip>

He and I were discussing what I said, not what others say. He implied I was racist.

Quote:
Quote:There is no fundamental difference between barring entry of a would-be immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country and deporting an immigrant whose views are inimical to the fundamental freedoms of the country.
Funny that immigrants are legally entitled to equal treatment under the law... So if you want to deport immigrants who don't fit western values that means you'll deport any native that doesn't fit those values at all. This includes Christian fundies, terrorists, murderers, sex offenders, the list goes on... Do you want to go down that path?

We already go down that path. An immigrant can be deported for a felony conviction.

Quote:The same argument you are using is used (as I've said) to deport any minority that is not native to the land and has a difference race/culture.

Don't you fucking start with the racist crap, too. I clearly stated 'immigrants who want to fundamentally change the basis of the society. Stick to the discussion or butt out.

Quote:Don't go down that way. How do you propose knowing which immigrants will fit western values? You do know that the EU doesn't permit that kind of discrimination, right? This means that first and foremost, EU citizens are equal regardless of their native country, and secondly outside immigrants are also accepted and can't be discriminated against because of their nationality.
If we add the fact some immigrants acquire citizenship and their descendants will consequently acquire it by birth, your proposal seems wishful but impossible. Maybe in the United States immigrants don't have the same rights as the remaining citizens, but the United States is not the best role model to the rest of the world. In the EU immigrants are already discriminated against and there's far right parties that promote hate against them. Immigrants face workplace and job discrimination, immigrants are poorer, are profiled because of their race, the list goes on... I don't know what do you intend with your measure but it seems, at least, prejudiced against other cultures. There are many natives that cause trouble, far more than immigrants, and no one is deporting them.

Oh, for fuck's sake. What has any of that to do with the point?

Quote:I'll bet the biggest criminals in your country are probably (1) Native born (2) Very rich (3) White (4) Not Muslims, probably Christians (5) Are not in jail

That, again, has nothing to do with the discussion.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-02-2015, 07:54 AM
RE: Anti-freedom of speech protests in London
Quote:He and I were discussing what I said, not what others say. He implied I was racist.
I don't think you are racist. But I think the line becomes blurry in our minds
Quote:We already go down that path. An immigrant can be deported for a felony conviction.
In America probably, in the EU no - An immigrant serves time just like any other citizen. It's called the principle of equality
Quote:Don't you fucking start with the racist crap, too. I clearly stated 'immigrants who want to fundamentally change the basis of the society. Stick to the discussion or butt out.
- What I'm saying is true - The far right uses the same argument and it's complicated to distinguish between legitimate measures and the ones motivated by xenophobia or racism
- How the hell do you propose knowing who fits that criteria?
- And do you think deporting immigrants is better than educating them?

Quote:Oh, for fuck's sake. What has any of that to do with the point?
Since this is in Britain it has everything to do with the EU's rules. You have to abide by them
Quote:That, again, has nothing to do with the discussion.
I'm pointing out the fact you are so worried about immigrants when
1 - They are still a minority and a population of 2-10% of Muslims has almost no control over means of production, media, politics and cannot destroy or oppress the rest of society --> Therefore they are not a danger
2 - There are far worse criminals that are not deported
3 - You are giving different treatment to people simply because they were born in a certain place. That's discriminatory - You can argue on semantics, but it is, if you give different treatment to immigrants you are discriminating

"A casual stroll through the lunatic asylum shows that faith does not prove anything" - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: