View Poll Results: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime?

Voters
219. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    7 3.20%
  • No

    209 95.43%
  • I don't know.

    3 1.37%
Page 22 of 72 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast
Results 211 to 220 of 720

Thread: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime? [W:636]

  1. #211
    Klattu Verata Nicto
    LaMidRighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Louisiana
    Last Seen
    07-21-17 @ 02:42 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    30,534

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by Pinkie View Post
    I agree and I think that decision should have been decided differently (and likely would have been, on better facts). But even if it had, that would in no way lead anyone with any logic to conclude that any US speech which MIGHT offend another person on Planet Earth with any known propensity for violence should also be illegal.

    I don't think people are thinking this through. Apart from the strategic error of trying to appease a bully, the speech that'd become illegal wouldn't simply be remarks trashing the Prophet Muhammed. It'd also be speech condemning polygamy, favoring women's rights, supporting gay rights, etc. As so many Ayatollehs have been at pains to remind us, they find almost everything about the USA worthy of condemnation.
    You hit a bullseye here Pinkie. If protected speech which falls under the SLAPS test(Serious Literary Artistic Political Scientific) and has the highest scope of protection can be violated "for safety" it opens the door for further violations. Any speech out of context can potentially offend someone, it isn't even close to worth banning speech because it offends someone.
    Neither side in an argument can find the truth when both make an absolute claim on it.

    LMR

  2. #212
    Sage
    Ikari's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-08-17 @ 01:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    54,124

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    I don't see how we could legitimately infringe upon free speech on this subject. Those speaking out are not responsible for the irrational reactions of others.
    You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo

    Quote Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
    "I should have loved freedom, I believe, at all times, but in the time in which we live I am ready to worship it."

  3. #213
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    The great lakes
    Last Seen
    06-12-13 @ 02:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    1,907

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by Fair View Post
    Yes
    Abbas Barzegar has written Nothing Farcical About anti-Muhammad Film which discusses the free speech versus hate speech implications of this film:
    How does "Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed" equate to hate speech?
    Should Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Christianity also be outlawed?

  4. #214
    Educator AreteCourage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Last Seen
    08-30-13 @ 12:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    790

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    No...Free Speech and freedom of religion is part of the fabric of our country.

    We have free speech to be able to say controversial things without fear of arrest. We don't have free speech to talk about trivial things.
    Libertarian and Atheist...wow I'm a hated man.

  5. #215
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?




    What about Comedians then when they make Fun of People and races? Whats Next.....I know what you are thinking?

  6. #216
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,872

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by lizzie
    The bolded would require that legal authorities could prove intent to cause violence, based on outcome, and if we were to go there, then virtually anytime someone had their feelings hurt, and decided to go ape**** on someone they didn't agree with, their violent actions could be considered justified. I vehemently oppose a situation where intent could be determined by someone else's inability to control their impulses.
    I don't think the case is quite so bad. We try to infer intent all the time in other situations in order to determine the extent of a particular crime. For example: a man fires a gun through a wall into a room in which he knows another man is standing. The other man is killed. We have at least four possibilities:

    1) The gun went off accidentally, and the man therefore had no intent to cause harm.

    2) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger thought the bullet wouldn't go through the drywall, or some other demonstrably absurd belief.

    3) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger only intended to scare the other man.

    4) The gun was fired deliberately, and the man who pulled the trigger intended to kill the other man.

    And in fact, these possibilities just scratch the surface. However, there is a clear difference between what we do with the man holding the gun that killed victim under each situation.

    It would be very easy to distinguish a case of me insulting someone else but not intending to incite violence vs. me lying about person A to incite person B to do violence on A. Your objection seems to rely on us being unable to form a theory of someone's mind based on available evidence. If such a principle were to hold, there would be no difference between what we'd do to the man who was holding the gun in situations 1-4, above. Ergo, unless you are prepared to claim that either murderers should walk free or people who accidentally shoot others (the point being, the case is truly accidental) should receive the same penalty as a murderer, your objection is specious.

  7. #217
    Global Moderator
    Bodhidarma approves bigly
    Andalublue's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Granada, España
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    26,111

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    I don't think the case is quite so bad. We try to infer intent all the time in other situations in order to determine the extent of a particular crime. For example: a man fires a gun through a wall into a room in which he knows another man is standing. The other man is killed. We have at least four possibilities:

    1) The gun went off accidentally, and the man therefore had no intent to cause harm.

    2) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger thought the bullet wouldn't go through the drywall, or some other demonstrably absurd belief.

    3) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger only intended to scare the other man.

    4) The gun was fired deliberately, and the man who pulled the trigger intended to kill the other man.

    And in fact, these possibilities just scratch the surface. However, there is a clear difference between what we do with the man holding the gun that killed victim under each situation.

    It would be very easy to distinguish a case of me insulting someone else but not intending to incite violence vs. me lying about person A to incite person B to do violence on A. Your objection seems to rely on us being unable to form a theory of someone's mind based on available evidence. If such a principle were to hold, there would be no difference between what we'd do to the man who was holding the gun in situations 1-4, above. Ergo, unless you are prepared to claim that either murderers should walk free or people who accidentally shoot others (the point being, the case is truly accidental) should receive the same penalty as a murderer, your objection is specious.
    Excellent post. That sums up the situation very well.
    "The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión

    "Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn

  8. #218
    Sage
    SmokeAndMirrors's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    RVA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:08 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    18,174

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Uh, no.

    People need to learn how to deal with others not kowtowing to their beliefs like adults.

  9. #219
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,052

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by ashurbanipal View Post
    I don't think the case is quite so bad. We try to infer intent all the time in other situations in order to determine the extent of a particular crime. For example: a man fires a gun through a wall into a room in which he knows another man is standing. The other man is killed. We have at least four possibilities:

    1) The gun went off accidentally, and the man therefore had no intent to cause harm.

    2) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger thought the bullet wouldn't go through the drywall, or some other demonstrably absurd belief.

    3) The gun was fired deliberately, but the man who pulled the trigger only intended to scare the other man.

    4) The gun was fired deliberately, and the man who pulled the trigger intended to kill the other man.

    And in fact, these possibilities just scratch the surface. However, there is a clear difference between what we do with the man holding the gun that killed victim under each situation.

    It would be very easy to distinguish a case of me insulting someone else but not intending to incite violence vs. me lying about person A to incite person B to do violence on A. Your objection seems to rely on us being unable to form a theory of someone's mind based on available evidence. If such a principle were to hold, there would be no difference between what we'd do to the man who was holding the gun in situations 1-4, above. Ergo, unless you are prepared to claim that either murderers should walk free or people who accidentally shoot others (the point being, the case is truly accidental) should receive the same penalty as a murderer, your objection is specious.
    I don't think this is a good analogy. A bullet has no sentience and the guy pulling the trigger is in complete control over whether the bullet gets fired. Insulting someone is not the same. The reaction of the one insulted is not like a bullet they have a choice on what they do. Yes incitement to violence is a crime but insulting somone is not the same thing as incitement to violence. The ones urging muslims in various countries to use violence and attack americans are the people who are doing the incitement to violence some guy who made a film insulting their beliefs.
    Last edited by Quag; 09-18-12 at 08:48 AM.
    A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.
    Winston Churchill



    A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.
    Winston Churchill

  10. #220
    Guru
    ashurbanipal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,872

    Re: Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Mohammed a Crime?

    Quote Originally Posted by Quag
    I don't think this is a good analogy. A bullet has no sentience and the guy pulling the trigger is in complete control over whether the bullet gets fired. Insulting someone is not the same. The reaction of the one insulted is not like a bullet they have a choice on what they do. Yes incitement to violence is a crime but insulting somone is not the same thing as incitement to violence. The ones urging muslims in various countries to use violence and attack americans are the people who are doing the incitement to violence some guy who made a film insulting their beliefs.
    It's not intended to be an analogy. It's intended to show that intent can be, and should be, discerned when deciding on many types of crime. There was an objection that seemed to be based on the notion that we would overburden our epistemic faculties to try to determine intent. I was pointing out that this is almost certainly wrong, and moreover, it is necessary to determine intent to avoid perpetrating miscarriages of justice.

    Again...I haven't been discussing the film that has led to such furor. I've been discussing general principles, abstracted from specific situations. I think there are other reasons to suppose that incitement to violence should be considered a crime.

Page 22 of 72 FirstFirst ... 12202122232432 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •