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 60 of 72 FirstFirst ... 1050585960616270 ... LastLast
Results 591 to 600 of 720

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

  1. #591
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,046

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    I apologize for mischaracterizing your argument.
    I also think you are still misunderstanding mine. Indirect incitement to violence is protected speech, direct incitement to violence is not. Can we agree to that much?
    Agreed, though I think you should just ignore the term indirect incitement to violence as it is meaningless. Now what in the question:
    Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime?
    Makes you have any hesitation to say NO!
    it does not talk of incitement to violence but of speech that is disparaging or critical of Muhammed. I could care less if you replace Muhammed with Christ, Buddha, Vishnu, Obama, Romney, or even Bob who lives next door and doesnt pick up after his dog. The answer in every single case is NO!
    Last edited by Quag; 10-03-12 at 06:26 PM.
    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

  2. #592
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Quag View Post
    Agreed, though I think you should just ignore the term indirect incitement to violence as it is meaningless. Now what in the question:
    Should The US Make Speech That's Critical or Disparaging of Muhammed a Crime?
    Makes you have any hesitation to say NO!
    it does not talk of incitement to violence but of speech that is disparaging or critical of Muhammed. I could care less if you replace Muhammed with Christ, Buddha, Vishnu, Obama, Romney, or even Bob who lives next door and doesnt pick up after his dog. The answer in every single case is NO!
    The answer should be, "it depends.". If it incites violence then it is unacceptable, and the question is not clear about that. "Indirect incitement" is right on the borderline, which is why I draw the distinction. It gets a bit hazy when it comes to speech that is calculated to incite violence by technically indirect means. It's like exploiting a loophole.

    Why is direct incitement prohibited? I don't see much difference, in spirit, between what this film maker did and a direct rabble rouser inciting violence in person. This guy knew full well what he was doing, he just did it at arms length. How is that so much different than direct incitement?

  3. #593
    Sage
    lizzie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    between two worlds
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,581

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post

    Why is direct incitement prohibited? I don't see much difference, in spirit, between what this film maker did and a direct rabble rouser inciting violence in person. This guy knew full well what he was doing, he just did it at arms length. How is that so much different than direct incitement?
    If I stand on the street corner, and shout obscenities about Christians, and claim their god is a fraud, would that constitute incitement to riot?
    "God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
    -C G Jung

  4. #594
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,046

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    The answer should be, "it depends.". If it incites violence then it is unacceptable, and the question is not clear about that. "Indirect incitement" is right on the borderline, which is why I draw the distinction. It gets a bit hazy when it comes to speech that is calculated to incite violence by technically indirect means. It's like exploiting a loophole.

    Why is direct incitement prohibited? I don't see much difference, in spirit, between what this film maker did and a direct rabble rouser inciting violence in person. This guy knew full well what he was doing, he just did it at arms length. How is that so much different than direct incitement?
    No never! incitement to violence is nto the same thing as making critical or disparaging remarks. If the title of the thread was shoudlincitement to violence be against the law well guess what it already is. so no poitn in pretundign it has anythign to do with tthe thread. There is no hazy except in your mind. Either you incite violence or you dont. Just because someoen reacts violently to what you say does not make it incitement. No loophole you incite or you dont, this thread is about critical or disparaging remarks. not incitement to violence. direct or you wishy washy irrelevant indirect.

    If you dont see the difference between a bad film that mocks someones beliefs and someone calling for the heads of people to be cut from their necks then I cannot help you! go back several pages Harry had the best post so far aboout this. I will grant he stated it in a way that was much clearer than anythign I have said so far.
    Last edited by Quag; 10-03-12 at 07:32 PM.
    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

  5. #595
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    Wrong.

    I'm not going to lift a finger to help him if his rights are getting infringed, since there are more important concerns. It doesn't mean I support the infringement.

    Try applying a little logic. I have been very clear about this. Maybe you're just having trouble following the subtle nuances? It does require a bit of thought to follow me on this, I grant you.
    Guy your getting your head handed to you, and yes I understand the sublties of your arguement. However in this case I think doing nothing is the same as support. Which, while your support of freedom of speach is DeJure, your lack of action is DeFacto support of restriction of speach.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  6. #596
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    Guy your getting your head handed to you, and yes I understand the sublties of your arguement. However in this case I think doing nothing is the same as support. Which, while your support of freedom of speach is DeJure, your lack of action is DeFacto support of restriction of speach.
    I can't say I agree with you there. Understand that I am mostly here to criticize people who oppose freedom of speech by supporting things like censorship on TV, but are all of a sudden champions of free speech when it comes to the right to bash Muslims. That underlying hypocrisy and bigotry angers me greatly. I am as staunch a supporter of freedom of speech as any libertarian, and you might take note that I applauded Henrin earlier for standing up for ALL FORMS of free speech. But if you support censorship on TV, because apparently you think boobs hurt people(?) you have no business asserting freedom of speech here, where people really got hurt. That's my argument.

    I am also considering a separate topic, which might not be wise considering that there are some people here looking to twist my words to get back at me for making them look foolish in other threads. That separate topic is whether this rises to the level of prohibited incitement. It does not, but just barely, and considering that the doctrines related to incitement were written prior to the internet age, any fair minded person will have to address the question of whether they are still valid. So far nobody opposing me has done that.

  7. #597
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    I can't say I agree with you there. Understand that I am mostly here to criticize people who oppose freedom of speech by supporting things like censorship on TV, but are all of a sudden champions of free speech when it comes to the right to bash Muslims. That underlying hypocrisy and bigotry angers me greatly. I am as staunch a supporter of freedom of speech as any libertarian, and you might take note that I applauded Henrin earlier for standing up for ALL FORMS of free speech. But if you support censorship on TV, because apparently you think boobs hurt people(?) you have no business asserting freedom of speech here, where people really got hurt. That's my argument.

    I am also considering a separate topic, which might not be wise considering that there are some people here looking to twist my words to get back at me for making them look foolish in other threads. That separate topic is whether this rises to the level of prohibited incitement. It does not, but just barely, and considering that the doctrines related to incitement were written prior to the internet age, any fair minded person will have to address the question of whether they are still valid. So far nobody opposing me has done that.
    I am right in line with Henrin, we pretty much in agreement there, I might even be slightly more extreme in that particalar view, though to be honest probably not by much. I understand were you are coming from, perhaps playing devils advocate would probably describe what you are doing. I think we can agree this is not incitement, which by the way I do not agree with or conspiricy for that matter.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  8. #598
    Sage
    Guy Incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Seen
    12-02-17 @ 07:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    11,216

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

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    I am right in line with Henrin, we pretty much in agreement there, I might even be slightly more extreme in that particalar view, though to be honest probably not by much. I understand were you are coming from, perhaps playing devils advocate would probably describe what you are doing. I think we can agree this is not incitement, which by the way I do not agree with or conspiricy for that matter.
    Playing devil's advocate describes pretty much everything I do.

  9. #599
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Today @ 08:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,076

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

    I can always use one more religion to make fun off. So no. Muhammed the killer, Jesus the flower power fairy and Vishnu the creep should all be fair game.
    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  10. #600
    Sage
    Quag's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Earth
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    19,046

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Guy Incognito View Post
    I can't say I agree with you there. Understand that I am mostly here to criticize people who oppose freedom of speech by supporting things like censorship on TV, but are all of a sudden champions of free speech when it comes to the right to bash Muslims. That underlying hypocrisy and bigotry angers me greatly. I am as staunch a supporter of freedom of speech as any libertarian, and you might take note that I applauded Henrin earlier for standing up for ALL FORMS of free speech. But if you support censorship on TV, because apparently you think boobs hurt people(?) you have no business asserting freedom of speech here, where people really got hurt. That's my argument.

    I am also considering a separate topic, which might not be wise considering that there are some people here looking to twist my words to get back at me for making them look foolish in other threads. That separate topic is whether this rises to the level of prohibited incitement. It does not, but just barely, and considering that the doctrines related to incitement were written prior to the internet age, any fair minded person will have to address the question of whether they are still valid. So far nobody opposing me has done that.
    Start new thread, leave this one alone as you seem to agree that disparaging or critical marks must be protected and only incitment to violence should be stopped. There is no ambiguity in the question asked, it is not about incitement to violence.
    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

Page 60 of 72 FirstFirst ... 1050585960616270 ... 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
  •