Why the Double Standard on Jesus and Allah U.K.?

[Epic Beard Man]

Of course it was hindered - her plan was to speak in the UK.

As for limits to free speech - you are correct, there are limits, and those limits have already been discussed. But I'm inferring from your posts that you think we should put more limits on free speech, and I think that that is one of the most dangerous ideas you could utter.

Quote me where I said “more”

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Allow me to revisit this.



Yep. They even call for martyrdom and death fatwas.

Such states of things must be challenged.



I think you are quite mistaken about me, if you see fit to say such a thing.

What was the last demonstration you’ve been to?

 

[LuisDantas]

What was the last demonstration you’ve been to?

That is immaterial and I think you know that.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

That is immaterial and I think you know that.

Whatever you say

 

[LuisDantas]

Whatever you say

Do you seriously expect people to simply accept submission to unreasonable theistic demands?

That would be disastrous at the very least. Challenging such obscenity is a dire need. If for no other reason, because the alternative is the continuous growth of oppressive fear and moral decay.

 

[Stanyon]

Some interesting videos for your consideration:

 

[icehorse]

What was in all of the materials they had at their “protest”? What do you believe she was protesting? She claimed she was carrying out a “social experiment”, not making a protest. Are you saying her statements were dishonest?

Unless her intent was to incite violence in the moment, then her intent is beside the point.

We live in a representative democracy. We explicitly elect a group of people to decide these things on our behalf. If you don’t like their decisions, you’re free to (legally) protest, campaign and eventually vote for someone to replace them.

Freedom of speech was hard fought and it's crucial to our survival. ANY attempt to limit free speech from our current rules should be fought tooth and nail.

 

[icehorse]

Maybe they banned her because she defamed Mohamed, not because she did something racist. There is no evidence that shows that Mohamed was gay. I mean he didn’t marry little boys, he married little girls.

I believe her poster said "Allah is Gay" not "Muhammed is Gay". But for the sake of discussion, if it did say "Muhammad was Gay", how would that constitute defamation? And how would that have been racist? Muslims are not a race, they are volunteers.

 

[icehorse]

Quote me where I said “more”

In post 61 you said:

People can say what they want so long as their speech is not disruptive. There is no intellectual value chastising someone else's religion unless there is a motive to disrupt social order. In the link her views are clear: "chastise Jesus, we chastise Allah." Tit for tat is the recipe of immaturity.

I do not believe this is the current standard for limiting speech. I believe this is you suggesting that we should put MORE limits on speech.

I also disagree that there is no value in criticizing religion. Religion causes endless suffering in the world.

 

[Shad]

If someone is sitting on the edge of a cliff, you don’t push them off to demonstrate how dangerous it is.

So irrational Muslims are akin to people that wish to commit suicide? Sounds like an argument for institutionalization

No it wasn’t. Her stated goal was to demonstrate some kind of alleged double standard (though she apparently made no attempt to compare like-with-like).

Which she did.

Her actual goal was deemed to be to stir up further religious (and indirectly at least, racial) conflict in the UK, which is why she has been denied entry.

Doubtful. She is pointing out an issue created by those issues which already existed long before she become active.

Are they not perfectly entitled to be offended, regardless of how irrational you or I view that offence?

Nope as that isn't a right.

None of them acted violently or especially aggressively towards her (much to her disappointment I’m sure) so her demonstration actually failed in its true motive.

No they just ran to the cops because their feelings were hurt like little children.

She proved her point as she was forced by an authority to stop while the comparison was not. After all the police sanction her and ceased her items.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

In post 61 you said:

I do not believe this is the current standard for limiting speech. I believe this is you suggesting that we should put MORE limits on speech.

I also disagree that there is no value in criticizing religion. Religion causes endless suffering in the world.

this did not infer "more"

 

[siti]

Who have you ever met or heard of, who you think is smart enough to determine for you what you can hear and what you are not allowed to hear? I've never met a person I'd give that power to.

The law determines what you can hear and what you cannot hear. Certain words are not permitted to be spoken in certain circumstances - especially in public - even RF filters certain perfectly good Anglo-saxon words from our posts. Almost all countries have some level of censorship based on what is culturally acceptable in their societies. As with any freedom, freedom of speech comes with responsibility and if I have used that freedom irresponsibly in a country that it is not my own, I see no reason to presume on the goodwill of that country to let me come and repeat that. The person in question in this thread is not a UK national - she has no natural right to come to the UK and stir up trouble. She can say whatever the hell she likes in Canada (or on Youtube or Facebook or Twitter..., but I see no reason why she should take umbrage at being turned back at the UK border when the primary focus of her agenda is to encourage European countries to tighten their border controls. The UK Border Force did not violate any right she has as a Canadian citizen. She has no cause for complaint.

 

[Shaul]

I believe her poster said "Allah is Gay" not "Muhammed is Gay". But for the sake of discussion, if it did say "Muhammad was Gay", how would that constitute defamation? And how would that have been racist? Muslims are not a race, they are volunteers.

It would defamatory because she would be saying something about someone that was not true.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

Some interesting videos for your consideration:

Why should I take the words of these men as representative of Islam, or especially all Muslims- when this kind of fundamentalism in Islam is very new? It doesn't reflect the historical religion at all, which championed the arts, promoted philosophy, and led the most pluralistic societies of the Old World (other side of the Atlantic)- with the single exception of Buddhist East Asia as superior in ideological tolerance?

 

[icehorse]

The person in question in this thread is not a UK national - she has no natural right to come to the UK and stir up trouble.

She's a journalist and she was conducting an experiment. The UK failed.

 

[icehorse]

It would defamatory because she would be saying something about someone that was not true.

I don't think that's quite right. I think it's only defamation if the not-true statement hurts the reputation of the person being described.

 

[siti]

She's a journalist and she was conducting an experiment. The UK failed.

Yeah OK - keep on believing my fascist friend - you might still win the civil war yet - what a bunch of ****ing idiots the alt-right are!

 

[Stanyon]

Yeah OK - keep on believing my fascist friend - you might still win the civil war yet - what a bunch of ****ing idiots the alt-right are!

Having a problem?

 

[siti]

Having a problem?

Not at all! Why do you ask?

 

[icehorse]

Why should I take the words of these men as representative of Islam, or especially all Muslims- when this kind of fundamentalism in Islam is very new? It doesn't reflect the historical religion at all, which championed the arts, promoted philosophy, and led the most pluralistic societies of the Old World (other side of the Atlantic)- with the single exception of Buddhist East Asia as superior in ideological tolerance?

I think you're painting an overly rosy picture of the history of Islam.