|
British Party Leader Arrested for “Inciting Hate”. Free Speech Surrenders … (pg. 4)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
I'm totally with Occrider and St. Andrew on these matters. In fact I think that it is perfectly ok for a private company to refuse to hire people because of their skin colour, religion, or political affiliation. It would probably be stupid, considering the negative press such moves would make, but it should definately not be a topic of legislation. When it comes to government owned companies, the principle of equal opportunity takes effect, though.
For those of you who somehow manages to distinguish between exercising free speech and inciting to hatred, could you please define *exactly* how the two differs? Say, if I utter "those Harry Potter books are really overrated" is that an incitement to hatred agains Rowlings? What if some lunatic reads it, thinks "he got a point", and subsequently kills Rowling to stop further output of Harry Potter books? How much stupidity on behalf of the listener can we disregard before we start talking about inciting to hate?
There you go with your generalizations again. You're quite the expert in that field :rolleyes:
It's really sad that you cannot see how much you violate your own socialistic principles by being extremely intolerant. It may be that the BNP is hating others because of their religion - but you clearly hate others because of their opinions. Do we choose our opinions any more than our religion? |
Well to be fair I did say I was pissed
Anyway, I am not against criticising religion but this is RACE
Even tho he talked about Islam, he was refering to Muslims as non-white when he made the remark about hitting white lads with baseball bats, therefore it is race, not religion
I will never accept anyone's right to critcise somebody or discriminate based on skin colour because that makes no difference to the type of person they are, whereas religion does change the way people are |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
And this is the end product of your comprehensive expertise in maximizing time and cerebral stimulation? Wow, I've never been so incredibly humbled before in my entire life. A pulitzer, sir, would do you dishonor.
And yes, in a cruel twist of fate, my mom named me Occrider (Oak-see-ride-deer) at birth. Unfortunately I guess George Smiley and all the other good names were already taken ... |
Are you really called occrider?!
And thankyou for your kind comments re. my writing ability, I do believe I actually spelt everything correctly too! |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Well to be fair I did say I was pissed
Anyway, I am not against criticising religion but this is RACE
Even tho he talked about Islam, he was refering to Muslims as non-white when he made the remark about hitting white lads with baseball bats, therefore it is race, not religion
I will never accept anyone's right to critcise somebody or discriminate based on skin colour because that makes no difference to the type of person they are, whereas religion does change the way people are |
So what you're saying is that we don't have a right to say what's on our mind based upon the content of what we have to say? Or we can't share our opinions if they don't meet a certain criteria?
| quote: |
Are you really called occrider?!
|
I most certainly would have committed suicide by now if I had been.
| quote: |
And thankyou for your kind comments re. my writing ability, I do believe I actually spelt everything correctly too!
|
What can I say? I'm the most gracious man that has ever existed. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by occrider
So what you're saying is that we don't have a right to say what's on our mind based upon the content of what we have to say? Or we can't share our opinions if they don't meet a certain criteria?
|
Sure you should be able to share your opinions, but not if sharing them provokes others to attack people or put dog through their letter boxes... |
|
|
| occrider |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Sure you should be able to share your opinions, but not if sharing them provokes others to attack people or put dog through their letter boxes... |
Okkk so you can share your opinion unless another person reacts adversely to what you have to say? How is that having the freedom to share your opinions?
I take it then that something like Richard Herrnstein's The Bell Curve would be prohibited ...
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...=books&n=507846 |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by trancaholic
There you go with your generalizations again. You're quite the expert in that field :rolleyes:
|
And you're quite the expert at taking things out of context:p |
|
|
| St_Andrew |
| quote: | Originally posted by Yoepus
And you're quite the expert at taking things out of context:p |
i think he meant that in some european countries (such as denmark) people have the same free speech rights as in the US. |
|
|
| Yoepus |
| quote: | Originally posted by St_Andrew
i think he meant that in some european countries (such as denmark) people have the same free speech rights as in the US. |
And all I meant was that most Europeans on this forum seem to critize free speech when it is restricted in the USA but on the otherhand applaud it when it is restricted in some European countries.... |
|
|
| donegalredneck |
Good to hear this ******'s in jail. His teenage daughter has some twisted views also (wonder where she got those). But it's not about his views. He's a racist whose rantings and opinions bear quite heavily on young influential men and women who resort to racial violence. Evidently so considering there's proof that members of his racist party engage in racist violence.
I don't think the incitement of hatred should come under the whole free speech argument. Free speech sould only be free when it doesn't infringe upon the way ordinary people lead their lives. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
Ok, there seems to be a bit of a pattern emerging here...
Notice how it is the British and Irish who support this decision to lock away Griffin, but it is only the people that dont live here defending him (or his rights)
You really need to do some research as to what the BNP and its members are actually like. The reason, Yoepus, why I brought Hitler up is that these people are exactly the same. They are Nazis who hate blacks, Asians and Jews. These people are vicious thugs who have no place in our society. We dont want them and I am glad the authorities are finally cracking down on them... |
|
|
| donegalredneck |
| Exactly. Maybe their name throws people who wouldn't know otherwise? It's unfortunate too that the party has people who are obviously quite intelligent and are able to influence quite heavily people by preying on their fears. For a group like them to do as well in the last local elections as they did is a disappointment but possibly because of the intellect of an elite within it? |
|
|
| eLe_vatE |
The views of the BNP don't scare me half as much as the rapidly advancing view of the left that the right to associational autonomy is a flexible thing. There should be absolutely no room for reasoning on this right that is essential for a healthy democracy (indeed a democracy at all).
It's a very hypocritical mindset, these people preach about how diverse we all are and how great it is, but can't seem to stomach the fact that people have views different to their own.
The thing is, on the whole, people aren't ing stupid, they see that all the BNP represents is racism and hatred, and consequently do not associate themselves with the party (obviously some do, hence why I said "on the whole...") - This is the same for any extremist party in a democracy, grant people their basic right to associated autonomy, and let democracy 'crush' the extremist parties.
The option that sadly has been taken by our government to arrest Nick Griffin will be counter-productive I fear, some (clearly not all as evidenced by this thread) people will recognise this action as oppressing freedom of speech, and it will really get their goat, even if they detest the views of the BNP (like myself). However, there will be, shall we say, 'borderline racists' amongst these pissed off people, who will possibly resort to 'taking their views further', as a consequence of their anger at this action. Bugger I'm waffling a bit, well, to be more concise what I'm saying is that; if you want to 'stir-up' the views that the BNP - or any other extremist party - represent , then oppressing peoples' right to announce these beliefs is a very good way to go about it.
The thing that worries me here is that people are in agreement that merely expressing an opinion is against the law, there is not evidence (that we've been made aware of anyway) of Nick Griffin actually planning a racially motivated assault of some form, which would constitute conspiracy to assault - a crime - so the fact that he was arrested for merely expressing an opinion makes this a much bigger issue than some people are taking it for, the repercussions of which are potentially much worse than some racial tension in Bradford or Oldham. |
|
|
|
|
