The only right the Charlie Hebdo people (magazine which was in fact a follow up of another one, older and better known in France : "Hara Kiri") were asking for is : "the right to make people laugh" !
But this is too much to ask from certain people ....
Not really… You have the right to hate and disagree.
Here’s an interesting take on the discussion. It eliminates the loopholes used to illegally prevent “hate” speech. I just prefer our existing verbiage and the removal of the therefore illegal restrictions on speech otherwise mentioned here.
Too many people believe free speech also means freedom from repercussions.
Eventually, I see all religion falling by the wayside because it will no longer provide survival for the members. Science is our only hope for survival.
Except that you're either forgetting or don't know that Christians don't care much about survival on earth.
1. The right to criticize. 2. The right to question. 3. The right to hate.
(partial quote)
The only right the Charlie Hebdo people (magazine which was in fact a follow up of another one, older and better known in France : "Hara Kiri") were asking for is : "the right to make people laugh" !
But this is too much to ask from certain people ....
[/CONTENTEMBED]
1. The right to criticize.
2. The right to question.
3. The right to hate.
(partial quote)
The only right the Charlie Hebdo people (magazine which was in fact a follow up of another one, older and better known in France : "Hara Kiri") were asking for is : "the right to make people laugh" !
But this is too much to ask from certain people ....
The problem is that one man's comedy is another man's grief.
Here’s an interesting take on the discussion. It eliminates the loopholes used to illegally prevent “hate” speech. I just prefer our existing verbiage and the removal of the therefore illegal restrictions on speech otherwise mentioned here.
It's important to make that clarification of the intended meaning of 'free speech'. The text you quoted says to abandon the pursuit of 'free speech', you're saying to use that phrase under a restrictive definition. If you break it down into parts, it's contradictory to use certain words contrary to their definition:
'Speech' doesn't cover any particular tone of communication, it's used in that phrase to generally mean all forms and tones of communication.
The same applies to existing in a state of freedom in any given country though. If someone is released from prison, they would be declared to be free but they are only free to do anything that's not against the law.
Where authors and publishers often make a mistake is in thinking that there are no limits to their expression. It's well understood in the physical world that freedom means freedom with restriction. That isn't as well understood for communication.
I suspect the reason for this is the certainty of inflicting harm. If someone physically hurts another person, we can all relate to that because we all have similar pain response and agree that's a harmful act and we all agree that's not ok. If someone emotionally hurts another person, we don't all relate the same way, which leaves a very ambiguous definition for what's ok or not. It can't be left unrestricted because the harm is real and laws are written in the interests of people, not for any abstract notion.
The danger in keeping using the phrase 'free speech' is that people are likely to believe there are no restrictions on how they express themselves. Given that you can be fined, imprisoned, punished in some way for what you communicate, speech isn't punishment-free. The main distinction between Eastern and Western societies is physical punishment. What we really have is violence-free speech in the sense that you will not be punished physically for what you communicate and other forms of punishment are less harsh.
Very interesting news. One should also note that this new issue will this time be translated in many languages and distributed all over the world (thanks to the financial support received). Charlie Hebdo was , it should be recognized, a dying magazine (Wolinski was 80, Cabu 76), sales were going steadily down and down, and there was no financial possibility to have international edition/distribution.
In a way, the killers have helped a lot Charlie Hebdo !
There will be in particular a turkish edition, with the support of a local newspaper (Cumhuriyet).
Achieving to issue this new edition, with half of the normal staff, in just less than three days, with hundreds of other urgent things to care about, is just incredible.
May be other people will be assassinated, but not in vain ! In the long term, tolerance and freedom will prevail. This fight is a legitimate one !
Very interesting news. One should also note that this new issue will this time be translated in many languages and distributed all over the world (thanks to the financial support received). Charlie Hebdo was , it should be recognized, a dying magazine (Wolinski was 80, Cabu 76), sales were going steadily down and down, and there was no financial possibility to have international edition/distribution.
In a way, the killers have helped a lot Charlie Hebdo !
There will be in particular a turkish edition, with the support of a local newspaper (Cumhuriyet).
Achieving to issue this new edition, with half of the normal staff, in just less than three days, with hundreds of other urgent things to care about, is just incredible.
May be other people will be assassinated, but not in vain ! In the long term, tolerance and freedom will prevail. This fight is a legitimate one !
I hope more vendors find the balls to sell this edition. To anyone that thinks selling the paper will cause more retribution, think about the possible consequences of not selling the paper... the chance to embolden these barbarians by giving in to them.
This is huge ! May be Tim will propose Charlie Hebdo on Apple Newsstand ! If so, I "mange mon chapeau" (eat my hat) I do not know the equivalent expression in English (expression you use when happens something you have repeatedly described as impossible (yet, pleasant, in this case).
The incredible fact about Charlie Hebdo is that in fact it had very few friends. Conservative people did not like them, of course, but neither "liberal" people (in the US sense) , because they were accused by them of "islamophobia" (being too harsh against muslims), ignoring the fact that they were equally harsh against Jews and Christians (or more precisely, again unpleasant aspects of these various religions (intolerance, etc ...) (things many people apparently ignore, but will soon discover ..).
The poor guys assassinated would have never believed that they would suddenly receive such massive support, from all over the world !
This is one of the very few encouraging facts one can observe in the present depressive worldwide situation, with terror, massacres, brainwash of "FoxNews - like" medias all over the world , etc ....
This is huge ! May be Tim will propose Charlie Hebdo on Apple Newsstand ! If so, I "mange mon chapeau" (eat my hat) I do not know the equivalent expression in English (expression you use when happens something you have repeatedly described as impossible (yet, pleasant, in this case).
The incredible fact about Charlie Hebdo is that in fact it had very few friends. Conservative people did not like them, of course, but neither "liberal" people (in the US sense) , because they were accused of "islamophobia" (being too harsh against muslims), ignoring the fact that they were equally harsh against Jews and Christians (or more precisely, again unpleasant aspects of these various religions (intolerance, etc ...) (things many people apparently ignore, but will soon discover ..).
The poor guys assassinated would have never believed that they would suddenly receive such massive support, from all over the world !
This is one of the very few encouraging facts one can observe in the present depressive worldwide situation, terrors, massacres, brainwash of "Fox-like" medias, etc ....
... and this is why I think it is so important to defy these barbarians in every way possible. The killers might have thought they avenged Allah, but, instead, they have only poked a sleeping giant. Nothing has been accomplished by them... zero, zip, nada... to the contrary they have awoken the world to Charlie Hebdo. They have brought these cartoons to the world. The barbarians have shamed their Allah by allowing these cartoons to be seen by even more people.
Well done, Muslim extremists. Welcome to the 21st century.
Except that you're either forgetting or don't know that Christians don't care much about survival on earth.
Yeah right. As long as their stomachs are full they will quote the church doctrine, but let's see what they do when they have no food or shelter, that is when their faith comes into question. For the most part they will revert to the very basic animal instincts in order to survive, just like everyone else.
Most Christians in the US will deny their religion at the first sign of adversity, unlike the Amish who are prepared for adversity,
Yeah right. As long as their stomachs are full they will quote the church doctrine, but let's see what they do when they have no food or shelter, that is when their faith comes into question. For the most part they will revert to the very basic animal instincts in order to survive, just like everyone else.
Most Christians in the US will deny their religion at the first sign of adversity, unlike the Amish who are prepared for adversity,
Comments
@TS :
1. The right to criticize.
2. The right to question.
3. The right to hate.
(partial quote)
The only right the Charlie Hebdo people (magazine which was in fact a follow up of another one, older and better known in France : "Hara Kiri") were asking for is : "the right to make people laugh" !
But this is too much to ask from certain people ....
Too many people believe free speech also means freedom from repercussions.
Yep.
Except that you're either forgetting or don't know that Christians don't care much about survival on earth.
The whole ‘stewards of creation’ line slipping your mind?
I didn't say survival of Earth.
The problem is that one man's comedy is another man's grief.
(cover of the new issue, to come this week (Wednesday, January 14th)).
Translation : Everything is forgiven / I am Charlie
I guess they're passive suicide bombers at Charlie's old workplace.
It's important to make that clarification of the intended meaning of 'free speech'. The text you quoted says to abandon the pursuit of 'free speech', you're saying to use that phrase under a restrictive definition. If you break it down into parts, it's contradictory to use certain words contrary to their definition:
free
http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/free?searchDictCode=all
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/free?s=t
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/free_1
"Able to act or be done as one wishes; not under the control of another"
"exempt from external authority, interference, restriction"
"not limited or controlled"
'Speech' doesn't cover any particular tone of communication, it's used in that phrase to generally mean all forms and tones of communication.
The same applies to existing in a state of freedom in any given country though. If someone is released from prison, they would be declared to be free but they are only free to do anything that's not against the law.
Where authors and publishers often make a mistake is in thinking that there are no limits to their expression. It's well understood in the physical world that freedom means freedom with restriction. That isn't as well understood for communication.
I suspect the reason for this is the certainty of inflicting harm. If someone physically hurts another person, we can all relate to that because we all have similar pain response and agree that's a harmful act and we all agree that's not ok. If someone emotionally hurts another person, we don't all relate the same way, which leaves a very ambiguous definition for what's ok or not. It can't be left unrestricted because the harm is real and laws are written in the interests of people, not for any abstract notion.
The danger in keeping using the phrase 'free speech' is that people are likely to believe there are no restrictions on how they express themselves. Given that you can be fined, imprisoned, punished in some way for what you communicate, speech isn't punishment-free. The main distinction between Eastern and Western societies is physical punishment. What we really have is violence-free speech in the sense that you will not be punished physically for what you communicate and other forms of punishment are less harsh.
http://www.ucanindia.in/news/saudi-arabian-gets-10000-lashes-and-10-years-jail-for-religion-website/24881/daily
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jan/09/saudi-blogger-first-lashes-raif-badawi
Just wait until the profit Alibaba comes along, nobody will be laughing (except maybe at Amazon again).
(cover of the new issue, to come this week (Wednesday, January 14th)).
Translation : Everything is forgiven / I am Charlie
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11342699/Newsagent-defies-threats-by-stocking-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11342699/Newsagent-defies-threats-by-stocking-Charlie-Hebdo-magazine.html
Very interesting news. One should also note that this new issue will this time be translated in many languages and distributed all over the world (thanks to the financial support received). Charlie Hebdo was , it should be recognized, a dying magazine (Wolinski was 80, Cabu 76), sales were going steadily down and down, and there was no financial possibility to have international edition/distribution.
In a way, the killers have helped a lot Charlie Hebdo !
There will be in particular a turkish edition, with the support of a local newspaper (Cumhuriyet).
Achieving to issue this new edition, with half of the normal staff, in just less than three days, with hundreds of other urgent things to care about, is just incredible.
May be other people will be assassinated, but not in vain ! In the long term, tolerance and freedom will prevail. This fight is a legitimate one !
Very interesting news. One should also note that this new issue will this time be translated in many languages and distributed all over the world (thanks to the financial support received). Charlie Hebdo was , it should be recognized, a dying magazine (Wolinski was 80, Cabu 76), sales were going steadily down and down, and there was no financial possibility to have international edition/distribution.
In a way, the killers have helped a lot Charlie Hebdo !
There will be in particular a turkish edition, with the support of a local newspaper (Cumhuriyet).
Achieving to issue this new edition, with half of the normal staff, in just less than three days, with hundreds of other urgent things to care about, is just incredible.
May be other people will be assassinated, but not in vain ! In the long term, tolerance and freedom will prevail. This fight is a legitimate one !
I hope more vendors find the balls to sell this edition. To anyone that thinks selling the paper will cause more retribution, think about the possible consequences of not selling the paper... the chance to embolden these barbarians by giving in to them.
Report: 'Je Suis Charlie' iOS App Fast-Tracked by Tim Cook
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2475089,00.asp
Report: 'Je Suis Charlie' iOS App Fast-Tracked by Tim Cook
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2475089,00.asp
This is huge ! May be Tim will propose Charlie Hebdo on Apple Newsstand ! If so, I "mange mon chapeau" (eat my hat) I do not know the equivalent expression in English (expression you use when happens something you have repeatedly described as impossible (yet, pleasant, in this case).
The incredible fact about Charlie Hebdo is that in fact it had very few friends. Conservative people did not like them, of course, but neither "liberal" people (in the US sense) , because they were accused by them of "islamophobia" (being too harsh against muslims), ignoring the fact that they were equally harsh against Jews and Christians (or more precisely, again unpleasant aspects of these various religions (intolerance, etc ...) (things many people apparently ignore, but will soon discover ..).
The poor guys assassinated would have never believed that they would suddenly receive such massive support, from all over the world !
This is one of the very few encouraging facts one can observe in the present depressive worldwide situation, with terror, massacres, brainwash of "FoxNews - like" medias all over the world , etc ....
This is huge ! May be Tim will propose Charlie Hebdo on Apple Newsstand ! If so, I "mange mon chapeau" (eat my hat) I do not know the equivalent expression in English (expression you use when happens something you have repeatedly described as impossible (yet, pleasant, in this case).
The incredible fact about Charlie Hebdo is that in fact it had very few friends. Conservative people did not like them, of course, but neither "liberal" people (in the US sense) , because they were accused of "islamophobia" (being too harsh against muslims), ignoring the fact that they were equally harsh against Jews and Christians (or more precisely, again unpleasant aspects of these various religions (intolerance, etc ...) (things many people apparently ignore, but will soon discover ..).
The poor guys assassinated would have never believed that they would suddenly receive such massive support, from all over the world !
This is one of the very few encouraging facts one can observe in the present depressive worldwide situation, terrors, massacres, brainwash of "Fox-like" medias, etc ....
... and this is why I think it is so important to defy these barbarians in every way possible. The killers might have thought they avenged Allah, but, instead, they have only poked a sleeping giant. Nothing has been accomplished by them... zero, zip, nada... to the contrary they have awoken the world to Charlie Hebdo. They have brought these cartoons to the world. The barbarians have shamed their Allah by allowing these cartoons to be seen by even more people.
Well done, Muslim extremists. Welcome to the 21st century.
Yeah right. As long as their stomachs are full they will quote the church doctrine, but let's see what they do when they have no food or shelter, that is when their faith comes into question. For the most part they will revert to the very basic animal instincts in order to survive, just like everyone else.
Most Christians in the US will deny their religion at the first sign of adversity, unlike the Amish who are prepared for adversity,
Source? I disagree. We mostly will pray.
Offensive to black people.