The Right to Cause Offence
-
Jo Brand's Joke Censored by the BBC.
In the episode, Brand told presenter Victoria Coren Mitchell that people who attacked Mr Farage and far-right political figures with milkshakes were "pathetic".
She said: "Why bother with a milkshake when you could get some battery acid?," adding, "I'm not going to do it, it's purely a fantasy."Some people have apparently had a humourectomy.
-
It is a fine line to tread. All too often, people lose their jobs over such comments.
Writing on Twitter he (Farage) added:
I am sick to death of overpaid, left-wing, so-called comedians on the BBC who think their view is morally superior. Can you imagine the reaction if I had said the same thing as Jo Brand?
That is the whole point. Comedians make jokes; politicians should be making comments that are meant to be taken seriously.
-
Sir Winston Churchill said:
“Everyone is in favour of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone else says anything back, that is an outrage.”
-
Even the Dalai Lama has to apologise for his remarks.
It is much better if the future Dalai Lama, if a woman, should be attractive. The Buddha was very handsome too look at. There is nothing wrong with being beautiful; it is the result of wholesome kamma, while ugliness is the result of unwholesome kamma.
-
@Pesala The quote given by the BBC is
"If a female Dalai Lama comes, she should be more attractive," he said in English, while laughing.
To me, I see no reason to apologise for this. It comes across (to me) as a joke with some self-deprecating humour, which may have been lost in translation.
As I interpreted it:
"If a female Dalai Lama comes, she should be more attractive [than I am]," he said in English, while laughing.
I'm not a massive follower of the dalai lama, so I can't really add much beyond that.
-
I think hate speech should be censored because it encourages heinous acts like Texas Walmart Shooting at El Paso.
We all know who is to blame for stirring up hatred against Hispanics.
This other attack at a Garlic Festival bears the hallmarks of a racially motivated attack.
No motivation for the Shooting at Dayton has yet been established. The shooter was a 24 year old white man. Connor Betts from Ohio.
-
A Christian Doctor, David Makereth lost his case.
The hearing was told he would refuse to refer to "any 6ft-tall bearded man" as "madam" following a conversation with a manager at an assessment centre and later left his role.
What worries me about this is that:
"It is deeply disturbing that this is the first time in the history of English law that a judge has ruled that free citizens must engage in compelled speech," she added.
-
This post is deleted! -
@Pesala stop blaming democractic rights for another nutter going berserk.
You are blinded.You have had disastrous amounts of school murders in USA for ages.
You don't solve this issue by regulating people's rights of free speech.How about confronting a sick society instead of those criticising such circumstances?
There's no difference between your standpoint and Taleban. Only another scale preferred..
-
@Cybernisse You are deaf. Free speech carries with it responsibilities. If you just say whatever you wish, true or not, if it is hateful and encourages hate then it has consequences.
True, there are many mass shootings in the USA, and most are done by nutters, but such unbalanced people are vulnerable to hate speech.
There are four ways in which the evil kamma of killing is done:
- One does it oneself,
- One urges another to do it,
- One condones it (allows it to happen when one could prevent it),
- One speaks in praise of it
Intentional actions have consequences. Killing leads to brevity of life; kindness leads to long life.
Censoring hate speech is just one method to confront a sick society; the other method, of course, is gun control laws as Australia and NZ did, and the UK after the Dunblane Massacre.
You must be a nutter if you think censoring hate speech is in any way equivalent to the intolerance of the Taliban, e.g. pulling out the finger nails with pliers if women wear nail-polish.
-
@GraveDigger The far right and the far left both cause harm. It is better to follow the middle path.
-
@GraveDigger Spoken like a true fascist. No one with moderate views is worth anything.
-
@Pesala Moderator follow the guidelines. My focus is the technical stuffs. I like geopolitical subjects, not here, which basically a forum about technology.
-
@lamarca said in The Right to Cause Offence:
basically a forum about technology.
Not the Chit-chat section of the lounge,
Where the conversations are light-hearted, often humorous and fun.
I get enjoyment from discussing ethics and related matters. Not all fun needs to be trivial nonsense.
-
Fascism, like any dictatorship, is not a political system, but a system of oppression, independent of the label they put on, they always end up in genocides and wars.Systems where sovereignty does not reside in the people, but in a small elite or in a single person, is neither communism, socialism or anything other than simply a dry dictatorship that always are comparable, regardless of whether they are called Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Mussolini, Franco or PolPot.But we should not fool ourselves with our current democracy, where our "representatives" represent more large corporations than their voters. This is another form of a dictatorship, that of the called "markets", these are the ones that set the standards, not us. A real leftist policy is urgent, the right is the one that destroys our planet with its policies, for the benefit (in the short term) of a few, where a simple money bill is worth more than a human life or a virgin jungle.The 4 riders are called greed, stupidity, fanaticism and ignorance
-
@GraveDigger It is not fascism to require users to follow codes of polite conduct. Your claim that the middle-ground moderates are fascists is untrue. The moderates do not oppress others when they oppose the oppression of minorities.
The extreme left oppress freedom of speech by trying to impose their values on others, as in the case of that medical doctor who lost his job due to not agreeing to address a bearded transsexual as "madam."
The right-wing oppress both the left and moderates who defend freedom of expression and tolerate different life styles or religions, modes of dress, etc.
Calling fat people fat, though true, is unkind and rude. There is no need for it. Insisting that Moslems or others follow western dress codes is intolerant. Even if you do not like it, and take offence, that is your problem. Wearing a hijab is not any more offensive than wearing a turban, a hat, or a balaclava. Wearing a full head toe to burkah complete with a face veil, is, in my opinion, inappropriate anywhere where identification or face to face communication is required. If Moslem ladies are going to the mosque then why do you take offence?
I go about in my monk's robe every day. The only ones who sometimes take offence are right-wing yobs.
-
@GraveDigger said in The Right to Cause Offence:
ANY time you want complete control over what people own or say and do you are from the center to the right. remember communism is fascism not socialism.
Have you heard of Godwin's Law? Comparing others to nazis because they censor and censure hate speech is ridiculous. The Nazis did not just close down Jewish newspapers and synagogues; they carried out a genocide against an entire race.
Moderates only wish for people to behave decently towards others. They do not want complete control over them.
If there is one thing that I cannot stand it is intolerance! And, yes, that is meant to be ironic.
-
@Pesala said in The Right to Cause Offence:
@GraveDigger said in The Right to Cause Offence:
ANY time you want complete control over what people own or say and do you are from the center to the right. remember communism is fascism not socialism.
Have you heard of Godwin's Law? Comparing others to nazis because they censor and censure hate speech is ridiculous. The Nazis did not just close down Jewish newspapers and synagogues; they carried out a genocide against an entire race.
Moderates only wish for people to behave decently towards others. They do not want complete control over them.
If there is one thing that I cannot stand it is intolerance! And, yes, that is meant to be ironic.
With 'moderates or centrists, a society cannot evolve, at least not with those that are considered moderate, in most cases more closely related to the right.
It is one thing to be conservative in things that work and another to be conservative in all things, where a commitment is not admissible and where changes are required. It is there where almost all politicians called centrists or moderates fail.
Politics do not need moderate, centrist and extremist people, but politicians with common and honest sense, who are seen as servants of the people. But the latter unfortunately are scarce in the political landscape.
Intolerant politicians who rule by banning and regulating people's private lives, by definition they are bad politicians.
This is not their task, but to manage resources for the general welfare and liberty of the population and not the welfare of an elite group or the wishes of ecclesiastics moralists. -
-
@lamarca said in The Right to Cause Offence:
very rigid point of view
What on earth in my post are you referring to with this statement?
- That the Chit-chat forum is not about technology
- That I get enjoyment from discussing ethics
- Not all fun needs to be trivial nonsense.