Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Satirist Charged With Violating French Speech Restrictions [View all]jberryhill
(62,444 posts)79. I actually am of two minds on this whole "hate speech" shebang
I respect Geek Tragedy a lot and on historical threads about "Is Limbaugh inciting violence" or the Phelps Clan, GT is a First Amendment champ.
I can also see where this sort of thing can be perceived as a double standard.
(and yes I KNOW we are talking about France here, whose population is apparently too feeble minded, relative to Americans, to deal with the US notion of Free Speech; especially since the French became Nazis and took over Europe in WWII)
But where did the French have this "historical experience" of "speech leading to bad things"? The Germans invaded - they didn't persuade the French to give up.
So, sure, I can see where they would want to restrict the speech of Germans, but the French certainly had the "historical experience" of being punished for insulting the Nazis.
But I don't know where it became a Progressive value to insult people purely for the sake of insulting them. The notion seems to be "If we make fun of them enough, they'll change and see things our way."
I dunno, the response to violence should be to remove those committing violence from society by locking them up. I'm all for going after behavior.
But now we know that there are people who will get upset if their religion is insulted. So, let's amp it up to eleven! Like that kid in grade school who would go into a crying rage if you said bad things about his mother. He'll get over it if we all keep doing it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
138 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
i am saying that just 24 hours ago people were advocating complete free speech. period. nothing else
La Lioness Priyanka
Jan 2015
#8
I stand corrected. It is a real cover commenting on Muslims getting shot by other Muslims in Egypt
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#65
i'd really like a cite for that 'advocated killing every jew on the planet' thing, especially
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#88
just give me a link to where he advocates killing every jew on the planet please.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#103
I followed your link. You somehow didn't post the controversial stuff. I wonder why
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#105
the only person who's been arrested or imprisoned is the islamic comic, & it seems you
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#82
neither do you, since that's the best you can do. the article you quote supports my point:
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#87
You said: "the only person who's been arrested or imprisoned is the islamic comic"
LittleBlue
Jan 2015
#91
yes, and those being prosecuted are arabs and muslims. which was my actual point.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#93
Just to clarify "Je suis Coulibaly" the problem is "Support for a Terrorist Act" which is illegal nt
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#106
But satire we're told is protected. So if we call it satire it's legal n'est-ce pas?
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#110
Who told you satire was protected? Yes by all means, lets see how low we can go
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#112
Cartoons followed by Terrorist Attack. Je suis Coulibaly followed by a court date in FR justice
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#117
Either satire is protected or it isn't. If it is, the charges should be dismissed. nt
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#118
You've confused "SATIRE" with "Condoning a TERRORIST ATTACK" That is the question at hand
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#121
Again, Excellent dodge for providing equivalence between a terrorist attack and a court date
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#123
Far from your point being made, I've given up on trying to understand you actually.
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#127
Having looked as some of the Charlie Hebdo cartoons that have given offense to Muslims . . .
markpkessinger
Jan 2015
#71
You are doing yeoman' work. I salute you. The double standard is glaring on what speech is
Fred Sanders
Jan 2015
#77
+100. seems to me the whole 'free speech = the right to insult others' is all about keeping
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#96
You're confused. the poster never claimed the parody version was the original version.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#95
i think the french are being insanely hypocritalical in this arrest
La Lioness Priyanka
Jan 2015
#76
according to one poster from france, americans simply can't understand the uniquely droll
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#94
"Your priority is protecting the right of Nazis and their ilk to incite violence"
jberryhill
Jan 2015
#40
"It flows in one direction--from the numerous against the few." right. because the folks
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#98
Did you notice the caption "Tuererie en Egypt" (Killings in Egypt) SATIRE ALERT
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#67
he was a communist -- so what? you're still wrong about that cover being a 'forgery'.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#100
I admitted that at least 4x all over this thread. Compared to Charb, you're a Wing-Nut
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#104
If the Charlie Hebdo writers died for free speech, then this shits all over their sacrifice
LittleBlue
Jan 2015
#25
NYT calling Dieudonné a "provocative humorist" is like calling Goebbels a "marketing executive"
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#37
"Freedom of speech means nothing if it does NOT mean the freedom to offend"
Stephen Retired
Jan 2015
#69
And the key to obtaining a majority in democratic politics is offending as many people as possible!
jberryhill
Jan 2015
#70
How incredibly hypocritical of the French. The Charlie Hebdo people ought to stand with him.
tritsofme
Jan 2015
#86
To clarify "Je suis Coulibaly" is printed "Support for a Terrorist Act" which is illegal in FR
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#107
By that logic the CH cover you thought was a forgery is support for a genocidal act.
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#109
"despite...that it ... illustrates the assassination of a Muslim rep of all Muslims by MUSLIMS
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#111
If context exonerates one is should exonerate both. There is clearly a double standard. nt
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#113
Why don't you flesh out your argument so that a reasonable person can understand it
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#115
I think most of us understand it pretty well, and the cartoons are unspeakably vile.
ucrdem
Jan 2015
#116
Excellent attempt at dodging the question. My question is "how does context exonerate both"
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#119
Should a Facebook post qualify as "support for a terrorist act"? I don't think so.
tritsofme
Jan 2015
#128
He hasn't been convicted yet. The FR justice system may agree with you after the court date
Pooka Fey
Jan 2015
#133
You didn't know it either, because Coulibaly was the black guy who shot up the supermarket.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#130
well, we know they're not based on careful examination of the facts, since you can't even
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#134
you get very basic facts wrong; no wonder you think 'yawn' is some kind of convincing argument.
ND-Dem
Jan 2015
#136
All religions are equal, but some religions are more equal than others
whatchamacallit
Jan 2015
#137