Should there be limits on Freedom Of Speech?

[Gregory]

Over the past view years there has been a debate concerning Freedom Of Speech. On the one hand you have those who believe that Freedom Of Speech should have limits (either through self regulation or government) and on the other side you have those who believe that Freedom Of Speech should have no limits. Where do you stand? Please understand that while you are free to express yourself in our blog. All blog posts are moderated. Open debate and criticism is healthy but it is our policy that all blog discussions must be respectful. We will remove any user who uses profanity or is disrespectful of any persons or group.

[Shaista Drabeck]

In response to the article, I do generally believe in freedom of speech but in some cases there has to be limitations due to human nature. Some people can't control their anger towards things and so result to violence etc to make their points heard. This article will probably induce a lot of negative reactions on both sides ( from the viewer and the people it's taking about). I believe that this where IFOR is doing a great job in that they are re-educating people about the diversity in cultures and beliefs so that people in the future will be aware of the nonsensical comments of films like these and would therefore not think any less of Islamic people (or whoever) but learn to live in harmony with one another.

[Shaista Drabeck]

I just came across this interesting article :

'European Union foreign ministers condemned on Saturday a Dutch film that accuses the Koran of inciting violence, but said its author had a right to make it under the bloc's free speech principles.

Geert Wilders, a Dutch parliamentarian and leader of the anti-immigration Freedom Party, launched his short video on the Internet on Thursday, prompting an al Qaeda-linked website to call for his death and attacks on Dutch soldiers in Afghanistan.

The film "Fitna" -- an Arabic term sometimes translated as "strife" -- intersperses images of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States and Islamist bombings with quotations from the Koran, Islam's holy book.

"The film equates Islam with violence and this view is sharply rejected," the 27 ministers said in a statement after a two-day meeting in the Slovenian country resort of Brdo.

"The vast majority of Muslims reject extremism and violence," they said, expressing support for the Dutch government, which has dismissed the film's view on Islam.

The film, which urges Muslims to tear out "hate-filled" verses from the Koran, has outraged Muslim nations in a similar way to a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad with a bomb under his turban published in a Danish newspaper in 2005.

But the ministers said the film fell within the scope of the EU principle of freedom of expression and those offended by it should refrain from violence or threats.

"Feeling offended is no excuse for aggression or threats," the ministers said.

"Muslims, Christians and people of all convictions and beliefs must live together in peace and mutual respect."

Iran called the film heinous, blasphemous and anti-Islamic, and Indonesia, the world's most populous Muslim nation and a former Dutch colony, said it was an "insult to Islam, hidden under the cover of freedom of expression".

Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen said he was satisfied with the support from his EU partners.

Denmark was hit was hit in 2006 by boycotts and international protests over the Prophet cartoons.

"I do not agree with the film because you cannot say 1.3 billion Muslims are potential terrorists," Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moller told reporters on Friday.

Earlier, British-based LiveLeak.com, the first Web site to post the Wilders film, said it had removed the film after threats to its staff "of a very serious nature."

[Gregory]

Hey Bjoern. No worries as I figured you were joking a bit but I wanted to address the larger group at the onset. Even though you were kidding your comment was on point and I wanted to acknowledge that also. Your points concerning politics, politicians and education are quite accurate. The USA military attracts lower income citizens from every color spectrum who volunteer to learn a skill and to get free University because of the high costs to attend University. Our primary school and high school education system seriously needs an overhaul and a large monetary investment as well as our health care system but the justification has been that we could not afford it. I would argue that if we can afford Iraq we can afford to invest in our citizens. The problem is is that it much easier to control people if they are ill informed and scared because fear is such a powerful weapon.

[Bjoern Drabeck]

Hi Greg,

I do fully understand your need to moderate the blog for profanity and disrespectful posts, and I wasnt criticizing you for it at all, and I dont think you would just censor someones opinion or constructive criticism - I just meant it was funny in a way, ironical almost ;-)

Thanks for your links, and I have to check out the BBC documentary, sounds very interesting!

To come back to the topic, this fear mongering and and making everyone afraid of some big terrorist network is something that really bugs me. Of course I do know that there are actually terrorists out there, and that we should be vigilant, but I dont like the spreading of fear with the (readily available) help from the media, together with the censored and unobjective reporting.
Also I dont like the fact that these are so strongly targetted at the poorer and less educated people, who can be more easily manipulated, taking advantage of their lack of (for example) historical knowledge. This is probably another reason not to improve the educational system a lot, after all it could potentially cost them a lot of votes.
Interestingly I dont really know anyone from the US who thinks the current government (esp. Bush) is doing a good job (or approves on Iraq or more generally Middle-East politics), but on second thought, thats most likely because I mainly know well educated people (in my case from IT sector). [A sad sidepoint is that more educated people generally seem to be less caring about politics and voting, and trying to make a difference, and instead rather try to maximize their own incomes]

Talking about all these things we are probably already being monitored closely... for our "subversive activities" ;-) I wouldnt be surprised actually.... Actually I assume I am already on some sort of "list" of the FBI, or NSA or whoever, because a couple of months before the 9/11 attacks I had flight training in a flying schools where one of the terrorists was trained as well. So I am sure they must have checked me out... ;-)

[Gregory]

Regarding the blog moderation. I must admit that I was a bit hesitant to write this comment but on the other hand I wanted to make it clear to potential blogjackers that they will be wasting their time here. To make it clear all posts will be posted as long as they do not contain high levels of profanity (I will still post them but just slightly modify F**K words), and as long as they do not espouse hatred or violence toward any individual or group. Otherwise all posts will be posted. Thanks for the excellent points.

[Gregory]

Sorry but my first link is wrong here is the correct one. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/3755686.stm

[Gregory]

As an engaged and participative American I also disagree with the fact that the usa media has largely been what appears to be a biased non objective cheerleader for the current administration's policies. I must also admit that the current administration is quite adapt at manipulation and creating atmospheres of fear. If you want an insight into why my country behaves the way it does regarding fear mongering and war I would see the brilliantly well done BBC documentary "The Power of nightmares the Politics of Fear" which will open your eyes to some very important facts, one of them being that the neocons learned from Vietnam that showing war casualties and coffins damaged their ability to "Market" and positively spin their war. BBC http://culturesofpeace.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=2024173%3ABlogPost%3A181

Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power_of_Nightmares

[Bjoern Drabeck]

I very much agree with being respectful of other people and their beliefs, and I think that people with common sense do that anyway. Unfortunately common sense doesnt seem to be too common these days - but that is another topic ;-)
And of course it makes sense to not be allowed to do certain things that might cause a panic or harm people in other ways (like you said shouting "fire" in a theatre or something like that - although I dont know if that really falls under this topic)

What I very much disagree with, is when the media in the US dont (or cant) show pictures or film of casualties from the Iraq War on/of Terror, and the reason for that mainly being to not get too many people out there on the barricades against the government.

I generally find it wrong when one is not allowed to express his opinions on political topics or people freely, for example if you are not allowed to criticise leaders of countries and things like that. USA seems to be getting worse and worse on that, and yet they often name China as bad examples for this and that (which they are of course, but they should look at themselves as well).

On a sidenote, I find it very funny that there is this topic here " Should there be limits on Freedom Of Speech?" and a few lines below it says "Please understand that while you are free to express yourself in our blog. All blog posts are moderated. " :-D
(although I of course understand that this comes under "respect" etc... still its kinda funny)

[Kimi Gilbert]

Great topic! So...(can of worms being opened)...I agree that freedom of speech should not be restricted. However, as Greg has already pointed out, speech is nevertheless restricted in societies that generally uphold and protect this right. Just to throw another example out there to add to Greg's list: Look at Germany. Because of Germany's National Socialist history, it is illegal to disseminate Nazi literature, films, music, etc.
Like Greg, I completely support freedom of expression. And although I too would be offended if someone created racist art (about Asians or any other group, for example) I believe it is the artist's right to do so. It doesn't mean I support the artist or agree with him or her, however I do defend their right to do so.
This might sound incredibly cheesey, but a professor of mine once said that PC shouldn't stand for "political correctness", but rather for "personal courtesy." This comment always resonated with me for some reason and I agree: We should be respectful of other people and their beliefs.

[Gregory]

I thought that I would start the discussion by posting my thoughts concerning this issue. Generally I believe that freedom of expression should not be limited, but in reality even in "free" and open societies freedom of speech is already limited. For instance in the USA you cannot yell fire in a crowded movie theater when there is no fire and I believe that USA law stipulates that you cannot say something which will incite (cause) violence. While I do believe strongly in Freedom of Speech and of Expression I also think that we should be respectful of other cultures, religions and beliefs. Even though I greatly respect art I would be very upset if someone created highly insensitive "art" depicting my mother or grandmother in a highly disrespectful way. Peace.