General Discussion

on point

(2,506 posts)

108. Time for the Muslim world to discover the Enlightenment. Claims of blasphemy sure sign it NEEDS it!

Fri Sep 28, 2012, 02:03 PM

Sep 2012

No roll back on free speech. What a stupid notion. If the point of view / person cannot stand challenge and ridicule, then it is a sure sign that it is dogma and NEEDS to swept out.

In terms of life cycle:
The life cycle of the Muslim belief system is behind that of the Christian one. But they need to catch up to Enlightenment.

Christians were busy with the same inquisition nonsense in their 12th century, but finally wised up by their 18th.

Muslims are now in their 13th century, but should have learned from others and lept forward to the 18th.

The world is not interested in going back while until they catch up.

In other words, get over it.

Claims of blasphemy are a sure sign the subject is worth the ridicule

(BTW different than false claims which might be subject to slander....)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

167 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A war is raging against free speech [View all] MNBrewer Sep 2012 OP

Here on DU as well ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #1

The calls here on DU for criminalizing speech are troubling, indeed. MNBrewer Sep 2012 #3

I think the only free speech I would ban is the calling for banning of free speech. nt Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #12

Yup. The Thought Police here at the "Underground" have fallen into line rather quickly. villager Sep 2012 #30

Pretty blatant examples of that here in this thread ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #33

What's really sad is how their ask-no-questions apologetics mimic precisely the things they pretend villager Sep 2012 #34

That's how you get people to vote their rights away 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #52

Right. And that the erosion of rights is okay because "our side" can always be trusted villager Sep 2012 #58

Naturally 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #59

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #122

You don't protect the rights of specific individuals 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #124

So, if that's true, you're willing to throw the 1st Amendment away, for good measure? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #128

Who else should we include in this list? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #143

The idea that OUR fundies wouldn't use such laws against us is naive and dangerous... friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #162

Bingo!!! liberallibral Sep 2012 #93

But... but other nations ban blasphemy and hate speech! <--- sound familiar? Zalatix Sep 2012 #150

What the fuck?! Are you fucking serious?! n/t porphyrian Sep 2012 #2

Yes, free speech is the greatest asset to democracy. alp227 Sep 2012 #97

I don't know, I like not having a state religion, too. n/t porphyrian Sep 2012 #106

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #4

So you say MNBrewer Sep 2012 #7

Who gets to decide what speech incites to violence? JDPriestly Sep 2012 #43

THANK YOU!!!! Your post++ alp227 Sep 2012 #103

So you mean, we shouldn't say anything mean about Adolph? socialindependocrat Sep 2012 #56

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #62

I see your point, but MNBrewer Sep 2012 #67

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #72

It went along with a LOT of other things MNBrewer Sep 2012 #75

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #76

duplicate. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #147

GOVERNMENT-SANCTIONED. Not some weirdo film-maker. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #149

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #84

Just so I'm clear here MNBrewer Sep 2012 #88

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #119

Your time line is wrong, for one thing MNBrewer Sep 2012 #123

On balance, I prefer to have my enemies free to speak their mind openly . . . markpkessinger Sep 2012 #100

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #120

That would be "Adolf" to his friends. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #146

Only if there is a direct call for violence and the crimes are imminent, not NYC Liberal Sep 2012 #61

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #74

If, heaven forbid, George W. Bush were to be assassinated by a deranged killer MNBrewer Sep 2012 #89

Speech that doesn't lead to imminent lawless action is not illegal NYC Liberal Sep 2012 #102

This message was self-deleted by its author bupkus Sep 2012 #117

Well, YES, it's legal! MNBrewer Sep 2012 #125

There are already limits on speech. NYC Liberal Sep 2012 #138

Actually, it IS FREE SPEECH... liberallibral Sep 2012 #95

Remember this saying by Benjamin Franklin: alp227 Sep 2012 #98

+1 MNBrewer Sep 2012 #101

It most assuredly fucking is. nt Codeine Sep 2012 #127

Careful, you'll piss off DU's islamophobes Scootaloo Sep 2012 #137

Do you recognize US jurisprudence as superior to any citizen's personal definition? WinkyDink Sep 2012 #145

If you were right then Sarah Palin would be in jail by now, as well as Rush Limbaugh and a few other Zalatix Sep 2012 #152

Dangerous stuff get the red out Sep 2012 #5

Oh really? 99Forever Sep 2012 #9

Can you imagine the abuse here? get the red out Sep 2012 #13

You think there aren't religous zealots ... 99Forever Sep 2012 #20

They are not the United States get the red out Sep 2012 #51

It's a brave new world MNBrewer Sep 2012 #64

It's looking that way get the red out Sep 2012 #87

"attacked"? 99Forever Sep 2012 #91

Where did I ever say that? get the red out Sep 2012 #110

Your words: 99Forever Sep 2012 #159

Still don't see where I told you to shut up get the red out Sep 2012 #166

And they're wrong to do so. jeff47 Sep 2012 #24

And that is part of their intention, to limit discussion on how Hitler and his evil.... Raster Sep 2012 #28

What specifically leads you to that premise precisely? LanternWaste Sep 2012 #32

here's the specific german law hauweg Sep 2012 #69

From your link: jeff47 Sep 2012 #156

Significantly different cultures ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #26

Don't get the mistaken impression that I... 99Forever Sep 2012 #44

It seems that in the US we are willing to risk offensive speech to guarantee free speech for the ProgressiveProfessor Sep 2012 #49

Interesting ... 99Forever Sep 2012 #83

How are you going to establish that intent? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #90

Intent is established all the time... 99Forever Sep 2012 #96

I can say it MNBrewer Sep 2012 #99

Some speech IS criminal already. 99Forever Sep 2012 #104

Some, yeah MNBrewer Sep 2012 #105

Well yeah. 99Forever Sep 2012 #107

My point is MNBrewer Sep 2012 #109

Where did I ever say I ... 99Forever Sep 2012 #157

You want "hate speech" to be illegal. Which certainly would include blasphemy, right? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #158

No, not certainly. 99Forever Sep 2012 #160

Should these guys have been prosecuted for "hate speech"? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #161

Why? 99Forever Sep 2012 #164

I think saying things like that does cause actual harm stevenleser Sep 2012 #111

Can someone saying "homosexuality is intrinsically disordered" MNBrewer Sep 2012 #112

There is an important distinction. Leviticus does not rant against the LGBT community stevenleser Sep 2012 #126

Why does saying gays are evil need justification? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #131

I'm speaking to a potential law that I am talking through in our conversation. stevenleser Sep 2012 #135

Ok, well, i'm going to go on record as opposing that law, whatever it will be MNBrewer Sep 2012 #139

No - I don't thing the Teabaggers know the difference socialindependocrat Sep 2012 #80

Yes DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #60

I think the problem with discussion about this in the US is laundry_queen Sep 2012 #140

It's a tough issue bongbong Sep 2012 #6

no it's not. and yes, it is a simple problem. cali Sep 2012 #8

Assertions are fun! bongbong Sep 2012 #31

Its not per se illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater onenote Sep 2012 #39

Thanks bongbong Sep 2012 #42

I am against any type of restrictions on free speech... Comrade_McKenzie Sep 2012 #10

no one likes free speech when it's against them. how many times has the lgbt community come out La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2012 #11

I'd say we do it quite often MNBrewer Sep 2012 #16

i have many a times and i am pretty sure if you search the archives so will you La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2012 #63

You have done what? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #66

seen people on du ask for free speech to be criminalized on the grounds of it being hate speech La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2012 #82

You have seen GLBT DUers state this? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #92

And yet Fred Phelps has not been attacked, no one seeks to jail him, he is Bluenorthwest Sep 2012 #41

many many here and elsewhere have advocated against fred phelps free speech La Lioness Priyanka Sep 2012 #65

I'm a gay man, and I support his right to his free "hate speech" MNBrewer Sep 2012 #71

How do you say "go fuck yourself... and your religious views" in Arabic? -..__... Sep 2012 #14

The irony is that the film has caused people who otherwise would not be sympathetic to the Muslim JDPriestly Sep 2012 #48

I've had 3 posts hidden Oregonian Sep 2012 #15

grab a clue, honey. DU is a private organization, not a nation and not a world body. duh. cali Sep 2012 #17

I put the term "primitives" in quotes for a reason Oregonian Sep 2012 #21

The real problem here is extremists of all kinds... OldDem2012 Sep 2012 #18

Well said. And welcome to DU! hifiguy Sep 2012 #25

Here's an example of what we would have to look forward to MNBrewer Sep 2012 #19

Totally disagree with your point that "A war is raging against free speech" Jessy169 Sep 2012 #22

If you want to limit the discussion to the video "Innocence of the Muslims" and the reaction MNBrewer Sep 2012 #23

Definitely bigger than just the "Innocence of Muslims" video Jessy169 Sep 2012 #27

So you plan on criminalizing right wing hate speech? MNBrewer Sep 2012 #29

Me? "Plan" to criminalize right wing hate speech? Jessy169 Sep 2012 #36

I'll be a little more explicit, then MNBrewer Sep 2012 #37

As stated previously Jessy169 Sep 2012 #46

There are legal opinions written by legal scholars that have been used to justify the use of torture MNBrewer Sep 2012 #53

Obama at UN "the strongest weapon against hateful speech is not repression, Bluenorthwest Sep 2012 #50

Yes! War against free speech does equate to a war raging against free speech. JDPriestly Sep 2012 #130

To be perfectly fair, the American idea of absolute freedom of speech is not the norm... Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #35

I think that question has been turned around in your formulation MNBrewer Sep 2012 #38

Well no... Spider Jerusalem Sep 2012 #40

That's not really what is being proposed MNBrewer Sep 2012 #47

Worldwide the norm is that women aren't really people 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #54

And "they" will enforce the global blasphemy ban with black UN helicopters. Comrade Grumpy Sep 2012 #77

I doubt it will actually go through 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #78

Totally agree with your post Jessy169 Sep 2012 #68

To be fair DonCoquixote Sep 2012 #70

>Implying that the US wasn't founded by people escaping 'the norm'. Edweird Sep 2012 #167

Let them clean up their own houses first leftynyc Sep 2012 #45

I'm starting to think an anti_Islam video should be released every week quinnox Sep 2012 #55

hehe. Really! I mean when ISN'T this an appropriate headline MNBrewer Sep 2012 #57

That's taking things too far... Zalatix Sep 2012 #154

Are the "Arab and Muslim leaders" who are proposing this law ... surrealAmerican Sep 2012 #73

Vatican Walks A Fine Line On Trying To Combat Blasphemy In UN MNBrewer Sep 2012 #79

Bwhahahahahahahahaha! 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #81

There's the problem get the red out Sep 2012 #113

The standard seems to be that A) the person being mocked geniuinely believes 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #114

Some religious beliefs RIGHTLY deserve mockery! MNBrewer Sep 2012 #115

Beyond the "don't be a dick to each other" proclamations that every religion touches on 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #116

I agree with you MNBrewer Sep 2012 #118

People have concocted some strange beliefs about god 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #121

+100,000,000!!! Well said! Zalatix Sep 2012 #155

Fuck religion. Alduin Sep 2012 #85

Religion. (n/t) Iggo Sep 2012 #86

About the author: alp227 Sep 2012 #94

Time for the Muslim world to discover the Enlightenment. Claims of blasphemy sure sign it NEEDS it! on point Sep 2012 #108

Absolute Kick for your reply. GoneOffShore Sep 2012 #136

What is needed is for the modern world---including DU 100%--to LAUGH IN THEIR FACES. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #142

Been laughing at the religious for years. Doesn't seem to help. GoneOffShore Sep 2012 #163

Yeah- not going to happen Marrah_G Sep 2012 #129

Are Catholics more civil/tolerant than Muslims? Go Vols Sep 2012 #132

WTH? Leave Catholics out of this. It isn't like war-mongers today aren't PROTESTANT. WinkyDink Sep 2012 #151

It was only an example of Go Vols Sep 2012 #153

Or clerics lying on tv and radio to incite riots over religion could be made illegal. Waiting For Everyman Sep 2012 #133

Blasphemy laws are a way to restrict criticism of religion which rightly deserves criticism. GoneOffShore Sep 2012 #134

STOP IT! STOP IT! [tm Ann Baby] WinkyDink Sep 2012 #141

Nah. The abuse of "free speech" by a fanatical few is causing the world to consider... Junkdrawer Sep 2012 #144

US Government actions against Occupy movement etc. nt. tama Sep 2012 #165