« Quotable Quotes | Main | Advertisements »
January 13, 2004
PC vs Freedom of Speech
Most sane people, when pressured, would agree that there are something that are better not broadcast in the public domain. Most parents, for example, would object to pornography being offered to children. A lot of people would object to revisionist historians getting public airtime to promote their (usually) twisted agendas. Some people would be uncomfortable with public promotion of direct racism. So for all these reasons we have laws in most countries that restrict your freedom of speech. You are not free to do or say things that could be considered offensive in these ways. Even in the USA with a specific freedom of speech right there are still restrictions (e.g. on burning the flag).
The problem is where the line is drawn between sanity (porn to children) and insanity (see this story. If I understand the context correctly (and perhaps I do not), then the quoted statement is factual and current. It is (presumably) a way of making you stop and think. A way of perhaps encouraging those involved to rethink their approach. Seriously, the participants picture all Americans as being 'satanists', 'invaders' and 'culture-destroyers' but they have not stopped to consider that Americans see them as no more than "suicide bombers, limb amputators, [and] women repressors". Neither view is correct but one of those views will get you in serious trouble in England while the other is supported as a right of expression. No prizes for guessing which is which.
Additional opinions on this may be found at The Gray Monk and Dodgeblogium.
Posted by Ozguru at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM
Comments
Posted by: Paul Jané at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM
Posted by: MommaBear at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM
Posted by: ozguru at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM
Posted by: The Gray Monk at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM
Posted by: Kathy K at January 13, 2004 08:01 AM