US Ambassador to Libya killed in attacks

[bud]

So individuals can boycott whatever they want. I could boycott buying goods made in a country whose politics I disagree with, for example. Or I could not sign up for classes taught by professors from a certain country. But an academic institution boycotting professors from a certain country? A union demanding that its employer discriminate based on national origin? No, these things should not be allowed and I would oppose them.

so what if i have an incorporated company and i don't want my company to deal with a country such as saudi arabia or iran because of their internal human rights records. why shouldn't i have the right to boycott?

[bud]

Sure, but sometimes people and/or ideas don't deserve respect. People should be free to decide.

i never disagreed with this. i am for 100% freedom of speech and expression. i was just pointing out that there is nothing wrong with asking our fellow humans to show respect for one another.

[Wilber]

Money also has a lot to do with principle when it comes to free seach.Google is refusing to pull the video on the grounds of free speach but voluntarily submits to censorship in countries like China in order to gain access to their markets.

[bud]

Money also has a lot to do with principle when it comes to free seach.Google is refusing to pull the video on the grounds of free speach but voluntarily submits to censorship in countries like China in order to gain access to their markets.

it's either no youtube or censored youtube in those countries. what would you do?

i think youtube should not censor the video and people should continue to discuss what has happened. only a small minority consider the creators of the video to be heros. most others find them to be despicable assholes.

Edited September 20, 2012 by bud

[Guest American Woman]

i'm curious how the islamophobe alarmists here feel about the anti-holocaust denial laws in many of the european countries. are you for them or against limiting speech in this instance? american woman? shady? sharkman? jbg?

I'm not an islamophobe alarmist. Apparently you terrorist supporters think anyone who isn't a terrorist supporter too is an islamophobe alarmist.

[Guest American Woman]

Yes. And criticizing someone for yelling fire in a crowded theatre would be the equivalent of taking away their freedom of speech.

So you think yelling fire in a crowded theater is the same as speaking one's mind about Mohammed/Islam? So you feel the same about upsetting Christians, right? And Jews? And everyone and anyone? You don't single out just Muslims? You don't think they are the only ones who deserve our complete respect and must never be insulted or upset, right?

[bud]

I'm not an islamophobe alarmist. Apparently you terrorist supporters think anyone who isn't a terrorist supporter too is an islamophobe alarmist.

let me rephrase that:

i'm curious how you feel about the anti-holocaust denial laws in many of the european countries. are you for them or against limiting speech in this instance?

[GostHacked]

let me rephrase that:

i'm curious how you feel about the anti-holocaust denial laws in many of the european countries. are you for them or against limiting speech in this instance?

I hope you get an answer on that, but I have a feeling it's not going to happen.

[Argus]

let me rephrase that:

i'm curious how you feel about the anti-holocaust denial laws in many of the european countries. are you for them or against limiting speech in this instance?

I am against all hate speech laws other than those which ban deliberate incitement.

[Argus]

Did I say that?

No, I was suggesting that was the reason...

[Argus]

Yes. And criticizing someone for yelling fire in a crowded theatre would be the equivalent of taking away their freedom of speech.

Now you're understanding how to debate around here.

There is a hell of a difference between jumping up in a dark, crowded room and yelling 'fire', and making a stupid video you put on the internet. The presumption in the former is that people will be startled, and in the dark might rush to safety and hurt themselves. The assumption you're making in the latter is that crazed Muslims will hear about the video and run around screaming and howling and pulling out their beards.

It sounds to me like you don't think much of these Muslims...

[Wilber]

it's either no youtube or censored youtube in those countries. what would you do?

i think youtube should not censor the video and people should continue to discuss what has happened. only a small minority consider the creators of the video to be heros. most others find them to be despicable assholes.

Just saying that Google isn't about to let a commitment to freedom of speech get in the way of improving its bottom line.

Youtube regularly screens for and removes porn if it is reported, which I doubt very much the showing of such is likely to get anyone killed.

[bud]

Youtube regularly screens for and removes porn if it is reported, which I doubt very much the showing of such is likely to get anyone killed.

good point.

[Wilber]

So you think yelling fire in a crowded theater is the same as speaking one's mind about Mohammed/Islam? So you feel the same about upsetting Christians, right? And Jews? And everyone and anyone? You don't single out just Muslims? You don't think they are the only ones who deserve our complete respect and must never be insulted or upset, right?

The question wasn't directed at me but in my opinion, if someone dies as a result, yes. Forget what people may or may not deserve and just look at cause and effect.

Point being, what is "free" for one person can have consequences that are very expensive for someone else. Someone who knowingly puts someone else in that position just so they can rant, deserves no respect at all.

[GostHacked]

The question wasn't directed at me but in my opinion, if someone dies as a result, yes. Forget what people may or may not deserve and just look at cause and effect.

Point being, what is "free" for one person can have consequences that are very expensive for someone else. Someone who knowingly puts someone else in that position just so they can rant, deserves no respect at all.

That talks to all our leaders beating the drum for war when the population clearly does not want to get involved in another war, in any country anywhere on this planet.

[Guest American Woman]

The question wasn't directed at me but in my opinion, if someone dies as a result, yes. Forget what people may or may not deserve and just look at cause and effect.

So in effect, what you are saying is if the person who feels insulted is violent, then don't insult him. If the person has morals and doesn't react violently, it's ok to insult them. So kids must not insult the school bully, but little meek and mild Johnny is fair game. That's what we should be teaching our kids.

Point being, what is "free" for one person can have consequences that are very expensive for someone else. Someone who knowingly puts someone else in that position just so they can rant, deserves no respect at all.

No one is saying you have to respect them. I don't respect a lot of things people say. That doesn't mean that they have no right to say it, and it doesn't mean that if I get violent because I don't like it, that they should cease saying it. In other words, my violent reaction is solely my doing; there is no one to blame but me.

Sounds like many a spouse/child abusers' excuse - 'if he/she just didn't make me mad, I wouldn't have to hit them or take it out on the kids. It's their fault that I'm violent.'

We have freedom of speech in our country and that's not going to go away because a violent faction of Islam has no morals, ethics, and/or anger control. To give into their violence, as we freely insult everyone else simply because they don't kill people in their anger, is to empower them. If you want to empower them, add to the problem, that is your prerogative. As for me, I think the media attention, the criticism, should be put squarely and strongly exactly where it should be. I don't care to see them empowered to the point where they control what the world does or doesn't say - and I am very thankful that I live in a country with laws that support that line of thought.

[dre]

First of all, I'm assuming "Islamists" is referring to extremists, fundamentalist, and/or terrorist types. It seems as if a lot of people worldwide excuse their actions as "blow back," so really, it's our fault that Islamists are what they are and do what they do. Sorta like how the U.S. asked for it and/or had it coming on 9-11, and people who dare to insult Mohammad are responsible for the "blow back" - or at best, should expect it, and therefore should never insult the Islamists. I'd say that's "support" on some level, but at best, Israel doesn't get that kind of 'understanding.'

Blowback isnt as simple as meaning is "your fault", or that you "had anything coming".

[BubberMiley]

So in effect, what you are saying is if the person who feels insulted is violent, then don't insult him.

Personally, I have no problem with you insulting them. Please just don't do it anonymously.

[dre]

Personally, I have no problem with you insulting them. Please just don't do it anonymously.

You have to use common sense is the thing.

I have every right to stick my penis in a hornets nest if I want to. They dont own that space any more than I do. So I can excersize that right if I so choose. The problem is... is it a smart thing to do? Should I excersize this right simply for the sake of demonstrating it is my right, if it hurts my penis a lot when I do? Or should I stay away from the nest...

[Wilber]

So in effect, what you are saying is if the person who feels insulted is violent, then don't insult him. If the person has morals and doesn't react violently, it's ok to insult them. So kids must not insult the school bully, but little meek and mild Johnny is fair game. That's what we should be teaching our kids.

No one is saying you have to respect them. I don't respect a lot of things people say. That doesn't mean that they have no right to say it, and it doesn't mean that if I get violent because I don't like it, that they should cease saying it. In other words, my violent reaction is solely my doing; there is no one to blame but me.

I'm saying that if you shoot of your mouth just to vent your own frustrations, knowing someone could get hurt as a result and they do, you have exacted a very high price from that person just so you could exercise your right.

If you are going to do it, make sure it is for something worthwhile. There is a big difference between a piece of literature like Rushdie's Satanic Verses and a crap video made for no other reason than to pull someones chain. Innocent people died so someone could demonstrate his right to be a bigoted A hole. They weren't given a choice. Their right to life wasn't a consideration. Perhaps they might have wished for something a little more noble to give their lives for.

We should be teaching our children that they have to accept a degree of moral responsibility for the consequences of what they say, regardless of their right to say it.

[GostHacked]

Blowback isnt as simple as meaning is "your fault", or that you "had anything coming".

Good point and good to note what the term 'blowback' really means.

[Guest American Woman]

Personally, I have no problem with you insulting them. Please just don't do it anonymously.

When did this become about me? Personally, I don't see insulting those who don't kill in response as any better than those who do. Too bad everyone who's complaining about insulting those who kill in response can't have the same respect for those who don't. In the meantime, I won't see the right of those to insult whoever they wish to be infringed upon by the threat of violence.

[Guest American Woman]

We should be teaching our children that they have to accept a degree of moral responsibility for the consequences of what they say, regardless of their right to say it.

Tell me, please. What "morals" are you teaching children to say it's ok to insult those who don't kill but not those who do?

[Wilber]

Tell me, please. What "morals" are you teaching children to say it's ok to insult those who don't kill but not those who do?

I don't know about you but I taught my kids not to insult other people.

[bud]

I hope you get an answer on that, but I have a feeling it's not going to happen.

your feelings were correct. this is not the first time american woman avoids answering questions that may expose her selectiveness. but lets try again:

i'm curious how you feel about the anti-holocaust denial laws in many of the european countries. are you for them or against limiting speech in this instance?

Edited September 21, 2012 by bud