Free Speech or Hate Speech?

[dialamah]

Just now, bcsapper said:

Yeah, it's funny how things can be misinterpreted on an online forum, as your second last sentence there indicates.

I said several times that the protesters had every right to protest however they pleased.   How can that be misunderstood by you that I disagreed with their right to protest and say whatever?

I also said that the manner of their protest made it clear that they weren't rallying in support of free speech or in opposition to M-103 as they claimed to be doing, but actually holding an anti-Muslim rally.  How could that be misunderstood by you that I disagreed with their right to protest in any manner they choose?

 

[?Impact]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Actually, as a committed pro choicer,

Which is irrelevant to the example, I too am pro choice. I am going to your home to imply you are a baby killer because I want to protect free speech. I expect many of the Muslims in the mosque are also free speech, and from some new reports they were saying that. 

[Guest]

Just now, ?Impact said:

A phobia is by definition irrational. People carrying around signs saying No to Islam is irrational. If their signs said No to Religion then it would rational. Does this same group have a similar rally planned for a Catholic church with signs that say No to Christ?

Saying no to Islam is perfectly rational, given its excesses.  If you want to carry around a sign saying say no to Catholicism I wouldn't think you were irrational, and you would have my full support.  Would you be Catholophobic if you did?  I would just ask for your reasons, if I was in doubt.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

Which is irrelevant to the example, I too am pro choice. I am going to your home to imply you are a baby killer because I want to protect free speech. I expect many of the Muslims in the mosque are also free speech, and from some new reports they were saying that. 

It's only irrelevant because you cut off the rest of the quote.  Somewhat dishonest, if you ask me.

[Guest]

 

4 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I said several times that the protesters had every right to protest however they pleased.   How can that be misunderstood by you that I disagreed with their right to protest and say whatever?

I also said that the manner of their protest made it clear that they weren't rallying in support of free speech or in opposition to M-103 as they claimed to be doing, but actually holding an anti-Muslim rally.  How could that be misunderstood by you that I disagreed with their right to protest in any manner they choose?

 

And I have never said "rallying for free speech" means protesting against Muslims."  Only that they can be the same thing.  Like I said, misinterpretation is easy. 

You seem to think that these people have every right to freedom of speech, but not the right to choose how to express it.  Is that a better statement of your position?

[Guest]

12 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

A phobia is by definition irrational. People carrying around signs saying No to Islam is irrational. If their signs said No to Religion then it would rational. Does this same group have a similar rally planned for a Catholic church with signs that say No to Christ?

So people carrying signs saying "No to Islam" is not Islamophobic, because it is most certainly not irrational. 

Your point seems to be that they single out a religion instead of applying their dislike to all equally.  Given that, if there were a protest with signs saying no to Buddhism somewhere else at the same time, how would that change things?

You see what I mean about the problem with the word Islamophobia? 

[dialamah]

17 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

And I have never said "rallying for free speech" means protesting against Muslims."  Only that they can be the same thing.  Like I said, misinterpretation is easy. 

You seem to think that these people have every right to freedom of speech, but not the right to choose how to express it.  Is that a better statement of your position?

 

 

Nope.  I'm saying that if someone claims to be holding a rally for some reason, but then choose a location, object, group, person or slogans that have nothing to do with their claimed reason for the rally, then few people are going to believe the rally is for the reason they claimed.   They are going to believe that the choice of location, object, group, person and slogans define what the rally is about.

This group said they were holding a rally in support of free speech.   They held that rally at a Mosque, held signs that said nasty things about Muslims, shouted slogans that said nasty things about Muslims, blocked the entry to the Mosque; ergo, the rally was an anti-Muslim rally and not a free speech rally.

But people are certainly free to claim one thing, and do another.

Edited February 20, 2017 by dialamah

[dialamah]

21 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

It's only irrelevant because you cut off the rest of the quote.  Somewhat dishonest, if you ask me.

I also found your response irrelevant; it seemed to dodge the question you were asked.   

 

[Guest]

3 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Nope.  I'm saying that if someone claims to be holding a rally for some reason, but then choose a location, object, group, person or slogans that have nothing to do with their claimed reason for the rally, then few people are going to believe the rally is for the reason they claimed.   They are going to believe that the choice of location, object, group, person and slogans define what the rally is about.

This group said they were holding a rally in support of free speech.   They held that rally at a Mosque, held signs that said nasty things about Muslims, shouted slogans that said nasty things about Muslims, blocked the entry to the Mosque; ergo, the rally was an anti-Muslim rally and not a free speech rally.

But people are certainly free to claim one thing, and do another.

If the group claimed it was holding a rally in favour of free speech, in response to an effort that they saw as restricting that speech with regard to one specific aspect, and they chose to pick a site that reflected that aspect, I see no problem with their motives, or their description of the event. 

[dialamah]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If the group claimed it was holding a rally in favour of free speech, in response to an effort that they saw as restricting that speech with regard to one specific aspect, and they chose to pick a site that reflected that aspect, I see no problem with their motives, or their description of the event. 

 

As is your right, of course.  However, since Motion M-103 has absolutely no bearing on free speech, other than in the minds of people who have an irrational fear of Islam, then the rally participants can accurately be referred to as Islamaphobes.   

[Guest]

19 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I also found your response irrelevant; it seemed to dodge the question you were asked.   

 

I didn't think he wanted it in black and white.  Bolded. 

Obviously, it would be just fine.  I thought that was obvious from my reply, but who the hell am I?

The volume might be an issue, but I brought that up.

Can I just say, as an aside, that attempts to come up with examples of free speech that advocates of free speech will not agree with will always succeed, as they can get as strident and hysterical as necessary.

Edited February 20, 2017 by bcsapper

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, dialamah said:

As is your right, of course.  However, since Motion M-103 has absolutely no bearing on free speech, other than in the minds of people who have an irrational fear of Islam, then the rally participants can accurately be referred to as Islamaphobes.   

And were back to Islamophobes.  The question as to whether there is anything wrong with that being still open for discussion.

[DogOnPorch]

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

And were back to Islamophobes.  The question as to whether there is anything wrong with that being still open for discussion.

Irrational fear...that's what I keep hearing.

Humor me and watch this from start to finish...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlwFYqIgrSM

Now what do we see in this video? Folks dying in the name of Allah. I know of few other ideologies that can make one DO THIS.

Irrational fear...

[dialamah]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I didn't think he wanted it in black and white.  Bolded. 

Obviously, it would be just fine.  I thought that was obvious from my reply, but who the hell am I?

 

 

It's also helpful if one is direct in what they say, instead of assuming that people will understand what you didn't say.   But you are right, it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking what one is intending to say while writing immediately apparent to each and every reader.  I fall into that trap regularly.

 

[dialamah]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

And were back to Islamophobes.  The question as to whether there is anything wrong with that being still open for discussion.

Shrugs.  Those people have every right to irrationally fear Islam and Muslims.  Heck, they can even imagine that a study about religious discrimination is going to end free speech and put us under Sharia law.  They can believe that, and I can mock them for it.   Free speech, yah?

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Shrugs.  Those people have every right to irrationally fear Islam and Muslims.  Heck, they can even imagine that a study about religious discrimination is going to end free speech and put us under Sharia law.  They can believe that, and I can mock them for it.   Free speech, yah?

 

Of course...

[Guest]

13 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

Irrational fear...that's what I keep hearing.

Humor me and watch this from start to finish...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tlwFYqIgrSM

Now what do we see in this video? Folks dying in the name of Allah. I know of few other ideologies that can make one DO THIS.

Irrational fear...

It's the numbers that get me.  One can always find a Bobby Sands type in a group, willing to die for what they believe in, but Muslims seem to be lining up for the opportunity.  There must be some serious brainwashing going on out there.

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

It's the numbers that get me.  One can always find a Bobby Sands type in a group, willing to die for what they believe in, but Muslims seem to be lining up for the opportunity.  There must be some serious brainwashing going on out there.

 

Plus, the makers of the video would like you to know they are also watching YOU from above.

13 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Shrugs.  Those people have every right to irrationally fear Islam and Muslims.  Heck, they can even imagine that a study about religious discrimination is going to end free speech and put us under Sharia law.  They can believe that, and I can mock them for it.   Free speech, yah?

 

 

Irrational = not rational = crazy = those not liking Islam are insane.

[?Impact]

In western countries like Canada, it is not the Muslim migrants that seem to be lining up but rather the ill adjusted locals converting to Islam and then lining up. 

Edited February 20, 2017 by ?Impact

[Guest]

Just now, ?Impact said:

In western countries like Canada, it is not the Muslim migrants that seem to be lining up but rather the ill adjusted locals covering to Islam and then lining up. 

"covering to Islam and then lining up"?  Typo?  I don't get it.

 I don't think anyone is currently lining up to be a suicide bomber in Canada.  I hope not, anyway.

 Still, pretty weird how many do in other places.  Certainly worthy of a little apprehension, if you ask me.

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

"covering to Islam and then lining up"?  Typo?  I don't get it.

 I don't think anyone is currently lining up to be a suicide bomber in Canada.  I hope not, anyway.

 Still, pretty weird how many do in other places.  Certainly worthy of a little apprehension, if you ask me.

 

Japanese kamikaze pilots are the only thing comparable.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Japanese kamikaze pilots are the only thing comparable.

Yeah, I forgot about those guys. 

Islamikaze!  What a word!

 

Edit>  Never mind, I looked it up.  Someone thought of it before me. 

Edited February 20, 2017 by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they are completely and utterly brainwashed by cowards who dare not do it themselves - Not Blaise Pascal

[?Impact]

16 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Typo?

 I don't think anyone is currently lining up to be a suicide bomber in Canada.  I hope not, anyway.

Yes it was a typo, fixed. Automatic spell correction has some benefits, but the way it silently corrects makes spotting your own typos harder.

I don't know about suicide, but certainly converting and then being killed. Did anyone ever find out what happened with Aaron Driver, he did kill himself with a 'device' which I presume was an explosive when the police raided his place but was it something he intended to use as a suicide bomb somewhere else?

[DogOnPorch]

10 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Yeah, I forgot about those guys. 

Islamikaze!  What a word!

 

Edit>  Never mind, I looked it up.  Someone thought of it before me. 

 

Good word, though.

The Japanese resorted to kamikaze attacks starting in 1944 when things were already VERY desperate in the Pacific. Banzai attacks, however, were a different thing, as old as the Bushido Code.

Were US Navy crews irrational when the planes started hitting the ships en masse?

There have been THOUSANDS of Islamic suicide attacks since 9/11.

Irrational...Islamophobia is just a vain attempt to make such concerns a mental illness.

 

 

[betsy]

2 hours ago, dialamah said:

What?  He's not allowed to express himself because he used the word "islamaphobia"?   If people can carry signs that say "No to Islam", "Ban Islam", "Muslims are terrorists", then why can't someone say "Those people are Islamaphobic"?   Does the right to name-call people you disagree with only apply to the right?

 

 

I didn't say he's not allowed to say it. 

I'm saying it is an example that  Islamophobia also means, you aren't allowed to criticize!  Imagine that!  John Tory labels the protesters Islamophobes!  For what?  For expressing their opinion:  "Ban Islam."  "No to Islam."  "Muslims Are Terrorists!"

Those are all opinions!

People may not like what's being said, but we STILL have our right to express our opinion! 

 

The reaction of a leader like Tory shows us where this motion is heading!  Wake up, folks!

 

Edited February 20, 2017 by betsy