freediver wrote on Aug 4
th, 2008 at 2:44pm:
That is not a violation of freedom of speech. Countries have every right to be choosy about who they let in. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from all the potential consequences of what you say.
Really? So you don't think that not allowing one to enter the country based on what they have said has anything to do with freedom of speech?
I can only assume your arguing semantics.
freediver wrote on Aug 4
th, 2008 at 2:44pm:
That is not a violation of free speech either. Freedom of speech includes the right to be a hypocrit. I do not percieve any genuine risk to our right to criticise other religions.
To criticise religon is one thing. To deliberately offend or insult a group of people is completely different.
What you are defending is the right for yourself and the western world to offend muslims, whilst taking away any right for muslims to react to the insult.
So if I went to your house and insulted your father and mother...using your logic, you should do nothing and accept my insults...as I have the freedom of speech..and I can do or say anything or attack anyone? As long as I don't incite violence or slander...huh?
So you don't believe those cartoons were seen as slander by the muslim population?
Like I said...you want to attack some one...then fine, go ahead, as long as you realise that for every action there are consequences.
Don't attack and insult people...and then tell them how they should react.