It does not matter what the content of the film is. It does not matter who is trying to distribute the film. What matters is that the Foreign Minister of a Western country, one which supposedly rejoices in Freedom of Speech, said this:
"It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend."
OTOH the man who is determined to show his film depicting the evils of the Koran and its destruction thinks that both the Koran and Mein Kampf should be banned. Free Speech for me, but not for Thee.
Link to article: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,2243805,00.html
Monday, January 21, 2008
Dutch Foreign Minister Disavows Free Speech
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
"'It is difficult to anticipate the content of the film, but freedom of expression doesn't mean the right to offend,' said Maxime Verhagen, the Foreign Minister..."
I beg to differ with this pinhead; the right to offend is indeed part and parcel of "free speech". But along with that right goes the responsibility of acknowledging that there may be consequences.
However, violence (or the threat thereof) is not a permissible consequence for speaking freely.
And I firmly believe there is absolutely no "right to not be offended".
I've got more to add but will have to do so later.
Human beings seem governed more by what they see exampled than by what they merely hear. Western peoples will return to their faith in the sanctity of the natural rights of life, liberty, and estate when they see demonstrations of that sanctity by means of spectacular signs and wonders. Recall the spectacular example of the enemies of Moses, whom the ground swallowed whole; remember the renewed subjection of the Israelites to Moses, whom they knew to be a mere executor of the will of God. Nor are modern examples lacking, though they have served an unholy purpose. Modern times do not differ from ancient times; you, also, must appeal to heaven for Moses's spectacular executive power.
Post a Comment