on 13-01-2015 02:46 PM
If we, as a society, accept the concept of freedom of speech, should we also accept the concept that there is a line which must not be crossed, and if so, where do we draw that line?
on 15-01-2015 11:18 AM
interestingly that same story was reported all around the world, but here it was a no-no
on 15-01-2015 01:05 PM
The question is, why do they effect you so much? Who seriously gives a toss about all this? Those with an agenda. The average person doesn't care. They are too busy trying to make ends meet, and still getting to spend time with their family.
Most of the posters here seem to live the "good" life. So how dare you? (underlining mine)
I believe it's called exercising my right to freedom of speech.
on 15-01-2015 01:29 PM
@debra9275 wrote:possibly lol...
personally I didn't find the cartoon offensive. there was an article about the people sitting on the hill., and it was all true, so why some people found it offensive enogh to threaten and hound him, I don't know. Pretty tame in comparison to the Charlie Hebdro cartoons I thought
interesting. can i ask why exactly
you thought that?
what messages do you think the
different cartoons were trying to convey?
15-01-2015 01:42 PM - edited 15-01-2015 01:45 PM
because it wasn't someones interpretation of something I suppose, not something that was made up to have a go at anyone
it was an actual scene and event
on 15-01-2015 02:34 PM
@*julia*2010 wrote:
@debra9275 wrote:possibly lol...
personally I didn't find the cartoon offensive. there was an article about the people sitting on the hill., and it was all true, so why some people found it offensive enogh to threaten and hound him, I don't know. Pretty tame in comparison to the Charlie Hebdro cartoons I thought
interesting. can i ask why exactly
you thought that?
what messages do you think the
different cartoons were trying to convey?
Yes, the Gaza was true; embarrassing for Israelis who were so outraged when Palestinians were watching & cheering Scud missiles hit Israel. But true events should be reported and commented on regardless who it will embarrass. That is the most important and what "freedom of speech" is all about.
on 15-01-2015 03:25 PM
Where does this fit into the "Freedom Of Speech" debate?
on 15-01-2015 06:59 PM
@the_great_she_elephant wrote:Where does this fit into the "Freedom Of Speech" debate?
tasteless with the possibility that it's private property which the users had no rights to profit from.
on 15-01-2015 07:01 PM
Interesting article from the Conversation
What conservative commentators don’t seem to understand is that they are not Charlie Hebdo; such a comparison is laughable. It is a satirical left-wing magazine that makes fun of all religions, political parties and themselves.
More importantly, Charlie Hebdo is part of France’s rich comic culture. Accordingly, its articles and cartoons must be understood in terms of parody, satire and, above all, with reference to political and cultural context.
This last point seems to have been missed entirely in the debate on Charlie Hebdo in Australia. Other things that are missing include reference to actual legislation and court proceedings.
A debate on reforming Section 18C should be informed by research and reason, not ideological cheap shots.
on 16-01-2015 05:14 AM
To all
It seems the Pope has weighed into the Free Speech debate, debating the issue.
I know it is the "Daily Fail" but best link I could find.
on 16-01-2015 08:11 AM
Freedom of Speech
Try going into a crowded area, standing on a wooden box and swearing at the top of your voice about the Government, or any issue you want, you will soon find yourself arrested.
Free Speech has about as much meaning as the term Free Country these days.