English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I was thinking about this earlier on. I know it's an old topic but it still remains important. Remember the caricatures of Muhammad? Well, how come it was called freedom of expression? A french comedian once came on stage dressed as a hassidic jew with a swastika on his arm and saying "Heil Hitler!" in reference to the way Palestinians are treated by the Israeli authority in place. Dieudonne, which is his name, got banned from every TV station and pretty much every media. He was slated as an anti-semitic fascist. (he Cameroonian/french...) Just imagine, people, how the world would react if any western newspaper portrayed a jewish person, ANY jewish person, not even the jewish "prophet", with a big nose and some money held in his "claws". Would that be considered freedom of expreesion? NO. Now, how come western newspapers caricaturising Muhammad, the prophet of over 2 million people, is considered freedom of expression then?

2006-11-16 10:29:02 · 10 answers · asked by Oyster 1 in News & Events Media & Journalism

10 answers

Emile H,
Good question, Yes it does exist and i would be surprised if any body who doesn't cherish that freedom. The thing is it is being abused by two small groups of people. People who use it to deliberately offend people, and people who shout "foul" at every thing. Hopefully the sensibilities of the majority will prevail.

2006-11-16 10:44:11 · answer #1 · answered by toietmoi 6 · 0 0

The idea of freedom of expression does exist but for the most part is fundamentally flawed. So the danish cartoons were printed which was an act of freedom of expression. Then the Iranians print cartoons depicting the Israelis as Nazis which was an act of freedom of expression. Then the Israelis print cartoons that are for the most part anti semitic which was an act of freedom of expression. Is it just me or are the people involved in this chain of events just plain bananas? I think that the institution of freedom of speech/expression should have some limits, this would be called exercising jurisprudence, which in my book is something that this world needs.

2006-11-17 04:01:11 · answer #2 · answered by Mr Slug 4 · 0 0

Freedom of expression exists, as is the right to protest the expression. That doesn't mean anyone has to give the bigots a platform to spew their bigotry.

I see you are only upset that people are criticizing bigots for expressing their hatred of Jews. Did you defend the Islamists who rioted over the Danish cartoons, or are you when the bigots are anti-Jewish?

Notice: I am using my freedom of expression to ask you this question.

2006-11-16 18:50:22 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Burning the flag is freedom of expression, Kent State was freedom of expression, demonstrating outside abortion clinics is freedom of expression, critisizing Bush is freedom of expression, fighting with police who want to see your i.d. is freedom of expression (and not too smart), but that is America, and those are just some of the things that make us great.

2006-11-16 18:40:52 · answer #4 · answered by commonsense 5 · 0 0

it does ;in some places it exists. but some people do not accept it and thinks that their opinion is right not yours. it does but sometimes if u speak out u may get insulted, beaten up or worse
for dat.

2006-11-16 18:37:44 · answer #5 · answered by Amore vole fe 6 · 0 0

Freedom of expression exist?

Not any more it doesn't!

2006-11-17 05:36:11 · answer #6 · answered by Earth 2 · 0 0

not in Britain if you are a white, tax paying law abiding citizen.

2006-11-16 18:31:54 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I see you are not taking your meds as directed

2006-11-16 18:37:01 · answer #8 · answered by Mopar Muscle Gal 7 · 0 1

it exists but you're better off keeping it to yourself
pmsl

2006-11-16 18:33:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

it exist.,but nobody cares.

2006-11-17 05:00:07 · answer #10 · answered by sal 2 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers