anyway, do u support m.f hussian for painting nude picture of hindu gods?
2007-08-11 00:41:44 · 11 answers · asked by sean paul 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Offending people falls within the limits; harming them does not. Thus we cannot:
1. Libel, slander, or defame others;
2. Tell lies that create danger or cause economic losses;
3. Corrupt , seduce, or traumatize minors;
4. Harrass people;
but we can:
1. Criticize the behavior and beliefs of others;
2. Tell lies that bring no harm to others;
3. Make inappropriate remarks to other adults;
4. Disagree with what others insist we say, do, or believe.
These are just examples, of course. It should be noted that the "right" to free speech is actually a social agreement that has become common to most western culture: painting nude pictures of Hindu gods might not fall within the legal limits in all cultures or nations.
2007-08-11 01:06:24 · answer #1 · answered by nightserf 5 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I do not know who m.f hussian is but anyway he should be able to paint anything he wants. Theses so-called "gods" are just figments of imagination anyway. The only thing you cannot do is to say anything derogatory about a jew, in which case it becomes a hate crime.
In hinduland you have cows as gods too, but I eat cows when I have a Big Mac or a Whopper with cheese... mmm yummy. I guess you could call them Godburgers.
2007-08-11 00:52:46 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Freedom of expression is limited already.
2016-05-19 21:10:28 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our freedom of expression is protected by The Constitution only insofar as its intent to shield us from government interference or persecution against unpopular expression; even then, there are limitations (such as expressions that can manifest, what Justice O. W. Holmes called, a "clear and present danger").
In my opinion, Husain's paintings of nude hindu gods is protected by the First Amendment the same as Andres Serrano's photograph titled "Piss Christ".
That said, I would support Husain's 'right' to create controversial works of art,.... but I would not support his 'intent' to do so,...
... the sole reason being that I think Husain's art sucks.
-
2007-08-11 04:32:48 · answer #4 · answered by Saint Christopher Walken 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Today we have only freedom of thought...we can not say, write, or demonstrate something in a safe way!
Today when someone says something it is 100% polarized opinion...people leave no room for choices...!
Naked gods...how can you draw God if you never saw him...i mean those statues you make are only statues...they are your creations...paintings as well...but how can you draw the real CREATOR?
2007-08-11 01:18:03 · answer #5 · answered by josh k 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If m f husain is a genuine artist , let him paint his own Prophet (PBOH) sodomising a pig. OK by me.
He should not provoke followers of other religions , but sparing his own religious leaders..
2007-08-11 02:50:24 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
YES, did you know there are nude pictures of Jesus out there? WHO CARES? It is someones idea of something, not your, not mine. They are entitled to their opinion and beliefs, just don't tell me how to believe.
2007-08-11 00:46:53 · answer #7 · answered by spacedude4 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
There should be no limitations on speech, only ACTIONS.
And let him paint what ever he wants.
2007-08-11 01:54:49 · answer #8 · answered by The law is a form of tyranny. 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
To me the limit is defined as,
Will someone else buy it?
If not.
There's the limit!
2007-08-11 01:52:23 · answer #9 · answered by hoovarted 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
your (or anyone else's) freedom ends where my nose begins
2007-08-11 00:49:23 · answer #10 · answered by fretochose 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋