

The West Is Choked by Fear - bluebird
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,669888,00.html

======
toothcomb
In the UK at least, we deal with difficult subjects through satire. But where
do you draw the line? I am one for open - although much material on the web is
offensive (as seen from me). I'd have rather the images were reprinted, and
have the whole thing forgotten about. But there was some gesture of respect
and sensitivity shown by the west deriding the work. The debate has also come
up with the turn around of the BBC to allow the BNP on question time. So I
think it is important to provide the material and the appropriate fora, and
freedoms of speech. The herd and mob mentality is usually a result of
ignorance. But it takes a long time for attitudes to change. In Britain in the
eighties, people were still afraid to speak their minds or challenge the
establishment. My father's attitudes have changed incredibly over the last 10
years. And I guess so have mine.

My personal belief is that people can practice what they like, but with the
following caveats: no harm to others, animals or the planet. I don't belong to
any faith, but see myself as more 'Christian' then many practising Christians.
People get lost in doctrine or the mob, and forget to question for themselves.
Natural law is far simpler.

The web provides an outlet for many voices, who's authority do you trust?
Moderation requires some form of censorship. I'd rather it all open. I can't
stand pruned forums, they feel like rigged referendums. It's just incredibly
difficult wading through it all. As usually the average Joe, hasn't really
anything much interesting to say.

So is it fear or learned sensitivity?

~~~
CWuestefeld
_But where do you draw the line?_

In a free society there should be _no_ line. A person should be free to say
absolutely anything. There is certainly a possibility of causing harm by way
of your speech, but this should be handled _post hoc_ , with a court
determining damages.

America partially observes this with a watered-down doctrine of prior
restraint, but it's got enough exceptions that it's not worth so much.

------
akamaka
I've heard the reasoning in this article before, and it's deeply flawed.

It's true that we in the West have the right to offend, but _being a troll
doesn't make you a righteous defender of freedom._. Those cartoons weren't
some type of brilliant artwork, they were simple trolling.

While I'll stand up for someone's right to be a troll, they certainly
shouldn't expect my support and respect. Instead, that is reserved for the
millions who fought and died to establish and protect our freedoms in the
first place.

~~~
philk
If we aren't willing to stand up for unpleasant and offensive things then we
aren't willing to stand up for freedom of speech at all.

And frankly, having seen the cartoons, anyone who thinks the cartoonists
deserve to either die or face attempts on their lives is a nutcase who we
should be willing to stand up to.

~~~
InclinedPlane
Yes, precisely. If you have the freedom to do only things that absolutely no
one else could take offense from then you do not have freedom.

------
tfh
HN is not the right place for such a debate.

~~~
viggity
I think a lot of hackers are interested in free speech issues. Myself included

------
pan69
Hmm. Important stuff. But not really hackers news material. Or do I
misunderstand the intention of this post?

~~~
mixmax
It's one of those borderline posts - on the one hand it isn't really hacker
news, but on the other hand it's important and about basic freedom. Which is
dear to hackers. I think it has merit,so I upvoted it.

