Omer el-Hamdoon:"what’s happening here is not that different from what we witnessed back in 2005 with the Danish cartoons when media outlets went into a cycle of just publishing the cartoons just to show defiance. And what that caused is more offence."
It's pretty clear that the likes of Mr. el-Hamdoon want it both ways. They want to sound supportive of free speech, but they want that speech curtailed to their liking.
No, they wouldn't kill anyone themselves. Yes, they are fostering a dangerous notion of "incorrect" speech that is very dangerous to the whole idea of free speech. Those dangers are so obvious that it is very hard to assign good faith to those preaching it.
One could argue that he did, indirectly. Freedom of speech means exactly that - the freedom to say whatever you want, within the margins allowed by the law, regardless of how it could be perceived by some specific group of people. Somebody is always going to be offended, I think el-Hamdoon missed the whole point.
What he could have said instead, but didn't, is this: "While I find the cover disgusting, freedom of speech protects their right to publish this, and they should not fear for their lives because of it."
> Freedom of speech means exactly that - the freedom to say whatever you want ... regardless of how it could be perceived by some specific group of people
No. You can't publish porn freely. Why? Because some people find it offensive. It's not that simple.
Or maybe it is. What makes you uncritically accept those restrictions as not violating free speech? Just because the countries that impose them happen to claim they support free speech?
