I am opposed to those calling for Michael Savage's sacking

Post Reply New Topic

Just to make it clear, I would like to point out straight away that I have Asperger's syndrome myself and that it has caused me considerable difficulty in life. However, I would like to say that I am not in favour of Michael Savage being sacked for his comments about autism.

For too long, the anti-racism movement has been tainted by idiots like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson putting themselves as self-appointed leaders of all the world's blacks and sadistically campaigning for anyone uttering the "n" word to have their careers wrecked. I would like to propose that everyone ignores these two morons until they actually do something useful for the race relations cause.

Similarly, I would like to stop hearing all these calls for Michael Savage to undergo punishments for what he said. If you want to campaign about hate speech, you should stop spreading hate against Michael Savage. In the words of our Lord and Savour Jesus Christ, you should remove the log from your own eye before trying to remove the speck from someone else's.

I have read through what he said and it seems that he made a perfectly valid point, but his careless choice of words caused this reaction. I genuinely believe that many people who don't really have autism are using this label to justify some negative area of their lives. In doing so, this undermines the credibility of people who really have it. It is a bit like how dyslexia has come to be regarded by many people as "middle class for thick". I do not want autism to be regarded as "working/middle class for naughty". If a child genuinely is autistic, then give them the necessary help, but if a child is just naughty, then they should be belted.

Well for starters, I think it's a bit of a jump to label us a race. We're more of a minority. I also think that the poll is a bit of a loaded question. While I do think that Rev, Sharpton and Rev. Jackson do take things to an extreme sometimes, I can't deny that they do truly hate racial epithets being used.

As far as the comments made by by Mr. Savage, I find them greatly misinformed. Even what he said in the context of the situation was rehearsed and thought out, yet he failed to do the necessary research to develop a true opinion on the topic before deciding to get on the air and broadcast his misinformation to countless people.

Also, I would be more forgiving if this was the first time Mr. Savage had said something so heinously offensive. On shear journalistic and editorial integrity he should be canned, yet the powers that be keep him on the radio and published in print because this kind of spectacle generates huge profits.

Finally, while I do fervently believe that Mr. Savage does have the right to free-speech, he also has the responsibility to use it with discretion. A responsibility that Mr. Savage has a long track record of neglecting.

I think Michael Savage has a right to freedom of speech, as does everyone else. I don't believe freedom of speech should mean "freedom, so long as you don't say anything in opposition to some whingeing minorities". Freedom of speech should be absolute.

From what I hear, Michael Savage is nothing more than a shock-jock anyway, meaning that reasonably intelligent people are not likely to believe anything he says without a pinch of salt.

As for the question of whether we are a race or a minority, I am not bothered in the slightest. What I am bothered about is that there is too much political correctness in the world.

First, take your "lord Jesus christ" stuff and stop applying it to everyone....not everyone believes the way you do! christians...sigh...so arrogant. second, this is not a free speech issue!! michael "wiener" savage works for a COMMERCIAL network. getting his sponsors pulled isnt censorship....its free capitalist society....

That's the whole point of libertarianism (the political ideology I think governments should go by): - being tolerant of intolerance. Genuine liberalism means tolerating other people's views, even when they don't agree with your own and that includes tolerating people's views if they are intolerant of a minority group. If say I want to hate the disabled, blacks, women, homosexuals, hispanics etc, that is entirely my affair and I feel it is my right to express views openly. Similarly, if Michael Savage wants to express his views about autism openly, I feel that is a matter of free speech.

So do you think it is right for people to criticise without making themselves blameless first? This is a view held by many people, even those who aren't religious. Similarly, many people will happily say that we should treat others the way we expect others to treat ourselves without realising that this was said by Jesus in Matthew 7:12. Are you standing here and telling me that these two points are a load of rubbish?

The sponsors do indeed have the right to pull sponsorship, but I don't support the idea of punishing someone for being intolerant. If Michael Savage wishes to reject the cause of liberalism, that is his life choice.

I suspect the reason you are going bonkers every time I mention anything to do with Christianity is because you are wrestling with the dilemmas I have posed. If you were an atheist comfortable with who you are, you would be able to simply say, "Jesus, so what?", without going mental over someone quoting from him. It is a bit like with the homosexuality issue: - people who get scared or angry when around homosexuals do so because they are scared about what their real sexuality might be, whereas fully-fledged heterosexuals can quite comfortably spend time around homosexuals, because they are comfortable with their sexuality and that nothing will change it. Similarly, a fully-fledged atheist would be quite comfortable in the presence of a Christian quoting from the Bible, as he would know that no biblical quotations will change him.

So you like hate speech? where does it say to like that stuff in the bible?? oh wait,,,,there is that nagging old testament isnt there. hey, hate whatever you want...but when you put kids down (forget about the autism) I will not go down without a fight as I suspect most people here wont. To post something in defense of this idiot on an AS website shows your IQ.

*Avoiding religious debate* Whoever started this thread, I agree with. As much as what Savage said make me want to go grab a semi-automatic and bust a few caps in his ass, the point is that a) What he said was perfectly within the lines of free speech, and cannot be considered slander because we are not an officially recognized minority group and because he didn't mention any individuals in particular, and b) Savage is the usual kind of shock jockey that says stuff on the radio just so that he can get shouted at by a bunch of people and so that the ignoramuses that listen to his drivel can get a few laughs at our expense. Immoral, yes. Illegal, not to the extent that we would need to file a lawsuit or similar. My point being that there's really nothing we can do but ignore him, since criticism does nothing but fuel his fire. Of course, we can always boycott the radio station he's on, but the fact remains that we are a small minority, and thus not likely to make a difference in that respect.

-Roxas