Page 2 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Erminea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,083
Location: Holland

23 Jan 2009, 10:44 am

Do you guys actually know what you talking about? Here in Holland/ The Netherlands the issue is 'Freedom of speech' is more and more misused to insult individuals or whole groups of people. Some muslims and imams (~preaching in mosques) stating that it's ok to throw gays from buildings, that women are considered less than man and most Dutch are dogs. Like me, no muslim of course, most believers in Allah are against such hate talks but still it exists or it is still being said.

It's a philosophical question, an ethical one....
Where to draw the line between sensible freedom of speech and where is the outing of believes or opinions going against the law. Discrimination, insulting, defamation and setting or making people hate the other. Wilders, I'm no fan at all, is stating that the spreading of hatred amongst muslims by other muslims with bad intentions like some imams here must be stopped. Like I said I'm no fan of the man, the means he has chosen are imo way too radical and he's doing it a bit in the opposite direction of what some radical imams are doing. Action/reaction, I guess.

First amendment? Can you openly say in the States that it's ok to throw a whole (sub-) group from a building? Partly because of the implications of such statements (with all the media exposure) young muslims are making the lives of gay men and women more difficult. There've been coward-like fights with a whole group against one or two gay(s). Not gay myself but that disgusts me a lot.

Theo van Gogh always openly spoke about muslims in public, saying, like Wilders, that it's a retarded culture (~the radical muslim believers) and a very radical fool killed him because of that. We always have been a very open culture (i.e. Holland) but there is def. a shifting going on in terms of radicalization. Action/reaction of smallmindedness versus smallmindedness.

Virtus in medio, Aristotel said.

Ps. there isn't going to be a trail against Wilders.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

23 Jan 2009, 11:11 am

Erminea wrote:

Ps. there isn't going to be a trail against Wilders.


I am delighted to hear this. I think Wilders is a bit of a hypocrite wanting to ban the Q'ran in a free society. The Q'ran is one thing. Imams recruiting Jihadists and terrorists in the local mosques is another thing. I think that sermons in the mosques should be closely monitored by Arabic speaking operatives and any Imam (or anyone else) exhorting to terror acts or recruiting mujihadeen should be deported (if foreign) or jailed (if a citizen).

No matter how bad a book is, it is ink on paper. Books should not be banned nor should authors be persecuted.

ruveyn



Erminea
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,083
Location: Holland

23 Jan 2009, 11:39 am

^
I agree. Banning a book is ridiculous. One may disagree with the content or parts of it and make that known in a civilized way, if someone wishes to do so. Wilders is stating a gut feeling that some folks have here but to me that's democracy. A voice, a counterweight. What he does, mostly, is political soul winning, imo. One can say one's opinion but the law must stand above a book, a religion, an opinion. And the law must be equal to all. Just don't break the law.

Ps. we, and others here also, have the same date of birth. Not the year but.... never mind. Not important, of course.