The World’s Largest Coalition of Nontheists and Nontheist Communities!

Want to get Muslims to complain less about people defaming Islam? There is a very easy solution.

Also reposted here: http://atheistnexus.org/forum/topics/want-to-get-muslims-to

I've always seen Muslims talk about how if you deny the Holocaust in the West you'll be thrown in jail and I always see that as an excuse for Muslims to have people who criticize Islam prosecuted. When they see the West they may see it as if they are protecting Jews, but not them.

Holocaust denial is already illegal in Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Israel, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Poland, Portugal, Romania, and Switzerland. There are also special laws for the book Mein Kampf: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mein_Kampf#Current_availability
It seems as though freedom of speech doesn't really exist in the majority of European countries.

Being an American living in The Netherlands for quite some time I do notice some differences between America and much of Europe. Having lived in Europe I get the impression that a large percent of Europeans do not have a full grasp of the concept of freedom of speech which is grasped fully by most Americans. I'm not at all advocating that Europeans are more backwards than Americans, but it seems that freedom of speech is not grasped as well over there.

I had a room mate originally from France who appeared to be a fascist. I one time mentioned to him about freedom of speech and he was criticizing it severely and said that he didn't at all agree with it and found it to be stupid. For me this was a shock, but I've talked to a non-Muslim from Norway who seriously thinks that those who defame Islam should be put in jail!! I've shown people in Europe videos of the Westboro Baptist Church and they were very shocked to see that Americans actually allow them to say the things they say and that these people even get police protection.

People who don't live in The Netherlands seem to have so much sympathy for Wilders having no clue that he's only an extremist and a piece of shit. You see Pat Condell and Sam Harris defending him and not criticizing him for the shit he really is. Bill Maher being very naive and dumb interviewed Wilders in his Religilous and rather than treating Wilders with ridicule as he does with others in the film he seems to be nice to him. Wilders demonizes poor working class Muslims in Europe and exaggerates heavily as though they are going to take over Europe (which is very unlikely). Maher might as well interview an American Wilders. An American Wilders would demonize Hispanics in America and how they practice a disgusting religion (which I'm originally from) and make a propaganda film called Catholitna that will talk about how Hispanics will turn the United States of America into the United States of the Vatican.

To get to know Geert Wilders better he had socialist activists arrested when they protested and called him an extremist. This same person also wants to ban the Quran since Mein Kampf is semi-banned. Yet, Wilders is always talking about "freedom of speech" when he himself either cannot grasp the concept or doesn't even believe in it at all since he wants freedom of speech to protect the things he says, but not for things he hates. It still surprises me that we have Atheists who support this disgusting film known as Fitna which demonizes a minority group in The Netherlands and focuses only on one religion rather show how bad ALL religions are. I only support Fitna on grounds of freedom of speech the same way that I would support a KKK member having the right to make a racist film that denigrates Black people.

The fact that Mein Kampf is banned in The Netherlands gives an extremist like Wilders a way to justify a ban on the Quran because the Quran is also a fascist book. The fact that Holocaust denial is illegal in twelve countries in Europe also gives Muslims the excuse to criminalize the defamation of Islam. I think the only solution is to have the Western countries have something like a "First Amendment" so then Muslims will have it a lot hard time asking for special protection. As Noam Chomsky says:
"If you believe in freedom of speech, you believe in freedom of speech for views you don't like. Goebbels was in favor of freedom of speech for views he liked. So was Stalin. If you're in favor of freedom of speech, that means you're in favor of freedom of speech precisely for views you despise."
If we believe in freedom of speech we have to be honest and non-hypocritical about it.

Here are some good articles about the subject I'm talking about:
http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19801011.htm

http://www.chomsky.info/articles/19810228.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2009/apr/15/religion...

0 members like this

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Jaume on August 7, 2009 at 4:59am

It's all about having your cake and eating it.

Make no mistake: I'm all for free speech, but I can't deny the fact it's a double-edged sword. Dangerous ideas flourish better in free speech areas, when a significant part of the people here lack a skeptical mindset.

Taken to the extreme: would terrorism be in such a good shape if media reporting about terrorism was universally banned? It certainly wouldn't suppress all forms of terrorism, but journalist Daniel Pearl might still have his head on his shoulders.

It's true many European nations impose legal restrictions on free speech. I'm not comfortable with that, as I'm an European myself. On the other hand, I think the US society, in a more informal way, also imposes its restrictions, just because its constitution gives such an enormous leeway to many kinds of religious extremists, whose charisma appeal to the masses, who in turn ostracize the unbelievers for not thinking properly. OK, this is a gross exageration, but I hope you see where I'm coming at. In the end, it's just a matter of where you put the limit. And it's never an easy decision.

Permalink Reply by ɟǝןıx dǝʇɹɐɹ on August 7, 2009 at 10:35am

Talking about Fitna, I give you another piece of garbage :)

Permalink Reply by John Smith on August 7, 2009 at 12:57pm

This video is crazy. The Muslims have more children in less industrialized societies. I'm currently living in one of the largest immigrant Muslim communities in Western Europe and I hardly ever see a Muslim woman walking around with 8 children. Usually in less developed countries they'll have tons of babies because either children may not survive or they'll need them to work. This is a good video for Christians to go more crazy over.

Permalink Reply by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on August 7, 2009 at 12:41pm

I think Ralph summed up the problem beautifully: "the free speech defense depends somewhat on the likely consequences of allowing the speech." Free speech has necessary limits in a civilized caring society.

The same is true for freedom of religious and other types of belief.

The line is drawn when the expression and practice of such beliefs significantly harms others or society in general. The problem with policing this is twofold: 1. who makes the decision about where the line is drawn and 2. who polices this and in what manner.

Contrary to popular opinion, the US does not really permit anyone to say anything. There are all kinds of de facto bans on expressing all kinds of things.

Some types of hate crimes are illegal. Such crimes include what people say.

Provoking certain types of violence is illegal. Provoking violence frequently depends on what people say as well as what they do. Organized violence is instigated through speech and the written word.

Admitting that you are an atheist will get you fired, shunned or demonized all over the land. Insulting the judiciary will get you jailed. School ground and work place bullies use words to achieve their sadistic goals.

Publishing material critical of right wing government results in deliberately engineered economic ruin, frivilous and sadistic legal action, placement on "black lists", harassment at airports, discrimation and bullying of spouse and children, and so on. All under cover of secrecy, of course.

In my opinion, having lived in several countries, the US does not sufficiently regulate hate and disaster provoking speech. This is not a virtue at all.

Permalink Reply by Prog Rock Girl on April 24, 2010 at 3:55pm

You claim that Europe has a limited understanding of free speech, and that is why Muslims in Europe complain/riot/threaten when they are insulted. But in America, a country which supposedly has more free speech than Europe, Muslims are still doing the same thing. I don't think it has to do with not understanding free speech. It has to do with people being convinced that their religion is the right one, and that people who are not of their religion are inferior. Therefore they should be able to say whatever they want (that's free exercise of religion after all) and people who portray the religion negatively are guilty of defamation/hate crime/religious intolerance. This sounds like manipulating the system pretty well instead of being naive about it.

I can see why some countries have made being a neo-Nazi and denying the Holocaust illegal, being that some of those are countries where it actually occurred and it's taking them a long time to live it down. I don't know if I would do the same thing and I don't think it should last forever, but it probably came about soon after the war because they didn't want to repeat history. Whoever suggests legalizing Nazism and Holocaust denial will look like a jerk. They also run the risk of appearing to be giving a nod to those things, although there have been cases where the rights of KKK and Neo-Nazis were upheld, and the judges and lawyers weren't promoting the beliefs, but the right to have and espouse even repulsive beliefs.

Wilders does say some xenophobic things but I don't think that everything he says is untrue. So maybe he is an asshole, but does he really deserve to be criminally prosecuted? It is true that he wants to censor the Quran while talking about free speech, but the inverse is also true--that the Quran is allowed as free speech but he is in the middle of a criminal trial for his free speech.

Permalink Reply by John Smith on April 24, 2010 at 4:56pm

Prog Rock Girl, do you know George Galloway? He's not a Muslim. I suggest you see this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS6_k8d91fg
Also, look at these statistics: http://www.entrepreneur.com/tradejournals/article/184710772_1.html

I met a European online who believed that the people who made the Mohammad cartoons should be put in jail. In The Netherlands you can go to jail for telling a person to go fuck themselves. I lived with a French room mate who had an open hatred to freedom of speech.

Revolution Muslim and Islamic Thinker's Society are both extremist groups in the U.S. and are very open about hatred of freedom of speech, homosexuality, among other things. From seeing their videos they post, their groups appear to be very small and limited. Even in one of the videos a Muslim got into a heated debate with them because they were so crazy.

There are Christians that are extreme too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvDRAaInDbg

I don't deny the Muslim religion is violent, but so is Judaism, and Christianity. There are Christian extremists here and violent Jewish extremists over in Israel.

Singling out Muslims is dangerous. What I don't like is that people exploit Islam's barbarism as a way to justify American imperialism and finacial support of Israel. Most Muslims in Western societies do not practice the crazy verses in the Quran and are shown to be highly assimulated in countries like the U.S. and France. I don't think so much in England, but the English government also kisses up to Muslims with providing tax money for Muslim schools.

As far as South Park is concerned, I support their 200 episode 100% and think they did the right thing.

Permalink Reply by Jaume on April 25, 2010 at 2:27pm

But in America, a country which supposedly has more free speech than Europe

Emphasis on 'supposedly'. Two words: bleep censorship.

Permalink Reply by John Smith on April 26, 2010 at 9:59am

Jaume, this doesn't have much to do with freedom of speech as opposed to the corrupt corporate media. The U.S. government itself does not tell the corporate media what to publish and what not to publish. They do it themselves. I'm appalled by the corporate media itself and people's voices like Noam Chomsky don't even make it in the mainstream media. Unfortunately in this case it's more about if you have more money like CNN, Fox news, ABC, etc. that only that way your voice can be heard.

I can go outside and be waving a red flag and start talking about how there is a big gap between the rich and the poor out in the public, but the corporate media will not be interviewing me. If I do get an interview me it will probably be someone on Fox news interrupting me all the time and that people can hardly know what I'm trying to say.

Permalink Reply by Jaume on April 26, 2010 at 10:45am

Isn't the FCC a government agency? According to Wikipedia, they have a right to enforce censorships in the media. Relevant entries: Bleep censor, FCC

Permalink Reply by Фелч Гроган on April 28, 2010 at 12:36am

Only if its tits.

Permalink Reply by Rosemary LYNDALL WEMM on April 24, 2010 at 7:36pm

The original idea behind the American concept of "free speech" was to protect people's right to protest against political corruption. Like the original idea behind the right to bear arms (to protect oneself against political corruption), the original meaning has been twisted to permit people to harm others without fear of being harmed themselves. In other words, it protects sadists and bullies. There is nothing superior or advanced about this. It is socially backward.

The right to say whatever one likes is the right to behave like an irresponsible child. America should grow up.

Besides, there is nothing consistent about the way these ideas are policed or permitted in the U.S. There are rules for the poor and weak and different rules for those who are rich and powerful. The system is endemically corrupt. It will take a social and political revolution to change this. A seriously improved free education systems would help. But that is not in the interests of the groups who have power.

Permalink Reply by Jaume on April 25, 2010 at 2:43pm

Those are wise words, but I'm afraid they come too late. Free speech in the US seems to have been sacralized beyond any hope of redemption.