Hate Speech Crimes

Agree2Disagree Forum

The human rights division of the U.N. is proposing a worldwide, mandatory speech code to prevent the offending of religions. This would, of course, impose an overriding restriction on our First Amendment.

Along those same lines, Bill Clinton has just publicly called for the arrest and prosecution of the ones responsible for the creation of the offensive cartoons.

Is it a basic human right to not be offended?

Thank you for not providing any links and this is the BREAKING NEWS section.

Perhaps this thread would be better served in the Polls section?

Regarldess, I think it's a human right to be offended. If there was some code or law that blanketed everyone from being offended, the world would be an awful quiet place. No one would say anything, ever.

-HECK!

Oh, so now what's next... arresting comedians for making fun of anyone, and everyone, under the sun? This is just ridiculous.

I totally agree. But with every person that says someone is a 'jerk' we have to equally allow someone to say a racial slur. Free speech does come at a price.

-HECK!

I still don't even understand what EUCLID is referring to with the UN? Editiorialized topics don't make much for discussion. Are we talking offensive language or incitement language here?

Not sure, hopefully we get a link or some other frame of reference to go from.

-HECK!

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/klein021406.htm

Oh it's not from a news site, it's one of those hack sites. This is likely some sort of distortion.

When a website parrots a political party's talking point, it fails to be news.

Okay I read the article, it's stupid, the write is all whiny because no one is on his "I hate Islam because they are all terrorists" bandwagon.

I don't think the article has anything to do with hating Islam. It is about the people who believe the violence is caused by the cartoonist instead of the rioters.

For all those people in the US who think Bush is a 'god,' and make him and his buddies into an all powerful military/political religion...

What happens to those who say?: "Bush is a F'n idiot." Jail time? Execution?

So at that point, when democracy dreamed up in the heads of these people become the bible and their leader's gods......

to that I say: Bush and his clonies are F'n idiots.

Inner City Blues,

You ask if we are talking offensive speech or incitement speech. By incitement speech, I assume you mean like the classic example of yelling, “Fire!” in a crowded theater, which is not considered free speech. The best example of the kind of speech the U.N. is talking about criminalizing is the Danish cartoon. The cartoon is the very reason they are talking about it now.

It’s not at all surprising that the U.N. would take the position that the blame for the criminal reaction of the offended should be placed on the offender. Many predicted it.

What do you think? Is the cartoon offensive speech or incitement speech?

Where does it say the UN is wants to criminalize the Danish cartoon?

Great! I knew you would agree with me in the end. Thanks.

What, how am I agreeing with you? I ask you about a ban, you say there is no move to ban, but than you say they are criminalizing it? This would mean they are banning something. You're arguing something that is mutually exclusive.

Double Post

I said they are not banning the cartoons. They can't ban them because they have already happened. But the cartoons are an example of the type of thing they are proposing to ban.

At the present, this is only rising to the stage of a U.N. proposal under the influence of the Muslim component of the U.N. However, the U.N. has been considering such speech codes for several years. The cartoons have brought the issue to the front burner.

It is unclear to me how such a world wide speech code would be enforced, but the intent is to make it a legal crime with punishment, not just a voluntary code of conduct.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/2006/klein022106.htm

Here is another article that sheds some more light on it. I don't think I am blowing it up at all. Why is it so hard to believe?