|
Senior Member
|
 |
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: I win hearts by saving lives
|
|

Feb 4th, 2006, 11:08 PM
Why is 'it's free speech' an appropriate response when no one has called for the government to shut someone up? Why should people 'relax,' unless they are calling for someone to be arrested, which no one did? Free speech has got to be one of the most misunderstood concepts ever. The 'it's free speech so shut up' argument is a particular pet peeve of mine. It means the government can't make laws forbidding people to say something. It does not mean that private citizens cannot be upset about what someone said, challenge what they said, etc. If the freedom only applies to who spoke first, it's pretty meaningless.
As a Muslim, I'm not offended when people attack the religion or burn Korans, because I understand exactly what they are attacking. Plus, it is usually other "Muslims" or former Muslims who are doing the attacking, at least where I'm from.
However, if someone were to come along and say that ALL Muslims are extremists and/or scum-of-the-earth, I would take issue with that. Unfortunately many people make this assumption.
|
__________________
I was reading a rather droll bio on Elvis Presley and read that he polypharmed, and I think that Polly Pharmer would make a great pen name.
|
|
|