ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old Yesterday, 01:08 AM   #241
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,103
Originally Posted by Information Analyst View Post
Freedom of speech doesn't mean the freedom to behave like a twat, especially if it infringes on the safety or rights of others.
Arresting someone for "hate speech" separates a parent from his children (assuming Europeans still breed). You're willing to separate a child from her parent because the parent hurt someone's feelings?
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:38 AM   #242
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,756
Originally Posted by baron View Post
There is no mention of harassment in that link.

The right to free speech does not and cannot infringe on anybody else's rights by definition. Contrary to ignorant opinion, in the UK there is no right not to be offended. If you think otherwise please illustrate with an example and state precisely what human right is being infringed (here is a list for easy selection).

I suggest you read the summary of the court judgment linked in the second post.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 01:53 AM   #243
Mondial
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 351
Alison Chabloz has been convicted in the UK on the basis of a song she performed mocking the holocaust. What happened to the British tradition of biting satire from performers such as Monty Python and magazines such as Punch ?
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12299
Mondial is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:03 AM   #244
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arcadia, Greece
Posts: 24,067
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Alison Chabloz has been convicted in the UK on the basis of a song she performed mocking the holocaust. What happened to the British tradition of biting satire from performers such as Monty Python and magazines such as Punch ?
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12299
I don't understand what you're getting at here. Are you suggesting her songs were satirical? She might claim that as a (pathetic, imo) defence, but I can't see any satire in suggesting that the Holocaust was "a bunch of lies" and referring to Auschwitz as a "theme park".

Meanwhile Chabloz described herself as a 'Holocaust revisionist'.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:14 AM   #245
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 8,822
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Alison Chabloz has been convicted in the UK on the basis of a song she performed mocking the holocaust. What happened to the British tradition of biting satire from performers such as Monty Python and magazines such as Punch ?
https://forum.codoh.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=12299
Chabloz claiming her anti-semitism was "satire" doesn't make it so.
Information Analyst is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:20 AM   #246
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 13,880
Originally Posted by Mondial View Post
Alison Chabloz has been convicted in the UK on the basis of a song she performed mocking the holocaust.
Correction: she was convicted as a holocaust denier. The mere denial of the holocaust has now been ruled a crime by the British courts.

Quote:
According to the Campaign Against Antisemitism organization, the decision sets a precedent that Holocaust denial is ‘grossly offensive’ and therefore illegal.
https://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/Landm...-denial-580589

Could this have legal repercussions for ISF which has a holocaust denial thread?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975

Last edited by psionl0; Yesterday at 02:22 AM.
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 02:55 AM   #247
Baylor
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 7,103
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post

Could this have legal repercussions for ISF which has a holocaust denial thread?
From what I can tell, all the UK members toe the line. You can just smell the fear in their comments. They're afraid of getting a knock on the door and being separated from their children (assuming they have any) just for expressing the wrong opinion. I wouldn't want to live like that.
Baylor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:13 AM   #248
baron
Philosopher
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,330
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
I suggest you read the summary of the court judgment linked in the second post.
I read it at the time. Courts can and do make incorrect decisions. This was an example. Unless you believe that criminalisation of telling the truth about Islam is in line with the concept of freedom of expression you already know this. Can I refer you now back to my original question.
__________________
"I don't think I'm getting the most out of my computer. I turn it on... and use it as a light." - Harry Hill
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:17 AM   #249
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,598
Originally Posted by baron View Post
No, it's me disagreeing with this again, because as I've explained, the notion of 'consequences' when talking of freedom of speech clearly relates to those resulting from state intervention. Consequences in more general terminology can result from literally anything you do, from saying hello to threatening murder to scratching your arse.
The point the quote is trying to make is that a person cannot claim freedom of speech as protection from any and all consequences resulting from what has been said.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:25 AM   #250
P.J. Denyer
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 5,093
Originally Posted by baron View Post
Fair enough, but most people believe that a thief can steal 'your' money from the bank, a falsehood perpetrated continually by the banks and the mainstream media.



It's entirely the bank's responsibility, as you no doubt know. The bank should have refunded you and informed the police of the fraud, and the police should have investigated on that basis.
Slightly off topic, but Mitchell and Webb did a good sketch on this subject on their radio show.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS9ptA3Ya9E
__________________
"I know my brain cannot tell me what to think." - Scorpion

"Nebulous means Nebulous" - Adam Hills
P.J. Denyer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:25 AM   #251
Nessie
Penultimate Amazing
 
Nessie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 11,598
Originally Posted by baron View Post
There is no mention of harassment in that link.

The right to free speech does not and cannot infringe on anybody else's rights by definition. Contrary to ignorant opinion, in the UK there is no right not to be offended. If you think otherwise please illustrate with an example and state precisely what human right is being infringed (here is a list for easy selection).
That lists where freedom of speech is limited to protect other's rights;

"Although you have freedom of expression, you also have a duty to behave responsibly and to respect other people’s rights."

and

"protect health or morals
protect the rights and reputations of other people"

and

"An authority may be allowed to restrict your freedom of expression if, for example, you express views that encourage racial or religious hatred."

There are laws, such as the Telecoms Act, where words alone can be illegal because they are grossly offensive. There was an example of a you tube video that had a dog and Hitler salutes and a voice over that resulted in a conviction.

So, there is a right not to be offended, but it is reserved for something that is grossly offensive.
__________________
Audiophile/biker/sceptic
Nessie is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:30 AM   #252
baron
Philosopher
 
baron's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,330
Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
That lists where freedom of speech is limited to protect other's rights;

"Although you have freedom of expression, you also have a duty to behave responsibly and to respect other people’s rights."

and

"protect health or morals
protect the rights and reputations of other people"

and

"An authority may be allowed to restrict your freedom of expression if, for example, you express views that encourage racial or religious hatred."
Yes, as I've said, these things do not legally fall under free speech.

Originally Posted by Nessie View Post
There are laws, such as the Telecoms Act, where words alone can be illegal because they are grossly offensive. There was an example of a you tube video that had a dog and Hitler salutes and a voice over that resulted in a conviction.

So, there is a right not to be offended, but it is reserved for something that is grossly offensive.
It's actually reserved for offence under hate crime law, so targeting people or groups because of their religion, ethnicity, orientation, etc. And sometimes, yes, it is misused and the wrong verdicts are handed down, just like the wrong verdicts are handed down in other eventualities.
__________________
"I don't think I'm getting the most out of my computer. I turn it on... and use it as a light." - Harry Hill
baron is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 06:12 AM   #253
Information Analyst
Philosopher
 
Information Analyst's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Besźel or Ul Qoma - not sure...
Posts: 8,822
Originally Posted by Baylor View Post
From what I can tell, all the UK members toe the line. You can just smell the fear in their comments. They're afraid of getting a knock on the door and being separated from their children (assuming they have any) just for expressing the wrong opinion. I wouldn't want to live like that.
Your deranged fantasies are your own problem.
Information Analyst is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:20 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.