Does this idiot have any idea what it means to have "freedom of Speech"?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

1prophet

Diamond Member
Aug 17, 2005
5,313
534
126
He spoke to CNN’s Piers Morgan in an extensive meeting that got heated at times, with the Iranian leader calling homosexuality 'ugly.'

Morgan twice involved Ahmadinejad’s children in his questions, asking him what he would do if one of them was gay - and asking how he would feel if one of them were dating a Jew.
On the topic of homosexuality, Ahmadinejad answered Morgan's questions with more questions, saying: 'Do you believe that anyone has given birth through homosexuality? Homosexuality ceases procreation.
'Who has said that if you like or believe in doing something ugly, and others do not accept your behaviour, they're denying your freedom? Who says that? Perhaps in a country they wish to legitimise stealing.'

These are the people that want blasphemy laws while they hang gays,

what's even sadder is the fool apologetic so called liberals that wouldn't think twice of using laws to ban Chick-fil-A, calling those opposed to gay marriage bigots, etc while apologizing for similar religious viewpoints under multiculturalism just because it isn't Christianity.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
I read his entire message and I didn't find anything wrong with it. It actually makes sense.

All he said was that if you have a group of people attacking the prophets of another religion, that it's going to make people angry. Which is why the riots are happening. That a responsible group of people would not use "Freedom of speech" as an excuse not to condemn those making the statements. Freedom of Speech comes with a bit of self control.

If I went up to a statue of David and spit on it, would it not be a normal reaction of those who cherish David to bee angry at me? They may even punch me in the nose? Is that a normal reaction? Or is it "freedom of speech"? Same for Christians and a status of Jesus or whatever. Or stomping on a cross while sitting outside of a church... Sure, freedom of speech. But that is just asknig for trouble.

Maybe you should continue schooling us how spitting on other people is not covered under free speech because there is clearly no difference between an actual physical action versus mere verbal insults. :rolleyes:
 

brandonb

Diamond Member
Oct 17, 2006
3,731
2
0
Maybe you should continue schooling us how spitting on other people is not covered under free speech because there is clearly no difference between an actual physical action versus mere verbal insults. :rolleyes:

Where did I mention spitting on other people?
 

feralkid

Lifer
Jan 28, 2002
16,397
4,455
136
Why should we even have to speak out against it to begin with especially when any random guy can make the same sort of video on Youtube? What, they think they are the only fvcking religion in this world that gets insulted or ridiculed? Bottom line, zero tolerance to the unreasonable, period.


Place johnson in hornets' nest.

Blame hornets.

Zero tolerance to hornets

Profit?
 

Throckmorton

Lifer
Aug 23, 2007
16,830
3
0
Why should we even have to speak out against it to begin with especially when any random guy can make the same sort of video on Youtube? What, they think they are the only fvcking religion in this world that gets insulted or ridiculed? Bottom line, zero tolerance to the unreasonable, period.

Because it has become an international issue and a lot of the Muslim world has been told by their religious leaders that the US government endorsed the video by not banning it. We have to explain to them that we don't have the ability to ban things we don't like.
 

Sonikku

Lifer
Jun 23, 2005
15,749
4,558
136
Freedom of speech is fine, it's just when people around here disagree with my obvious truth that I take issue.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
35,203
28,218
136
Oh, I thought you were referring to Obama.

President Obama:
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

Claims to support free speech, then says that.
"The future must not belong to the Westboro Baptist Church."

Hopefully this illustration helps you to understand why you are a hack.
 

berzerker60

Golden Member
Jul 18, 2012
1,233
1
0
Hey everyone, you can have a legal right to do something and a moral obligation not to do it, all at the very same time. You have a moral obligation to speak out and make it clear that bigotry isn't acceptable around you, even though bigots have a right to their opinions; you (might legitimately feel you) have a moral obligation not to eat veal, even if it's your right; you have a moral obligation not to sleep with your best friend's spouse, even though it's your right. Someone criticizing you for sleeping with the spouse isn't trying to "rob you of your freedoms," you apologizing for doing it aren't "apologizing for your freedoms."

Freedom of speech doesn't mean nobody gets to tell you you're an idiot for saying something stupid.
 

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
Hey everyone, you can have a legal right to do something and a moral obligation not to do it, all at the very same time. You have a moral obligation to speak out and make it clear that bigotry isn't acceptable around you, even though bigots have a right to their opinions; you (might legitimately feel you) have a moral obligation not to eat veal, even if it's your right; you have a moral obligation not to sleep with your best friend's spouse, even though it's your right. Someone criticizing you for sleeping with the spouse isn't trying to "rob you of your freedoms," you apologizing for doing it aren't "apologizing for your freedoms."

Freedom of speech doesn't mean nobody gets to tell you you're an idiot for saying something stupid.

People have the legal and moral right not to get killed or threatened to be killed for merely insulting Islam. Really, is it that hard to understand?
 

makken

Golden Member
Aug 28, 2004
1,476
0
71
the israeli delegation walked out as he speaked. lol. maybe they didnt like this

article-0-152EF961000005DC-654_634x429.jpg

This guy. He be trollin' Israel.
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Again it comes from usage of words. Condemn when being used by most people in the USA is used to mean "blame", for most the rest of the world it means to "convict". Look at the definition of the word people, look at it in terms of historical context. When you want to "condemn" someone you're saying a very harsh thing, not simply "blaming" them and even then that's nonsense. What are we to blame them off? Causing the violence? Bullshit.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
-snip-
I also suggest you google "piss christ" by maplethorpe. Note that there was some vandalism. Note that no one died as a result. Being upset is a natural reaction. Killing over it is too, but I hardly see an equivalency in the two acts.

I think that's exactly the reaction Maplethorpe was aiming for. I think he would have felt he failed if people didn't have a strong reaction.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Ahmadinejad's position on Freedom of Speech is quite similar to Liberals position on Freedom of Religion.

Both see it as Freedom from speech/religion.

Just as Liberals claim it means 'freedom' from hearing/seeing others' religious activities, Ahmadinejad thinks it means 'freedom' from our speech he doesn't like.

Fern
 

BurnItDwn

Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
26,066
1,550
126
More Christian bashing :(

The Christians dont want to kill people for being a different religion, gays and women along with Jews

Their religion is about 500 years or so younger than christianity.

Also, this is a very new phase in Christianity to not want to kill people who are different. Maybe in 500 years the religion will have aged enough that people will be less insecure.

Also, the "extremest" christians do still go of on killing rampages... look at the recent massacre in Norway for example.