Man fined by courts for "slurring" against teenager Mzee Mohammed on Reddit

[Deleted]

So instead you support a blasphemy law. Nice.

How many dead kids is your liberal sensibility worth?

- - - Updated - - -

A publication miles and miles away from Palestine.

Yeah and the holocaust was miles away from Israel. They are still quite sensitive about it. People always marginalize attacks against other communities and exaggerate attacks on their own.

[Nitro Fun]

How many dead kids is your liberal sensibility worth?

People being prone to violence because they feel offended is no reason to ban what they might find offensive and triggering. It's those people that needs to be changed. If they won't change then they should be put in prison for the rest of their lives or be put to death.

[Deleted]

You also haven't replied to the point that your restrictions, if you're basing it on the outcry of the Islamic community would eventually lead to all mockery of Islam being banned.

What kind of higher purpose is served by mockery? What exactly does that do? Substantive criticism can be helpful. Mockery isn't.

In Northern Ireland, if someone made an overtly sectarian comment, then the next day it would be quite likely that someone from the other side of the political divide would go and shoot somebody. The reallity was the laws against sectarianism saved a lot of lives.

[Deleted]

Yeah and the holocaust was miles away from Israel. They are still quite sensitive about it. People always marginalize attacks against other communities and exaggerate attacks on their own.

To my knowledge, there aren't large amounts of Jewish extremists being exported to execute white nationalists or anti-zionists.

- - - Updated - - -

What kind of higher purpose is served by mockery? What exactly does that do? Substantive criticism can be helpful. Mockery isn't.

So there we go. You think that mockery /in itself/ is disposable (if people are annoyed). You'd ban South Park. You'd ban Four Lions. You'd ban Uncyclopedia. You'd ban panel shows. You'd ban Monty Python.

You are the modern equivalent of Mary Whitehouse.

- - - Updated - - -

In Northern Ireland, if someone made an overtly sectarian comment, then the next day it would be quite likely that someone from the other side of the political divide would go and shoot somebody. The reallity was the laws against sectarianism saved a lot of lives.

People that feel an obligation to murder people over hurt feelings are the problem, not the publication.

[Onizuka]

We have malicious communications legislation, which this falls under and is separate to our freedom of speech legislation.

It is a throwback to physical postal services, it requires updating as it is no longer fit for purpose, however it is not an erosion of freedom of speech as we have had versions of these laws for longer than anyone has been alive.

Oddly, if he had said it publicly or written an article about it, then he wouldn't have been subject to prosecution. Sometimes laws need to be thoroughly updated to cater for new technologies, rather than just slightly amended, this is a case of that. Eventually they will get around to doing something about it.

Legislation regarding "Internet" is a black box, where not many want to put their hands on.
A bit too much and you are violating personal freedoms, person's right to private life etc. On the other hand, a bit too low and you actually make nothing, just a new written legislation paragraph in a law.

Overall it's something that can't be done and taken lightly, besides even if they do, there would be countless appeals to the highest form of courts.

[caervek]

So there we go. You think that mockery /in itself/ is disposable (if people are annoyed). You'd ban South Park. You'd ban Four Lions. You'd ban Uncyclopedia. You'd ban panel shows. You'd ban Monty Python.

The is a distinct difference between satire designed to be funny and non-serious, and hate publications designed primarily to offend/upset/anger.

[Vorkreist]

What did Brexit have to do with being politically correct?

Millions of immigrants stuffed down their throats maybe

The number one reason all right wingers and their dogs went to vote

[Nitro Fun]

What kind of higher purpose is served by mockery? What exactly does that do? Substantive criticism can be helpful. Mockery isn't.

Exposing people who are prone to violence because of mockery and letting themselves show that they're not fit to live in the society because they will resort to violence when they feel wronged.

[caervek]

People that feel an obligation to murder people over hurt feelings are the problem, not the publication.

So you want to ban feelings/emotions and un-ban hate speech?

[Deleted]

The is a distinct difference between satire designed to be funny and non-serious, and hate publications designed primarily to offend/upset/anger.

Advanta, just asked, specifically: "What kind of higher purpose is served by mockery.

In any case, if you leave up to the Islamic community to decide what is too offensive, almost all humour against Islam would be banned.

[Deleted]

People being prone to violence because they feel offended is no reason to ban what they might find offensive and triggering. It's those people that needs to be changed. If they won't change then they should be put in prison for the rest of their lives or be put to death.

It is not the people who are being offended who do the violence generally, it is those who agree with the insult. You see it in the US right now. Trump makes racist/sectarian statements. Racist/sectarian attacks increase. We see it in UK. Brexit brought political leaders campaigning on dog-whistle racism. Racist attacks increase.

I'm not in favour of mob violence.If that means limiting freedom of speech so be it. People will have essentially proven they can't be trusted with it.

[Deleted]

So you want to ban feelings/emotions and un-ban hate speech?

Saying that people shouldn't murder is not the same thing as saying people shouldn't feel hurt, offended. It's saying that it does not give them a magic right to murder people.

[Nitro Fun]

It is not the people who are being offended who do the violence generally, it is those who agree with the insult.

So the muslims agree with Charlie Hebdo and attack them because of it. Got it.

[Deleted]

It is not the people who are being offended who do the violence generally, it is those who agree with the insult. You see it in the US right now. Trump makes racist/sectarian statements. Racist/sectarian attacks increase. We see it in UK. Brexit brought political leaders campaigning on dog-whistle racism. Racist attacks increase.

I'm not in favour of mob violence.If that means limiting freedom of speech so be it. People will have essentially proven they can't be trusted with it.

This kind of attitude is why it is going to get more prohibitive in the Uk. People like advanta don't value free expression and really do want to censor people.

[Nitro Fun]

This kind of attitude is why it is going to get more prohibitive in the Uk. People like advanta don't value free expression and really do want to censor people.

Some of these people would fit right in here in this part of the world. They'd probably be on the wrong side of the censorship and dislike it though.

I bet they'd love 防火長城 if they were in china.

[caervek]

This kind of attitude is why it is going to get more prohibitive in the Uk. People like advanta don't value free expression and really do want to censor people.

People have been saying this for years, I'll believe it when I see it.

[Deleted]

So there we go. You think that mockery /in itself/ is disposable (if people are annoyed). You'd ban South Park. You'd ban Four Lions. You'd ban Uncyclopedia. You'd ban panel shows. You'd ban Monty Python.

Four Lions wouldn't get banned on the grounds that it treats everyone with equal contempt.

South Park would probably escape on the same grounds, though they do go very soft on the Jews.

I never understood what Python were supposed to be mocking. As a Christian, I thought their depiction of the church was fairly accurate.

[Deleted]

Four Lions wouldn't get banned on the grounds that it treats everyone with equal contempt.

Four Lions mostly insults Islamic extremism.

South Park would probably escape on the same grounds, though they do go very soft on the Jews.

I never understood what Python were supposed to be mocking. As a Christian, I thought their depiction of the church was fairly accurate.

It seems arbitrary to suggest you can be "grotesquely offensive", so long as you insult and attack lots of things. South Park really does upset people. Four Lions really does upset people. Uncyclopedia is a parody website of Wikipedia where you can find mockery towards all things.

That you're indifferent towards Monty Python does not mean other Christians aren't. Why should their offense, from your perspective, be sidelined? You want a prohibitive society where black humour is all but stamped out.

- - - Updated - - -

People have been saying this for years, I'll believe it when I see it.

We've seen an increase in frivolous cases in the last 6 months. This incident specifically involved Reddit for the first time. Most of the general public here support or are indifferent this kind of control.

[Deleted]

This kind of attitude is why it is going to get more prohibitive in the Uk. People like advanta don't value free expression and really do want to censor people.

I am sick of young people lecturing me about freedom of expression.

You have not seen the consequences of an openly sectarian society. It is a very horrible place to live. You do not run the risk of your home being firebombed, bombs going off, the omnipresent threat of a gunman walking into your local bar, being beaten to death and tortured because you wandered into the wrong area.

Your pampered, ivory tower liberal sentiments do not acknowledge the ugly actuality of sectarianism.

[Collegeguy]

I think it's pretty cool. Time to start reporting Brit mmochamp users to their language police.