Dear Mr. Bennett,I usually only leave comments on articles whose
themes interest me and whose angles puzzle or perplex me.So it is
here. I am interested in all things FREEDOM including the Freedom of Speech,
and I'm totally perplexed that such a terrific article appeared in the
Deseret News. It was delightfully witty and a wonderful DEFENSE of freedom
rather than the usual attack upon it.Congratulations and many
Re: RanchHand Huntsville, UT"What should we do with people who
intentionally produce materials intended to offend and incite others to
violence; knowing that will be the result of their actions?"You
may be correct. Perhaps movies, books, and speech should be reviewed by a
censor, and a permit issued before we allow offensive material to be
published.Surly there must be some benefits to establishing a
thought police task force.
@casual observer -- I do not defend their violence in any way, but I don't
think they are angry because they are being characterized as violent. They are
angry because their respected prophet was characterized as a womanizing, evil
person in that stupid movie. And, while I'm sure most Muslims don't
like their prophet depicted in such a way, most are not violent in response.
What should we do with people who intentionally produce materials intended to
offend and incite others to violence; knowing that will be the result of their
actions?Are they, or are they not guilty of crimes?We
arrest people for yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.We
arrest people for inciting others to riot.The film maker, in this
case, is every bit as irresponsible as perpetrators of the other two examples.
Casual Observer, it reminds ME of Americans so upset that they clamored for the
destruction of so much of Afganistan and Iraq.They showed some lady
dancing and happy about 9/11 over and over until everyone was so upset by
Muslims happy about violence against the US that the people all supported two
rediculous wars OF NEEDLESS VIOLENCE. Then for years, anyone that
protested the wars was considered a traitor and fired from broadcasting or
publically humilated and called a pinhead by Hannity and the "religious
right". So much for freedom of speech in the American Christian Taliban
People think that freedom of speech relieves them of reponsibility of what
happens afterwards, it doesn't.
There is an irony in that those who object to the characterization of Islam as a
violent religion are reacting by killing people.
The US Embassy in Cairo did not "apologize" for the offensive Muslim
film. It condemned it, which every decent person can and should do. That does
not mean we are calling for censorhip, but in a free society people are free to
spew bile and people are free to condemn it. The author of this piece has
greatly misinterpreted the US Embassy's comments, which I copy verbatim
below."The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the
continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of
Muslims – as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.
Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the
United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our
nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for
religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the
actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the
religious beliefs of others."
Well said, recovering actor. The way for us to get rid of the garbage is to
refuse to see it. The way for "offensive" movies to receive their just
due is to avoid seeing them. None of those who are offended by the movie that
has "sparked violence" were forced to see it (I'm assuming). Those
who make terrorist violence happen operate by a set of standards that have no
respect for principles of freedom.
Condemning a movie that is bigoted against a religion is not an apology. The
Bush administration embassies issued the same kind of statement all the time.
It's really nothing new. Then again, I'm sure some feel obligated to
defend Mitt Romney after his blunder of attempted politicizing of a tragedy
through a statement that wasn't even factually accurate.