Freedom of expression works just perfectly if it stops right before the freedom to insult others beliefs. The blind eye support of unlimited freedom of expression is one issue any sane society would frown upon. Laws are created in a sane society to protect people from harm and create equity and fairness. You cannot allow someone to look into the eyes of the other and curse his momma or belief systems and expect a case of defamation not to be slapped on your wrist. That some people believe freedom of speech covers such actions and is acceptable but denies the victim of such abuses a right to the protection of his beliefs is injustice itself. In the absence of rule of law, anarchy reigns. We can sit down and whine about things, be sentimental or we can go down and look at the roots of the problems and solve it. You can draw yourself in a cartoon. Thats your problem but drawing another persons revered identity which is unique to them in a cartoon mocking such identities is an infringement on their personal rights, freedom of association (as long as that association it is legal and recognized under the law). Laws are created to bring justice not breed injustice. The world is diverse and we shouldnt be giving senseless people an excuse or opportunity to perpetuate their evils. Somethings are not black and white but shades of grey. Before anyone misconstrues my thoughts. Not justifying the attack. I would never do such. The attack is not only despicable but cowardly. Heartfelt condolences to the families of those who died in the barbaric attack. However, we can not shy away from exegesis of such situations and profer solutions that would take away the avenue or excuse for such acts. Things dont just happen, they always have an history. There is a reason I see the drawings as bad. I see it as hate mongering techniques designed to alienate such people, sway public opinion against them, create stereotypes and participate in increased violence and hate crimes against groups such are targeted at. Many minorities are protected against this kind of things in many countries. Like for example laws against Holocaust denial and anti-semitisim or other laws against hate speech in many countries. Including France. In France, the Gayssot Act, voted for on July 13, 1990, makes it illegal to question the existence of crimes that fall in the category of crimes against humanity as defined in the London Charter of 1945. When the act was challenged by Robert Faurisson, the Human Rights Committee upheld it as a necessary means to counter possible antisemitism. In 2012, the Constitutional Council of France ruled that to extend the Gayssot Act to the Armenian Genocide denial was unconstitutional because it violated the freedom of speech. Do these laws violate the freedom of speech in some ways? Absoloutely! Are they necessary? To me yes but i guess thats a big debate. #CharlieHebdo
Posted on: Sun, 11 Jan 2015 09:18:57 +0000