Friday 20 March 2015 12.44pm
eDWaRD WooDWaRD wrote:
You can try and justify your crude comments all you like, you're not a satirist, you're just insulting and hiding behind Charlie Hebdo does not disguise that. For one, CH satirised EVERYBODY, you invariably isolate a particular group and insult them. Not even directly, to their faces, but on SE1, anonymously and to people who most likely aren't even Muslim. So basically, you can glorify your comments all you like, at the end of the day they are just gratuitous insults meant to upset people. On top of all that, when you complain that "no comment" is the future, you are contributing to that by abusing free speech to indulge in your agenda. Now, THAT is my opinion.
Well, good for YOU and YOUR opinion. Thank goodness (not God) for the right to free expression and differing opinions. If you read my post, I was tearing into Christianity and Islam. If you wish, I'll also opine on the other fairy-tale cults out there. As I said, I understand James' reluctance to allow these type of comments on his site as there is one particular brand of religion at the moment which works themselves into such a tizz at any criticism/parody of their "holy book" that they are prepared to do harm to folks who say it. I just wish people were a bit more up-front as to why they have been obliged to stifle freedom of expression. It kind of reminds me of the mohammed cartoon "controversy", when the media outlets of the U.K collectively bottled it but used all manner of weaselly words to justify their decision not to show them, even though the cartoons were central to the story. Why didn't they just say they were scared of "insulting" islam because of violent reprisals? I would have respected them more. I respect your views (but disagree with them) but as yet, nobody is the sole arbiter of what constitutes "gratuitous insults". Long may it remain so.