this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2025
266 points (96.8% liked)

Ask Lemmy

27462 readers
1175 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


6) No US Politics.
Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting

This is a sensitive topic for some people, so please do your best to have civil discussions. Let's do better than the average social media.

(page 3) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I don't have any issue or opinion or dog in the race with the prophet Muhammed, but those idiots made it important to say "muhammed the prophet is a giant cunt who should be laughed at and get a pie in the face" every now and then just to remind everybody how getting to talk works.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (19 children)

Satire should be free. Hate speech should not. People shouldn't be killed for either. I don't particularly cry when bigots die though.

All that said, there's reasons some jokes just aren't worth telling. There's times and spaces, and for some jokes there's neither and that's ok.

load more comments (19 replies)
[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

A week ago I was in line to check out and there was a young woman in a hijab. When she turned to help me I saw her entire face and hands (all I could see really) had acid burns all over.

The paradox of tolerance will never be something I struggle with once The Fall happens. Regardless for whichever religion seeks to lynch me.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 week ago (5 children)

once The Fall happens

What's that?

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago

It is hard to make satire now when we seem to be living in an age that satirizes itself.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago (7 children)

Obviously it's horrible to kill people over speech. Cartoons do not justify violence or terrorism.

But we also shouldn't pretend like speech is necessary or valuable just because it's offensive or that offending people to the point of violence is noble.

If someone was killed for saying the n word that would be a tragedy and should be condemned. But we shouldn't all go around yelling the n word just to assert our free speech or pretend like the guy saying the n word was a hero for doing it.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 week ago

I agree with your sentiment although the n word wouldn't have been my choice for that analogy.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

This view is ostensibly reasonable (I've been tempted by it myself). The problem is the slippery slope. As soon as someone declares, "I'm offended so pleased don't say that", you begin to get de-facto limits about what (perfectly legal) things may be said. In the case of religious offense it's doubly dangerous because religion always gets a free pass when it comes to offense.

Next thing you know, only a few very brave people are willing to say whatever (perfectly legal) thing has been established as verboten. And then they become easy pickings for extremists. This is exactly what has happened with innocuous, legal, Mohammed cartoons, among other things. It's called the assassin's veto and personally I find it much more offensive than any cartoon.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's not a slippery slope, it's an ambiguous gray area which a lot of moral rational debates like this don't do well with. For example I think we can agree that white people shouldn't call black people n*gger, but what about negro? There are some people who will do the victim hood Olympics and say calling people black is bad too.

If we follow the free speech absolutist line then we get a bunch of white men demeaning every marginal group with horrific slurs. If we follow the no offense at all costs line then we're walking around a term for Mexican food because someone said that it's racist. We need to find some sort of middle ground and that ground is going to be very blurry, socially determined and subjective, and it won't have any easy hard rules that people desperately search for in stuff like this.

The punishment for leaving this area should just be social ostracization though, not violence or death. There shouldn't be an assassin's veto but there also shouldn't be an asshole get out of jail free card.

This all wasn't my argument though, I was arguing against the people in this thread saying we should've doubled down, published the cartoon in all major publications and done more Mohammad drawings simply to assert free speech. That's saying that speech is valuable and should be spread simply because its offensive and caused an overreaction which is the same logic as those annoying right wing assholes who say horrible shit to "trigger the libs". Offensiveness can be a means to an end but when it becomes an end unto itself then it just becomes cruelty.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

This leans heavily on two very modern, and US-centric, ideas:

  • to insult a group is the worst possible form of speech infringement
  • that non-physical abuse can constitute "cruelty" (you didn't use the word "harm" but it's right there)

Personally I dispute these premises. I think it would be better if we stuck to something close to free-speech absolutism: easier to police; no perverse incentives to victimhood; resilience is an underrated virtue, etc.

Technically I belong to one of your "marginalized groups" but I don't see myself as a victim. My answer to insults is usually to roll my eyes rather than to break down in tears and call for Daddy to step in.

Anyway, I think this is really about the cultural zeitgeist. My ideas are going out of fashion and yours are coming into fashion. Better hope this experiment goes well.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 week ago (5 children)

Doesn't make sense to me that religious people get violent because of something you say or draw.

If it would be wrong god will punish people who do it. If god doesn't it is not wrong. And if god doesn't but religious people do, that is them acting against god and thinking they know better then god. That is blasphemy and will make their god hate them.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 week ago (1 children)

What's this image supposed to be? All I see is CENSORED.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 week ago (4 children)

I always thought that the reason that religious extremists are so obsessed with concepts like blasphemy and hatred for other sects and religions is because their very existence plants seeds of doubt in their minds. "If my beliefs are self evident and absolutely true then how can any other beliefs possibly exist?" They may turn it around and pose it as an attack on them "They are trying to make me doubt my beliefs."

[–] [email protected] 27 points 1 week ago (6 children)

Once I saw this guy on a bridge about to jump. I said, "Don't do it!" He said, "Nobody loves me." I said, "God loves you. Do you believe in God?"

He said, "Yes." I said, "Are you a Christian or a Jew?" He said, "A Christian." I said, "Me, too! Protestant or Catholic?" He said, "Protestant." I said, "Me, too! What franchise?" He said, "Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Baptist or Southern Baptist?" He said, "Northern Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist or Northern Liberal Baptist?"

He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist." I said, "Me, too! Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region, or Northern Conservative Baptist Eastern Region?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region." I said, "Me, too!"

Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1879, or Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912?" He said, "Northern Conservative Baptist Great Lakes Region Council of 1912." I said, "Die, heretic!" And I pushed him over

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

I find it weird when religious people don't see this. I was proselytized to not long ago by a Muslim dude from Egypt out of the blue. He tried to dismiss Christianity because there are many denominations and when I pointed out the various Muslim denominations he just said they're wrong by default because they are. Like, ok, I see your brain is forced to turn off with this topic.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 week ago

Completely agree.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago

It isn't just religious people

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (1 children)

It's religion, it doesn't need to be logical. Au contraire.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›