The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Double standards in religious free speech > Comments

Double standards in religious free speech : Comments

By Alex Perrottet, published 9/5/2013

At UNSW Christians are fair game, but Jews and Muslims have game keepers.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
I'm afraid Alex Perrottet will not like my reply.

Any belief system including Christianity, Islam and Judaism is a legitimate target for critique, analysis, satire and scorn and even profanity in bad taste.

We must never conflate antipathy towards a religion with racism.

Hilmer's response is a disgrace.

And that brings me to a delicate point. Most anti-Semites have little to say about Judaism per se. Their target is usually ethnic Jews, most of whom are secular.

So is targeting Jews, as opposed to Judaism, acceptable?
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 9 May 2013 8:46:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Does any thinking person really consider that this sort of behaviour is what free speech is all about? What a load of garbage, spouted by ill-informed sheep. Grab a cause (no understanding of core issues required), follow it and, if you're lucky, you might even have a chance to really offend someone.
I remember chatting to a fellow who was handing out a uni newspaper some years back. Its headline was something anti-Christian (too long ago to recall exactly what). I asked him what he thought about the article. He hadn't read it. I asked him if he cared that it was offensive. He didn't. I asked him did he like offending people. He smiled and said yes. Quality fellow that...
Free speech is Martin Luther King. Free speech Is Rosa Parks. Free speech is not brainless bigots whose sole aim is to offend.
Posted by rational-debate, Thursday, 9 May 2013 9:34:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Freedom of speech does not exist in most people’s minds, rather it is freedom of 'my' speech. The good professor should be laid off after such an incident (if it occurred as reported). Not because he allowed an offensive image to a specific sect or religion but rather because he seems incapable of applying the same code to all sects and religions.
Posted by Arthur N, Thursday, 9 May 2013 9:53:51 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'Freedom of speech' is a label only. There is in reality no such thing in Australia. Anyone who doubts this should consult the 'Human Rights & Equal Opportunities Act' which tells us that (white anglo-saxon) Australians have no protection against racial discrimination because (white anglo-saxon) Australians 'are not a race'. I've attempted several times to register a complaint that speakers of the Australian dialect of english are discriminated against by avaricious companies like Tel$tra which earn their income here but are too greedy to employ locals. Seems whatever bloodsucking parasite wrote the relevant legislation was on the UN payroll because almost identical legislation is in place min the UK, the US, the Irish Republic & Canada. Furthermore, even a hint that one is displeased by the human rights act is automatically treated as racism. One can't even criticize blatantly unfair laws !! Mind you the same doesn't apply to aliens sponging off taxpayers, those clowns have total protection and can say whatever they like with no fear of retribution.
Posted by praxidice, Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:10:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I fully support the rights of Christians to exercise their freedom of speech to really offend Judaism and Islam.
Posted by WmTrevor, Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:28:39 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
oh dear poor little christ-stains.. if your truley offended then take your case to the courts.
Posted by Kenny, Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:37:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
it is only the Word of God that convicts secularist of their rampant hypocrisy. That is why they are comfortable with mocking the only one that can save them from their rottoness.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:40:49 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not a bad article.
Mr Perrottet makes a good point. It's open slather when criticising Christianity, but often deemed 'racist' or bigoted to criticise Islam. In academia Christianity comes under some very harsh criticism, not just from student organisations, but from university courses themselves. This is okay, as university is supposed to entail critical thinking (in fact, the entire intellectual world from the Enlightenment onward has been to dispel the superstitions of the church). However, imagine these harsh critiques turned on Islam. In fact, they should be turned on Islam. The metaphysics of Christianity and Islam are almost identical (a cross over between Platonism and Jewish mysticism). Yet, to criticise and ridicule Islam for all its atrocities and non-empirical fantasies is deemed 'racist' or bigoted.

There is a very, very strange alliance here between the Left and Islam. The Left protects Islam from criticism, but lambastes Christianity at every opportunity. There's enough material in that strange bond to keep psychologists and sociologists going for several years and several dissertations and journal articles. (However, given that the Left virtually run the academe such research simply isn't going to be done).
Posted by Aristocrat, Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:16:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Posted by WmTrevor, Thursday, 9 May 2013 10:28:39 AM wrote:

>>I fully support the rights of Christians to exercise their freedom of speech to really offend Judaism and Islam.>>

I second that.
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:24:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
One must separate the issues.

1. Obscene, vituperative language is bullying and verbal violence. A university, but not the state, is entitled to enforce rules against it.

3. Wholesale slurs in public space on the sole basis of ethnic origin are libellous and discriminatory, and the state and every university is fully entitled to enforce sanctions against such slurs.

4. Freedom from religion is even more vital than freedom for it. Ideologies, including religions and including racist pretensions elevating any ethnic group above the rest, are fair game for rejection, opposition, ridicule, hostility (combined with freedom to to uphold them without incurring threat of personal sanctions).

5. Howls of “bigotry”, “intolerance”. “racism”, “blasphemy”, “anti-Semitism” in response to attacks on religious or racist ideologies are libellous and rightly treated as an overt threat to civil liberty.

Reckon that more or less sums it all up
Posted by EmperorJulian, Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:32:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The double standard that is the elephant in the room would be supporters of gay marriage trashing Christianity as per usual. Quite obviously all of those claims of gay 'rights' to marriage are just a blind and fraud to get the gold standard of marriage applied to gay sex and gay lifestyles. They still hate and abuse what they have always offensively regarded as "breeders' marriage" and would sabotage that instution every way they could.

That they support Islam at the same time shows just how barking mad the left are and particularly the feminist left.

Freedom of speech has been severely curtailed by political correctness and by the speech and thought control of racial vilification law in Australia.

People should have the right to be offended, but there are those who have been successful in having that right restricted according to what they want.
Posted by onthebeach, Thursday, 9 May 2013 12:45:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The solution to this problem is simple, Christians need to be redefined as a "race", so they should cultivate an aura of "otherness" e.g. wear different and distinctive clothes and complain of "racial discrimination" when they don't get their own way.
Posted by mac, Thursday, 9 May 2013 1:27:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mac:

You've nailed it! Exactly!
Posted by diver dan, Thursday, 9 May 2013 1:48:08 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I do notice that the author did not include the comments against the Max Bremmer shop, and is unaware of what is required for a balanced commentary.

Student publications have a propensity for "shock" titles. I bothered to look up the article in question, and it was a response to a Christian fundamentalist sticking his oar into the abortion debate. And while I find the article a bit OTT and tasteless, I don't see it inciting hate toward Christians.

Antisemitism is targeted against Jews, and the protest was against a store with a Jewish Name. The difference is not subtle, and if Alex Perrottet wants to be taken seriously he should not post such a flawed article.
Posted by Shadow Minister, Thursday, 9 May 2013 1:59:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So what this all means is that Christians who want to maintain their right to object to the vile attitudes and behaviour displayed by some followers of other religions must be prepared for non-Christians to object to the vile attitudes and behaviour displayed by some followers of Christianity. And the same goes for the majority of all religious believers who value common humanity and ordinary decent behaviour over the rules laid down by their various Imaginary Friends.

Any Christian (or anyone else) who thinks they should be allowed to be daft and bigoted because Muslims are is lending his or her approval to intimidation, misogyny, bigotry and murder.
Posted by Jon J, Thursday, 9 May 2013 2:07:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
'and it was a response to a Christian fundamentalist sticking his oar into the abortion debate.'

certainly better than sticking a knife in the babies heart by a secular fundamentalist .
Posted by runner, Thursday, 9 May 2013 3:32:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mac wrote:

>>..Christians need to be redefined as a "race", so they should cultivate an aura of "otherness" e.g. wear different and distinctive clothes and complain of "racial discrimination" when they don't get their own way.>>

LOL

Yes, I think that's a good idea.

And we can take it further. Every denomination can be defined as a separate "race" with its own dress code. That way if, say, Baptists get some concession Catholics, Anglicans and the rest can all clamour for a quid pro quo.

Eventually we'll Balkanise Australia into Baptisto-Stan, Shia-Stan, Sunni-Stan, Sufi-Stan, Catholico-Stan and a Jewish-Stan centred around Caulfield with a branch at Bondi Beach.

Multiculturalism in action!
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 9 May 2013 3:41:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's too potentially divisive, stevenlmeyer...

"Eventually we'll Balkanise Australia into Baptisto-Stan, Shia-Stan, Sunni-Stan, Sufi-Stan, Catholico-Stan and a Jewish-Stan centred around Caulfield with a branch at Bondi Beach."

Instead, all the monotheists could get together and decide who's right - and then all the problems will magically go away.

Won't they?
Posted by WmTrevor, Thursday, 9 May 2013 4:24:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
and the godless can keep having their luv fests where they dream up ways to justify their depiscable behaviour. They could well be called the godless 'race'. They are experts excusing their corrupt natures and behaviour and even demand legislation to condone their actions.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 9 May 2013 5:11:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
stevenmeyer,

I recently participated in a discussion on the same theme on "The Conversation" site.

I asked three of the academic Islamic apologists who were involved in the discussion to define "Islamophobia" and to defend the definition of Moslems as a "race" and also to justify their easy assumption of the moral high ground and the use of rather patronising socio-jargon.

The result--no replies. I have no idea whether it was due to ignorance or arrogance.
Posted by mac, Thursday, 9 May 2013 6:16:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The day people wake up & rid themselves of superstition will be the most joyous of days because it is then that they can think of themselves as intelligent.
It'll probably never happen because intelligence is not in the genes
Posted by individual, Thursday, 9 May 2013 7:03:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If you do a google on Alex you will find that he is an Opus Dei operative which is interesting for a number of reasons, four of which are: it is deeply misogynist;it is at root deeply anti-semitic (while pretending otherwise; it maintains a list of banned books which its acolytes are forbidden to read (so much for free speech and free enquiry; mortification of the "flesh" is a daily practice for many of its senior members.

Mortification is a form of psychosis. It is a method of asserting one's presumed cultural and religious superiority. It is a denial of love and only achieves the "ecstasy" of self-pity.
Its goal seems to be truth, God, love, etc, but it is a manifestation, itself a signature of a certain quality of an emotionally crippled life. And it only perpetuates itself. It is an intrinsically false and disturbed life. It is a demonstration which is itself a refusal to live in a world where there is God, a world of love, openness, intrinsic uncaused pleasure, and happiness.
it embraces guilt and the incapability for love, self-pity and hard-hearted superiority of self.
It seeks to "win" through effort. This instead of Grace and the labors of Love. All mortification is an indication of the search for superiority through the emblem of suffering. But its only fruit is self-pity and darkness and lack of love.
It is the strategic refusal to live in a world in which Love is the essential medium of Reality and Freedom, the essential Force of Being.
It seems to seek a condition of light, life, love and freedom, but in fact it manifests and enforces a condition of depression, ignorance, bondage, and fearful separation.

It is interesting to note that John Paul II practiced mortification by sometimes sleeping on a concrete floor, and by whipping himself too. Supposedly to get closer to God.
Posted by Daffy Duck, Thursday, 9 May 2013 7:10:48 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"We are sure the University’s student body is also horrified and offended by such statements...The University supports and encourages the free expression of diverse views and open debate on campus but it must be lawful, respectful and responsible. "

The author should be commended for bringing the apparent UNSW top administration's double standards in religious free speech into the open. The above statement on the university website illustrates the administration's hypocrisy -- after virtually ignoring Tharunka's grossly disrespectful , irresponsible and obscene depiction.

"As one student posted on the Tharunka Facebook page last month:
Would you dare represent even a symbol of Islam (such as the crescent) or Judaism (the Star of David) in such a blatantly offensive manner? Of course not."

Sadly, this student's posting is an accurate reflection of the double standards currently applying.
Posted by Raycom, Thursday, 9 May 2013 7:26:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mac

It is a characteristic of leftards that they are brave upholders of free speech until it comes to Islam and, to a lesser extent, Judaism.

Here is how Mark Thompson, former director-general of the BBC put it.

>>“Without question, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms’, is different from, ‘I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write’,” he said. “This definitely raises the stakes.”>>

See:

Mark Thompson: BBC director general admits Christianity gets tougher treatment

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/tvandradio/bbc/9107689/Mark-Thompson-BBC-director-general-admits-Christianity-gets-tougher-treatment.html

Remember the brave defenders of free speech when the National Gallery of Victoria displayed Piss Christ? In some cases the very same people who defended the NGV were adamant that the comparatively benign Muhammad cartoons should not be published in Australia.

It was in 1989 in the wake of the Rushdie affair that the left and I parted company. They disgust me.

And, just for the record, I think anyone who truly believes that the creator of the universe, if such exists, chose to entrust Khadija's toyboy – aka Muhammed – with some special message that includes all sort of weird passages and scientific inaccuracies, must have a kink in his or her brain. And, no, I do not respect someone who thinks that way. I respect their right to think that way. I even respect their right to propagate that preposterous message to whoever cares to listen. But I don't respect them.

Muslim Book 026, Number 5564:
>>Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: He who killed a gecko with the first stroke for him is such and such a reward, and he who killed it with a second stroke for him is such and such reward less than the first one, and he who killed it with the third stroke for him is such and such a reward less than the second one.>>

You really think the creator of the universe is going to reward people on this planet for killing geckos?

Gimme a break!
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Thursday, 9 May 2013 8:47:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
stevenmeyer,

Yes, I can understand, but not excuse, BBC management, outraged Moslems are lot scarier than outraged Christians, the aura of "Otherness" is really enhanced by the threat of violence. Fear is obviously an inhibiting factor that contributes to the current double standards in regard to criticism of Islam-eg the silence of many Western feminist nutcrackers is appalling.

Nothing makes this grumpy old man even grumpier when some "Cultural Studies' poseur cites some platitudes from the Qu'ran in defence of the ridiculous Islamic ideology, any meaning whatsoever can extracted from any sacred text.

I'm also fed up with the Left's monumental and perhaps wilful, ignorance of the history of Islam and the West--the Crusades were a minor campaign in a 1400 war.

I was educated at a Christian school to absolutely no effect. I don't have the gene for religion but I don't have any objection to believers lawfully practising their religion as long as they don't "practise" on others.

I'm also a lapsed leftist, multiculturalism and its dysfunctions was the last straw, the irony is that the old Left probably would have rejected it as an "anti-progressive" fantasy.
Posted by mac, Thursday, 9 May 2013 11:26:36 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The anti-Christian bias in the left-dominated press is an oddity the probably does start out at Uni level. This article points out a glaring double-standard that even the most anti-Christian rationalist should be able to see?
The connection between the left and Islam is a well-made point on one of the posts; they certainly do make for strange bedfellows.
I guess if there's a fatwa on offer, you might be inclined to agree with whatever someone said. It would be good, though, to see Christians decrying insensitive and inappropriate messages directed at Muslims, Hindu's and Jews, or anyone for that matter; Jesus did teach that Christians are to love their enemy. It would be just as good to see others looking after Christians - I don't really see much leadership in any camp in the area of respectful free speech to be honest.
Posted by TAC, Monday, 13 May 2013 5:30:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy