Apparently newspaper editors in the UK
agree with the Pope.

The following link explains:

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/jan11/charlie-hebdo-cartoons-uk-press-publish

"Freedom is and should always be tempered by responsibility.
Drawing the line between the two is difficult at the best
of times..."

"Editorial decisions have always been guided, not just by
legal restrictions but by what is fair and tolerable
within British society."

Apparently what an editor needs to ask himself is -
"Is it right for me to publish this material?"

The UK editors have decided not to re-publish the Charlie
Hebdo cartoons. The explanation given in part is:

"It should be seen instead that editors as they do daily
take into account the effects of what they publish.
In essence they have to ask themselves if they should
gratuitously insult a religion and its adherents,
because a small group of fanatics had misused its
teachings in order to justify murder."

"...indeed, would publication of the offending cartoons
serve only to provoke others to take reactionary action, or
at the very least encourage yet more alienation of Muslims
in British society."

There's more on the given link.

Hi Foxy,

Freedom of expression suggests the freedom to criticise, even offend or insult what somebody believes. Nobody's belief system is somehow immune. I don't think religion has in any privilege on that score. And I don't think Islam has any extra-special privilege over other religions. Ergo ......

As an atheist, I admire the current Pope's stand on many social issues, but I don't have to go along with everything he suggests.

When the religion of peace ever actually becomes a religion of peace, i.e. say, a whole month without an atrocity, or better still, no atrocities at all [we can but hope], then we can welcome its adherents to the modern world of discussion, dispute, argument and criticism, and yes, the world of offence and insult as well.

Clearly many Muslims hold extremely firm views of many issues, views with which most of us fundamentally disagree. Should we keep silent ? Should we allow FGM, child marriage, polygamy, gender inequality, etc., merely because to criticise those matters might offend someone ? Those views offend me, I find them disgusting and primitive, and like you and everyone else who may think so, we share the right, even the duty to our fellow human beings who are unfortunate enough to be female and trapped inside that ghastly mind-set, to say so.

We don't have to be bound to dark and ignorant prejudices just because somebody else is, and we don't have to ignore the plight of people trapped by those backward notions.

This is going to be a very long ideological struggle, and it is not clear whether respect for human equality, decency and reason will eventually prevail over backwardness and bigotry.

Joe

Good stuff Joe --but i think is largely wasted on Foxy. Until she sees it reported on New Matilda or The Conversation she wont be believing any of it.

Good heavens, SPQR, are you suggesting that someone can be (I dare not write it) bigoted, that they won't change their mind no matter what evidence you present to them ?

Joe

Dear Joe (Loudmouth),

Don't pay any attention to SPQR - he's simply
stirring. He enjoys it.

Personally - I happen to fully agree with your last post.
However, I felt it important to broaden the discussion
and when I came across the link from The Guardian and
what the UK editors were doing - I felt it might add
another perspective to the discussion.

BTW: My views have never been set in concrete - I
re-think about things as new evidence is presented. It's
for that reason that I appreciate posters like Constance
who go to the trouble of doing the research. We don't
always agree - but I respect her opinion.

Foxy,

How do you think Sweden once being one of the most peaceful countries on earth with low crime to become the country with the 2nd highest rape record in the world? Don’t forget it is steeped in Socialism with politically correct madness.

Go on, do it now, before its too late. Expand your mind.