Pericles,
Gosh! here I was sitting in a quiet little backwater , having a civilised little chat with Foxy, when look who should roll up…

Sledging wasn’t something invented by Ponting and his team.
It’s been going on for ages, both on and off the field .

What’s new is it level of reporting (wicket microphones) .
And its new found significance. (‘racism’& all the machinations that follow on from that).

If we (as a society) cultivate a- too precious- attitude, whereby every second word is examined for vilification , it eventually comes back to bite us . And, we’ve been well and truly bitten on the rear end by it on the cricket field, and, a growing number of other fields.

PS: I was wondering if part of our peace deal in cricket included us throwing (well, as good as ) the third cricket test (?)

Good Morning Horus,

You have had quite an effect on me. I couldn't sleep last night. I kept tossing and turning and mumbling, "Free speech..." and thinking,
"Why can't he see the point I'm trying to make?" So I'm going to try one last time...

To me, "Freedom of Speech" means that we're free, within bounds of the law, to say or write what we think privately of publicly, about the Government, or about any topic. But, the intention must be constructive, not to do harm. And that was the point I was trying to make.

There are laws to protect a person's good name and integrity against false information. There are laws against saying or writing things to incite hatred against others because of their culture, ethnicity, or background. Freedom of speech is not an excuse to harm others.

Everyone laughs at ethnic jokes, at lampooning certain "icons." It depends on how far these things are taken.
I think most of us would find an image of a "fornicating Christ" offensive. Or caricatures of Jews(sick). Again, I repeat... Freedom of
Speech is not an excuse to harm others.

Jes' rolled up.

Wot' Foxy said.

"Hate Speech-Are Human Rights groups the forerunner to ORWELLIAN social control ?"

................come to think of it...?;-look at the title. The first two words.

"HATE speech". Thanks for the clear acknowledgment BOZO.

You want a free reign on that do you? OF COURSE YOU DO!!

Hallelujah Praise the Lord and Pass the Ammunition!

Dear Foxy,
I apologise for my contribution to your sleepless nights–treat it as a friendly chat.
( why was it so absolutely necessary that I come around to your point of view on this issue?)

The cartoons were not illegal under existing Danish or Aust laws.
They weren’t even out of the ordinary ( by subject matter, or artistically)

And, as TRTL so succinctly pointed out in an earlier post , would have likely been quickly passed-over if a few firebrands hadn’t staged a beat-up.

If you tighten-up the laws to protect Muslim sensitivities, you’d ( being fair minded) no doubt want to do the same for every other group – including white settlers(!)

Unless of course, you favoured that (innovative) two-tiered system of Sharia law, advocated by the anti-cartoonists, whereby Muslims have all rights over the rest of us second class, non-Muslim, dhimmi.

Important point: You seem sold on the proposition that if it’s true, its Ok. Well, many of the religious ‘histories’ & CVs of the Middle East have been fabricated.
Official media only carry the approved Mickey Mouse versions . The anti-cartoon brigade would find any attempts to air the truth, equally as unpalatable.

Had we given-in on the cartoon issue it would not have been the end of anything.
There are dozens of other potential provocations:
- support for Israel in any way shape of form,
- giving sanctuary to any Rushdie or the like
- aid for the Sudanese rebel south .
it would have only whetted their appetites

( why, was it so absolutely necessary that I come around to your point of view on this issue ?)

Funny how it's not hate-speech for an Indian to call one of our cricketers a 'monkey'. Oh, of course, only a White can be guilty of hate-speech.