October 24, 2009

Nonsense Passes for Opinion


It is illogical to say that Wilders "would have us all give up not only our right to practice our religions but also our ability to see value in cultures that do not adhere to his perspective." Criticizing religion is protected speech and does not deny free practice of religion. Opposing such speech is censorship.
Saying "the line between freedom of speech and hate speech intent on inciting fear of Islam and Muslims within the greater community was crossed." makes no sense. Hate speech is protected speech. How is Wilders' intent established? Denying hate speech is promoting censorship. Freedom from fear is not a right. People who give up their freedom for security deserve neither. Equating speech with suicide bombers, beheading nuns for criticizing religion shows how distorted the minds of liberal college students are these days. Passing a course in logic should be required for participation in public discourse.

http://www.columbiaspectator.com/2009/10/22/wild-wild-wilders

Wild, wild Wilders
Wilders’ speech, while beginning as a discussion of free discourse, soon devolved into little more than an open, vicious attack on Islam and Muslims, claiming that the ultimate goal of Islam is to conquer the world and forcibly impose itself on the conquered.
By Adel Elsohly
Columbia Spectator
Published Thursday 22 October 2009 05:26pm EST.

No comments: