Does free speech mean to abuse peoples'feelings and arouse hatred among nations? show your idea on Mohamad ?
106771
Tell me something,since you seem to care about peoples rights,were you this concerned when muslim zealots desecrated Buthist statues,blew them up with dynamite and machineguns,or do you believe that only muslim religion has rights.
127877
Freedom of speech also grants you the right to insult as sad as that may be to some who do not understand those freedoms.  You can not lie about a person speaking, or in written form (slander or libel), in a fashion that will actually cost that person economically due to loss of revenue or actual losses.  Then you may be taken to court and have a judgement placed against you  and have to pay damages to the injured party.  The problem with this comes from different cultures and what one considers freedom of speech the other considers outright insult.  Which has happened and people are being killed over it in protests and most of the people being killed are the ones protesting about being insulted.  This make no sense from either culture and we should all pray for peace and understanding between our people's.
528391
Although I'm a firm believer in freedom of speech I find it quite disturbing that people don't have a problem with using this word in front of anybody, at any time.\nIt negates any sign of intelligence that you would not find it in your vocabulary to communicate disgust, anger and other emotions without resorting to a word that literally means fornicate or sexual intercourse. Aren't our brains a little more evolved than that?\nIf you want to use it, you have the right, but other people have the right NOT to hear it everywhere!
527535
It is called freedom of speech, the same thing you are practically using now. No. They aren't jealous, but remember that each and everyone that hates the US have a different excuse, based on their upbringing or political belief. It is hard to just quantify them wiht a single label.
198397
With this ever changin and growing world our freedoms are being greatly compromised for the good of the many. Yes this is free speach and I believe people should have the right to do so, if I wanted to insult someone I believe I have the right to do so, even if it is very distasteful. \nIt should be my choice to decide what I say and how I say it, and people should be sensible enough to respect each others beliefs, but it is the few that are causing a problem as usual.
79835
"Freedom of Expression" is a concept that means that someone has the right to express views-- no matter how unpopular-- without fear of being persecuted or punished for what he has said. In a strictly political sense, freedom of speech is meant to protect the rights of people who have a grievance against the government or have unpopular views in general. It was created because in the past, Western leaders [or religious organizations] had the practice of condemning, imprisoning, or killing people who expressed views that they didn't like. (For example, Honore Daumier [a 19th century French cartoonist] was imprisoned for printing cartoons that the French government found offensive.) \n\nSo Freedom of Expression is a concept meant to protect the rights of people who have unpopular views, especially if it's against the government or other authorities with immense power. They cannot be imprisoned or persecuted or exiled. It is a good concept. The problem, however, is that this concept has now been corrupted by many people, who feel that Freedom of Expression means being as insensitive and rude as you feel like, and not expect to get a negative reaction for it. It has also become a crutch [lazy] response when someone does something that creates controversy and doesn't really address the issue head on. I don't know much about this Danish cartoon affair, but this may have happened in this case.
83962
I've already commented on this countless times, both on and offline, and I am completely sick and tired of this whole ludicrous situation. Having said that, here goes...\n\nAny reasonable person with an open mind and a rudimentary understanding and appreciation of freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of the press, et al KNOWS that the Danish newspaper was 100% within their rights to publish those caricatures of Mohammad. \n\nAs evidenced by some of the responses here (most notably the one from Pakistan above), the Muslims who are rioting in the streets, making death threats, boycotting Danish products, etc. are completely unreasonable. They cannot see beyond their own personal biases (Mohammad may be #1 with you, mate, but he's not #1 with me and 5-6 billion others who are sharing this planet with you) and have no conception of tolerance -- to say nothing of free speech.\n\nThe Danes are a free and tolerant people allowing their media to express itself freely, irrespective of whether or not the majority of Danes agree with what is printed. Any civilized country handles such matters in much the same way. We're talking about political CARTOONS, for Godsake!\n\nBut the fanatical Muslim fundamentalists and their terrorist host countries (Iran, Syria, et al), on the other hand, have absolutely no understanding of what it means to have free thought, free expression and tolerance for the views and beliefs of others. Whatever the perceived slight or "offense," these people can be counted on to react with excessive outrage and extreme violence (erm, what is that telling us about their religion, btw?). \n\nNothing short of the rest of the world converting to Islam tomorrow will appease these villains. So you know what? I couldn't care less about appeasing or even trying to understand them anymore. Fuck 'em!\n\nGod bless Denmark and Freedom!
1146735
Ah yes the right to free speech. Note it is freedom OF speech - not freedom FROM speech.\n\nWelcome to America!
939782
Freedom of speech and exercising the vote gives anyone the right to complain.  If people don't like their political situation - in a free and democratic society - it is their right and obligation to speak out...working toward change and improvement.  \n\nFreedom of speech is now a convenient term...used only when it is good for those who use it.  Sad...as it is the basis of democracy.  It is what the troops are fighting for in Iraq.
602193
Yes. It's a free place, isn't it? People start wars over religion. It's better to be friendly.
180919
The line is drawn between free speech and hate speech.\nThis is a theory developed by freedom of expression supporters which is ment to define what goes and what doesn't.\n\nDefinition varies and many disagree on what goes where (eg: most people would see the Holocaust matter brought under free speech, on certain conditions, while others still want to keep the taboo).\n\nGenerally speaking, free speech embraces things that aren't particulartly aimed at hurting or insulting others and are supported by accepted arguments, facts and proof.\nOn the other hand hate speech are opinions gratuituously spilled just to provoke and insult.\n\nThis doesn't help much and the debate goes on.\nStill most people see the cartoon deal under hate speech because it's not sustainable by arguments (there are many ways to make fun of Islam without resorting to attacking religious principles of non-graphical depiction).\n\nA more fierce debate goes around the Holocaust, where free-speech supporters say that discussions around the events and the number of victims should be allowed and proof needs to be gathered to support supporters and deniers (if the supporters are right, why do they need a law to hide behind if they have strong arguments).
989738
I think true free speech is limitless, but if you say something false that incriminates or otherwise harms others, the fact that you harmed someone would be a violation of law.
218348
No. Having a free society requires us to occasionally put up with the fact that other people who have repugnant opinions are just as entitled to speak their mind as we are. What we don't have to do is take the repugnance itself lying down. It's fine to challenege someone's "stupid racist remarks" whenever they're made, whether "on TV" or elsewhere, and we/you should whenever we see it. Free speech is not the problem, letting racists go unchallenged is.
869836
Your other respondents have already given you the basic answer.  Where your expression creates an imminent danger to other citizens, then that expression is not allowed.  Some words are considered too inflammatory for public expression, or "fighting words".  You cannot express yourself to the point of provoking others to violence or panic where public safety is jeopardized.  That is common sense and our laws were written with a common sense public in mind.  In other words, most of us know what is right and what is wrong.  We know better than to incite a riot with lying words in a polarized crowd for instance.  Because some people are too dense to use common sense, we have had to verbalize and memorialize some of those restrictions.  Call it censorship if you wish but it is really stating certain restrictions on the freedom of expression that most of us already clearly understand.
140429
it will only take away our freedom of speech and freedom of expression if we allow it to.  There should be and cannot be EXTERNAL standards placed upon our ability to preserve our rights as free Americans to express ourselves --> even if the 'offended' party disagrees with that.\n\nThere is definitely another reason for this sudden outbreak of violence.  The cartoon is FIVE MONTHS OLD.
868651
First of all, there are rights and responsibilities. For every right you enjoy (freedom of speech) there are responsibilities (respecting other people's rights.) Think of it this way: everyone has the right to feel safe and to not be slandered. If you were the Prime Minister, and someone goes up to you and calls you an "idiotic fool", would that not anger you? Freedom of speech only lasts if you are respectful of the rights of others. You will be punished if you infringe on everyone else's rights, so I guess freedom is limited. \n\nIn the end, it depends on your definition of freedom. I think of freedom as more of a privilege. But if you see freedom as being able to do anything you wish, then to you there would be no true freedom.
167971
1) Muslims are angry that while any criticism/joking about jews is often labeled anti-Semitic and quickly censored (it's illegal to question any aspect of the Holocaust in many European countries), the same countries are defending these cartoons as "freedom of speech".\n\n2) Many Muslims incorrectly believe that the Danish press, like theirs, is controlled by the state. Therefore, they see the cartoons as being sponsored and encouraged by the Danish government.\n\nPersonally, I disagree with them, and believe that \nAs for Christian outrage, look what NBC did with Will & Grace (Cruci-fixin), as well as how "The Book of Daniel" got axed.\n\nWe need to educate these people about the concepts of freedom, that people may say stuff you don't like, that's no reason to burn stuff.