Freedom of speech // Is the West falling behind?

[Anglicora]

yes... so what? There's no civilised country where you can say absolutely whatever you like.

banning people from putting rainbow halos on a picture of the virgin mary is acceptable censorship?

Yes, its part of the anti-hate speech laws.

[Vassenor]

Poland, this u?

Elżbieta, Anna and Joanna – whose last names have not been released – were arrested in 2019 and charged the next year after they stuck up posters of the Virgin Mary adorned with a rainbow halo, symbolic of the popular flag used to represent the LGBT+ community.

Its called hate speech laws get over it

And what part of the act constitutes hate speech?

[Anglicora]

Its called hate speech laws get over it

And what part of the act constitutes hate speech?

Disrespecting the Virgin Mary who is venerated by about 80% of the Polish population. This is consistent with ECHR rulings that say criticising religious figures is not free speech.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

banning people from putting rainbow halos on a picture of the virgin mary is acceptable censorship?

Yes, its part of the anti-hate speech laws.

what is hateful about drawing a virgin mary with a rainbow halo?

it isnt even hate speech. its just blasphemy, because the polish government is authoritarian fundie catholic and dosent like gays

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

And what part of the act constitutes hate speech?

Disrespecting the Virgin Mary who is venerated by about 80% of the Polish population. This is consistent with ECHR rulings that say criticising religious figures is not free speech.

i dont give a shit what the snobby bureaucrats at the echr say is free speech to be quite honest

banning criticism of any kind violates the right to free speech

[Anglicora]

Yes, its part of the anti-hate speech laws.

what is hateful about drawing a virgin mary with a rainbow halo?

it isnt even hate speech. its just blasphemy, because the polish government is authoritarian fundie catholic and dosent like gays

Yes and blasphemy falls under their hate speech laws.

[Anglicora]

Disrespecting the Virgin Mary who is venerated by about 80% of the Polish population. This is consistent with ECHR rulings that say criticising religious figures is not free speech.

i dont give a shit what the snobby bureaucrats at the echr say is free speech to be quite honest

banning criticism of any kind violates the right to free speech

Hate speech is not free speech.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

what is hateful about drawing a virgin mary with a rainbow halo?

it isnt even hate speech. its just blasphemy, because the polish government is authoritarian fundie catholic and dosent like gays

Yes and blasphemy falls under their hate speech laws.

you did not answer my question

the only thing that is hateful is the law because it treats being gay like its a bad thing

[Anglicora]

Yes and blasphemy falls under their hate speech laws.

you did not answer my question

the only thing that is hateful is the law because it treats being gay like its a bad thing

They are obviously not Catholics, they are just taking something Catholic and appropriating it for their politics. They are displaying the Virgin Mary in such a way because they wish to offend people. This is hate speech.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

you did not answer my question

the only thing that is hateful is the law because it treats being gay like its a bad thing

They are obviously not Catholics, they are just taking something Catholic and appropriating it for their politics. They are displaying the Virgin Mary in such a way because they wish to offend people. This is hate speech.

free speech includes the right to offend

otherwise it is not free speech

[Anglicora]

They are obviously not Catholics, they are just taking something Catholic and appropriating it for their politics. They are displaying the Virgin Mary in such a way because they wish to offend people. This is hate speech.

free speech includes the right to offend

otherwise it is not free speech

The ECHR disagrees.

[Kexholm Karelia]

Poland, this u?

Elżbieta, Anna and Joanna – whose last names have not been released – were arrested in 2019 and charged the next year after they stuck up posters of the Virgin Mary adorned with a rainbow halo, symbolic of the popular flag used to represent the LGBT+ community.

Its called hate speech laws get over it

Lol watch the same people who support “hate speech laws” to defend this

[Anglicora]

Its called hate speech laws get over it

Lol watch the same people who support “hate speech laws” to defend this

I support hate speech laws and I defend it.

[The Alma Mater]

free speech includes the right to offend

otherwise it is not free speech

The ECHR disagrees.

Nonsense. Otherwise all religions would be banned for being highly offensive.

[Vassenor]

And what part of the act constitutes hate speech?

Disrespecting the Virgin Mary who is venerated by about 80% of the Polish population. This is consistent with ECHR rulings that say criticising religious figures is not free speech.

Disrespecting her how?

[Vassenor]

Its called hate speech laws get over it

Lol watch the same people who support “hate speech laws” to defend this

Maybe you should explain what makes it actual hate speech then. Hate speech requires hate against a given group, after all.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

free speech includes the right to offend

otherwise it is not free speech

The ECHR disagrees.

i do not give a flying shit about what the echr thinks

court rulings have no impact on my opinion

actually explain your position rather than going 'oh bbut the echr disagrees with you and they are never wrong about anything '

[Galloism]

Lol watch the same people who support “hate speech laws” to defend this

Maybe you should explain what makes it actual hate speech then. Hate speech requires hate against a given group, after all.

Incidentally, you should take heed on why hate speech laws are so hazardous by observing this example.

This clearly should have been allowed, as you and I will both agree, but "hate speech" is largely defined by the majority in power at the time. That means if you allow hate speech laws, they WILL be used against you when the balance of power shifts against you. And eventually, the balance of power always shifts against you sooner or later, at least for a period of time.

Might want to consider the ramifications of that.

[Gravlen]

First of all, because the people claiming this is "anti-censorship" dooesn't understand what the term "censorship" means.
Second, because it's an illegitimate governmental interference in private business.
Third, when it's selective.

private businesses can do what they like?

No.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

private businesses can do what they like?

No.

then why cant the government restrict them

[Anglicora]

Disrespecting the Virgin Mary who is venerated by about 80% of the Polish population. This is consistent with ECHR rulings that say criticising religious figures is not free speech.

Disrespecting her how?

By portraying the Virgin Mary as being supportive of LGBT. You cannot square modern egalitarianism with Christianity. You are right that Christians are called to love homosexuals and non-believers but we are to correct erroneous beliefs and sinful behaviour. The Pride flag accepts homosexual behaviour which is intrinsically sinful in Christianity. Depicting the Mother of God as being tolerant of sin is blasphemous. It is disrespecting the Catholic (and Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran) religion.

"Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted."
Galatians 6:1

"If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother."
2 Thessalonians 3:14-15

"As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear."
1 Timothy 5:20

Nonsense. Otherwise all religions would be banned for being highly offensive.

No the ECHR literally ruled that freedom of speech does not protect insulting religious figures. It did not rule that "all religions would be banned for being highly offensive". So until you can show me an ECHR ruling that says what you believe to be the case, you are wrong.

[Gravlen]

Poland, this u?

Elżbieta, Anna and Joanna – whose last names have not been released – were arrested in 2019 and charged the next year after they stuck up posters of the Virgin Mary adorned with a rainbow halo, symbolic of the popular flag used to represent the LGBT+ community.

Its called hate speech laws get over it

That's not a hate speech law. Learn about it

[Vassenor]

Disrespecting her how?

By portraying the Virgin Mary as being supportive of LGBT. You cannot square modern egalitarianism with Christianity. You are right that Christians are called to love homosexuals and non-believers but we are to correct erroneous beliefs and sinful behaviour. The Pride flag accepts homosexual behaviour which is intrinsically sinful in Christianity. Depicting the Mother of God as being tolerant of sin is blasphemous. It is disrespecting the Catholic (and Orthodox, Anglican, Lutheran) religion.

"Brothers, if anyone is caught in any transgression, you who are spiritual should restore him in a spirit of gentleness. Keep watch on yourself, lest you too be tempted."
Galatians 6:1

"If anyone does not obey what we say in this letter, take note of that person, and have nothing to do with him, that he may be ashamed. Do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother."
2 Thessalonians 3:14-15

"As for those who persist in sin, rebuke them in the presence of all, so that the rest may stand in fear."
1 Timothy 5:20

Nonsense. Otherwise all religions would be banned for being highly offensive.

No the ECHR literally ruled that freedom of speech does not protect insulting religious figures. It did not rule that "all religions would be banned for being highly offensive". So until you can show me an ECHR ruling that says what you believe to be the case, you are wrong.

So it's hate speech because you personally disagree with it. I don't buy it.

[Echo Chamber Thought Police]

Maybe you should explain what makes it actual hate speech then. Hate speech requires hate against a given group, after all.

Incidentally, you should take heed on why hate speech laws are so hazardous by observing this example.

This clearly should have been allowed, as you and I will both agree, but "hate speech" is largely defined by the majority in power at the time. That means if you allow hate speech laws, they WILL be used against you when the balance of power shifts against you. And eventually, the balance of power always shifts against you sooner or later, at least for a period of time.

Might want to consider the ramifications of that.

the only restriction of speech laws should be against harassment, incitement, defamation and perjury

[Gravlen]

First of all, because the people claiming this is "anti-censorship" dooesn't understand what the term "censorship" means.
Second, because it's an illegitimate governmental interference in private business.
Third, when it's selective.

So when is government interference in private business legitimate?

It varies with the businesses, and their interests.