Just a quick on. On this Larry King interview with Frank Zappa, he talks about how we shouldn't be putting warnings, and age restrictions on entertainment. Larry brings up that what about a song that is telling kids to go out and sniff cocaine. Zappa rebuts saying that anyone who wants to hear that is going to buy it, and is probably on cocaine anyway. The big thing is that the FCC, the government, and other regulatory body's dont give anyone any credit. They think we are all stupid, and we need to be told what we can and can't consume entertainment wise.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ec82Tcq3o
Tuesday, 18 March 2014
Sunday, 16 March 2014
More religious censorship
It's not uncommon to come across stories like this. On BBC 3's "Free Speech" on Wednesday the 12th of March, 2014, the question "When will it be ok for me to me muslim AND gay."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26576673
It was pulled because the show was being recorded in a Birmingham Mosque. The Mosque didn't want to have the question discussed because it had received security threats that they feared would have put their community in danger. The BBC have had to postpone the debate till when they are not filming it inside said Mosque. It isn't that the fact that the Mosque didn't want the topic discussed, I mean, I disagree with it, but what they do in their own place of worship is up to them. The religion pushing down on LGBT people is another debate all together.
The thing that strikes me here is the fear of free speech that the people who threatened the Mosque are. They are using fear of violent retaliation to make people say and do what they want. Which is very wrong. If we have to let you get on with it, you have to let us do the same.
This isn't a new debate, especially in the Muslim world. They have countlessly threatened people when they propose showing pictures of Muhammed. Famously there was the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoon controversy. It was an educational cartoon for a publication, which was met with very violent protest all over the world, just for an artists interpretation.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-26576673
It was pulled because the show was being recorded in a Birmingham Mosque. The Mosque didn't want to have the question discussed because it had received security threats that they feared would have put their community in danger. The BBC have had to postpone the debate till when they are not filming it inside said Mosque. It isn't that the fact that the Mosque didn't want the topic discussed, I mean, I disagree with it, but what they do in their own place of worship is up to them. The religion pushing down on LGBT people is another debate all together.
The thing that strikes me here is the fear of free speech that the people who threatened the Mosque are. They are using fear of violent retaliation to make people say and do what they want. Which is very wrong. If we have to let you get on with it, you have to let us do the same.
This isn't a new debate, especially in the Muslim world. They have countlessly threatened people when they propose showing pictures of Muhammed. Famously there was the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoon controversy. It was an educational cartoon for a publication, which was met with very violent protest all over the world, just for an artists interpretation.
Religious censorship - Stewart Lee.
I recently watched a documentary by Stewart Lee, about religious censorship on non religious people. His ig example was his own musical, "Jerry Springer: The Musical" Which featured heavy "blasphemy".
The Christians of the United Kingdom didn't take kindly to people having their say because it offended their belief, so they protested almost every show that as put on, and even managed to get it pulled off of the BBC when they wanted to air it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9EUe8jNr6o
"Religious protesters and lobbiests try to dictate what we can, and cannot say and do."
The main point of the programme, which I highly recommend, is that this large group of people who are getting offended are trying to stifle free speech, while still wanting to be able to speak about what they want. It seems more and more that secularists ain't allowed to speak their mind in case of offending people, while we have to let them put up posters, build giant churches, and be in our faces about it just because.
A good example of this was a group of secularists students who wanted to make a secular club so that they could feel included, and get together to talk about things. But they were denied, while there where many religious clubs currently in session.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVWItI2OjxQ&list=TLP_QQAksMxfXuOA6y9mSYtgwsEvgZjFtw
The Christians of the United Kingdom didn't take kindly to people having their say because it offended their belief, so they protested almost every show that as put on, and even managed to get it pulled off of the BBC when they wanted to air it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9EUe8jNr6o
"Religious protesters and lobbiests try to dictate what we can, and cannot say and do."
The main point of the programme, which I highly recommend, is that this large group of people who are getting offended are trying to stifle free speech, while still wanting to be able to speak about what they want. It seems more and more that secularists ain't allowed to speak their mind in case of offending people, while we have to let them put up posters, build giant churches, and be in our faces about it just because.
A good example of this was a group of secularists students who wanted to make a secular club so that they could feel included, and get together to talk about things. But they were denied, while there where many religious clubs currently in session.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVWItI2OjxQ&list=TLP_QQAksMxfXuOA6y9mSYtgwsEvgZjFtw
David Cameron's Porn Filter.
This year marks the arrival of the Porn Filter in the UK. This means that you will someday get a call from your ISP asking whether or not you want to be able to get to certain pages on the internet. The original intent for this was to "protect" people that didn't want to see hardcore pornography on their computer, but it seems to be going a lot more deeper than that. When they phone, they will ask you a number of questions on whether or not you want to opt in to being able to get access to certain sites. This will include Porn, information about drugs, gay sex, abortion, you name it. It seems that Cameron is hiding behind one agenda while secretly trying to achieve another. Now you could argue it isn't so terrible that they are asking us whether or not we want to see these things, and yes, some people may get embarrassed saying that they want to opt in to being able to see certain things, but it goes SO much more deep then that. It's about freedom. We shouldn't have to be asked whether or not we want to see certain things. If you don't want to see them, then don't see them. Don't inflict YOUR moral "High ground" on other people.
It's a way of controlling what we as a country are spending our time doing, and if we allow this to come into our houses and dictate what we can and can't do in the privacy of our own homes, it will pave the way for more radical censorship.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/03/david-cameron-internet-porn-filter-censorship-creep
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/21/uk-porn-filter-blocks-game-update-that-contained-sex
It's a way of controlling what we as a country are spending our time doing, and if we allow this to come into our houses and dictate what we can and can't do in the privacy of our own homes, it will pave the way for more radical censorship.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/03/david-cameron-internet-porn-filter-censorship-creep
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/jan/21/uk-porn-filter-blocks-game-update-that-contained-sex
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)