Pope advocates for limits to free speech
Pope Francis finally weighed in on the Charlie Hebdo murders and he compared the terrorist attack to a punch in the nose says Associated Press;
“If my good friend Dr. Gasparri says a curse word against my mother, he can expect a punch,” Francis said half-jokingly, throwing a mock punch his way. “It’s normal. You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others.”
Yeah, well, in my opinion, I think that your freedom of speech ends at the point where you insult bloggers, specifically me.
The Pope makes it sound like the murders of several Frenchmen were justified, some of the people murdered had nothing to do with Charlie Hebdo, even though he said that the murders weren’t justified;
His pretend punch aside, Francis by no means said the violent attack on Charlie Hebdo was justified. Quite the opposite: He said such horrific violence in God’s name couldn’t be justified and was an “aberration.” But he said a reaction of some sort was to be expected.
Nice dodge, Your Eminence. A reaction was justified, but not murder, no matter how much you explain it away. The liberals love this Pope, I’m sure the jihadists will, too. So, how many Catholics are going to show up at the TAH fortress to punch me in the nose or to burn down the building? I’m guessing none.
Category: Terror War
Well I’m Catholic, and I’m decidedly unimpressed with this Pope. I respect the position, but he’s a man, not a deity. And he just so happens to be wrong about a lot of stuff. When invokes Papal infallibility on something, I’ll listen. But when he expresses quasi-Marxist opinions I don’t have to respect them. You sure as heck haven’t offended me with anything you’ve said about him.
This pope is a pantywaist. What the Church needs is a Pope who will call evil for what it is. In other words, a John Paul II.
Pope Benedict (Ratzinger) was even better than John Paul. Having been expected to attend Hitler Youth meetings, Ratzingers parents allowed him to skip out after a time, never to return. He obviously knows Nazism when he sees it.
I want Pope Benedict XVI back!
Amen! Bring back the PanzerPope! Pope Benedict (AKA Cardinal Ratzinger) is an amazing man, who filed the shoes of John Paul II (AKA the greatest Pope since the Apostle Simon Peter himself) very well. They wouldn’t have stood for this crap.
How many Christians shot up museums in response to “Piss Christ” or the elephant-dung portrait of the Virgin Mary? How many Buddhists will go on a murderous rampage if someone mocks the Buddha’s fat belly? How may Jews will bomb a marketplace if someone draws a picture of Moses?
How many Catholics (or even Christians) went apeshit over Kevin Smith’s Dogma? Or rioted over The Last Temptation of Christ?
And, no, your Eminence, a punch in the nose is not the same as murdering a dozen people in cold blood.
Just to clarify, Catholics are Christians…
Depends on how you define Christianity, there are many Christian fundimentalist sects that do not veiw the Catholic Church as a truely Christian ‘faith’.
Speaking as a Jew (but not for all Jews, because we’re a kind of fractious bunch), here is my perceived probable Jewish reaction. “*raises eyebrows slowly* This you have time to do but not call your mother? Hmph. Goyim…”
Now that’s funny! I don’t care who ya are, that’s funny right there.
I’m not a fan of Pope Frank but if you wanted to call him every name in the book, I would be offended–but not prompted to violence. In fact, I’d get over it quickly. It is my understanding that Pope Frank is not conversant in English so, at best, those quotes are suspect.
Do I think that AP may have bent what the Pope said? Hell yes. Could what AP initially reported have been further bent by Yahoo? Again, hell yes.
Then again, does the fact that the Pope hails from the area of the world that embraced liberation theology color what he may think? Possibly.
Free speech as we understand it in the US is an alien concept to damn near every other nation, including the Vatican. It’s probably true that it is an alien concept everywhere but here. Even countries such as France and our 1/2 frog neighbor to the north claim it but there, as elsewhere, free speech EXCLUDES that speech which the government dictates is to be excluded.
I know this is a wild ass tangent, but when I was finally coerced against my will to buy health insurance via the obamacare website, I first had to set up an account with a password. Each and every time I created a password that included the word “obama”, the password was rejected for no reason. I was making up short phrases with “obama”, a capital letter, a number, etc. They all met the stated criteria yet they were all rejected. HE shall not be mocked I guess.
Many of my passwords for a variety of accounts are derogatory phrases that refer either to obama or the other idiot, Biden.
That, or some portion of the site was down (as usual).
Did your password include:
-between 8-20 characters (I think)
-upper case letter
-lower case letter
-number
-special character
You forgot to include a urine sample and the blood of your first-born child.
The old free speech example of yelling “fire” in a crowded theater comes to mind.
Yes, but in other countries, calling the movie theater manager a faggot will land you in jail. The closest we come to that is those idiotic hate crimes–which, at least for now, require an underling or accompanying violent crime to make stick.
Well said…another food for thought…Isn’t crime in itself, hate upon society, no matter who the victim maybe?
I wish the uniformed would stop using that “fire” statement when they don’t like what someone says….. sorry that sh*t was shut down in 1969…
Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark United States Supreme Court case based on the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Court held that government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is directed to inciting, and is likely to incite, imminent lawless action. Specifically, it struck down Ohio’s criminal syndicalism statute, because that statute broadly prohibited the mere advocacy of violence. In the process, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) was explicitly overruled, and doubt was cast on Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919), Abrams v. United States, 250 U.S. 616 (1919), Gitlow v. New York (1925), and Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494 (1951).
The proper quote is “yelling fire FALSELY in a crowded theater”.
So all those out there who want to bring that game, STFU & STFD.
Hey. There is a difference between law students and lawyers who know how to Shepardize cases and the rest of the world who hears an oft-repeated, famous phrase from a legal decision and points to it. From a commonsensical viewpoint, shouting fire in a crowded theater well illustrates that there are limitations on free speech. In that sense, it remains valuable.
Hey…what about “Fire for effect?”
This is one of my favorites. I will agree and disagree.
The reason why you can’t yell fire in a crowded theater has nothing to do with free speech and everything to do with safety. Just as if your free speech is intended to incite a riot, or to incite someone else to do harm because of it. At that point, it is no longer free speech. However, if you were to stand on a street corner and yell that Obama is a big poopyhead, you are free and clear to navigate.
The yelling fire scenario has been used far too often out of context for what it’s implication is.
There’s always someone “smarter” than the rest who thinks he’s going to be the last one into ovens.
Dropping a crucifix in a jar of urine is art, but drawing Moo-Ham-Mad is offensive to Islam.
But, remember, if you offend the religion of peace, you will be brutally murdered.
So, not so much on the whole “turn the other cheek” thing then?
You’ve hit the nail squarely on the head. I’m Christian, and NOBODY has access to ANY of my cheeks voluntarily.
always remember that when He advocated turning the other cheek, he never said more than one cheek or forbade stomping the attacker into jelly afterwards. You only get a free pass once…
I always thought Jesus meant to turn the other cheek while you’re winding up that haymaker on the asshole who struck you.
I always thought it sounded (in context) like, “Meet his fist with a hand-shattering headbutt.”
Remember that this is the same Jesus Christ of Nazareth who chased the moneychangers out of the Temple by beating them with a big-ass stick and leading a riot. The Lord was not and is not a pacifist. He just doesn’t favor the use of violence without just cause. And He’s pretty clear regarding what does and doesn’t constitute just cause.
Ha. My Pastor growing up used to say, “When struck, turn the other cheek. But Brother, that third lick is yours!”
“Turn the other cheek” does not mean “cheerfully accept evil.”
I’m not sure why people are not understanding what I’m trying to say here, but I’ll flesh it out: the Pope said here that a violent reaction to a minor provocation was understandable, Jesus said the opposite. In this case it’s the Pope who is “accepting evil” by excusing it. Jesus had thicker skin.
It’s good in theory, that’s for sure, but, in practice, the other guy will just keep swinging.
He is kowtawing to Islam. I read an article the other day that made the Muslims of Europe the victims! He is wants peace at any cost. Just a slight problem, when the Jihadists march into the Vatican and hang his ass, wonder if his last thought will be, “Damn, should have bent over more”.
I can understand based on recent church history and the coverups that were revealed how unflattering speech might be a problem for this fellow.
He’s like so many other cowards though, blame the victim for being a victim rather than stand up to the bullies and murderers.
This shit wouldn’t fly if he was blaming a rape victim for being raped because she was in a low cut short skirt and that shit shouldn’t fly here either…
Francis you are wrong dude, completely and totally wrong.
Being an obnoxious dick with your words and your images isn’t punishable by death in the west.
Piss christ was a disgusting display of unnecessary idiocy, but nobody died…some folks held some signs proclaiming their disgust but everybody went home at night and the shitty turd artist wasn’t killed on his bike…Francis that means that your people are tolerant, even when it’s uncomfortable….not an easy thing but the right thing. Be proud of that…
Muslim fucksticks are offended at every turn when their alleged mountain moving goat prophet is portrayed in any unfavorable way and they react by killing. That’s how muslims respond to everything when you actually stop and consider their “culture” they mutilate criminals, they kill adulterers, they beat women for showing more than their eyes and kill the husbands of women who don’t wear the appropriate circus tent when they are in public…modern islam is a disgusting perversion that needs to be ridiculed and confronted at every turn.
Fuck. Those. Guys…
Guess I’ll be next on the “it’s not really radical Islam” hit list for this one. Locked and loaded here.
https://www.facebook.com/UniversalFreePress/photos/a.145136705532577.25873.142868065759441/769679779744930/?type=1&theater
Maybe what he meant was: When you say some to or about insane people who are looking for things which they can claim are offensive then you can expect an irrational response. (This would apply to all special little snowflakes who apparently have too much time on their hand.) Insane people seldom have a mature sense of proportionality. It’s as if that characteristic itself might help define them as insane.
Man, you are really straining to be offended by this one. Advocating for limits on free speech? Could you be more sensationalist?
He’s saying if you insult a crazy group of radicals that are KNOWN TO REACT TO DRAWINGS WITH VIOLENCE, then it’s no shock when they do it. And then, when he clarifies himself, you accuse him of “covering.” Holy shit.
It sounds to me like all he’s saying is “You shouldn’t act surprised that these people attacked.”
NEVER listen to a guy wearin’ a dress.
I was not impressed by Pope Francis from the beginning. The media was fawning over him, he expressed tolerance of gayness, etc. Numerous red flags.
And with this latest idiotic commentary, I have very little regard for this person.
He needs to “man up,” and understand who it is that is waging war against the west, and the Christians that he ostensibly represents.
It pains me to say it, but I’m wishing the College of Cardinals picked somebody else. There is no justification for this. I take shit for being Catholic all the time, and I’ve never thrown a single punch for it. Why not? Because his greater predecessors, my own priest, my saintly Catholic mother, and the Holy Scripture all tell me not to! They also tell me that opposing by force those who would do such things is righteous in the eyes of God.
Pope Francis should go back to his seminary and ask for his money back.
+1
I don’t get Catholics. They pay a lot into this self serving institution and get no return on their investment. The pope ignores Christians being slaughtered and then is a fool enough to be used by Islamists. Now it’s excusing evil.
He’s the Obama of religious leaders.
It didn’t used to be that way, but the Church has climbed into bed with the world.
The last two Popes weren’t like this, and I’m thinking (and praying) that the next one won’t be, either. But for now we’re stuck with this guy.
In any case, the supposed Catholic belief in Papal Infallibility is widely overstated by others. It’s one of those very things that some people often use to hit me with the “You’re Catholic, so you believe [total bullshit based on misunderstanding and propaganda],” to which I generally reply along the lines of, “Really? I didn’t know I believe that! How amazing is it that I find out what I really believe from you telling me? Yeah, sorry, no. Fuck off.” The level of sarcasm and the use or augmentation of “fuck off” are dependent on how much of a condescending prick the person chooses to be.
We trust the Pope with leadership of the Church, but he’s still a man. The same can be said of the College of Cardinals when they elect a new Pope. Personally, I wish they’d picked Cardinal Dolan. Maybe next time.
An old saying, but I think it fits….
“Praise all the Gods, (or not), drink the wine and let the world be the world…”