UN chief says anti-Islam film 'disgraceful, shameless'
...Calling freedom of expression and assembly "inalienable" rights, Mr Ban said on Wednesday that they "must be guaranteed and protected when they are used for common justice, common purpose."
"When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others' values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way," Mr Ban added, speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters in New York...
The real shameless disgrace here—aside from the Islamic campaign of murder and destruction that has now spread to at least 20 countries as a result of the anti-Islam film—is this highlighted travesty of reason on the part of the UN chief. Curtailing the freedom of expression to safeguard against emotional offense is nothing short of eviscerating the core of the principle itself.
The freedom of expression concerns the right of filmmakers to produce an offensive film as much as it concerns the right of viewers to witness it. The further out an opinion rests on the fringe of consensus, the more important its protection becomes. If we are going to constrain our freedom of expression from breaching into areas of offense, then we must designate one or more human beings to define and outline those areas of censorship. This is to say that we must endow someone or some group with the authority to control what we can say or write and, by direct consequence, what we can hear or read.
I don't know about you, but I am at a loss for providing nominees.
.
...Calling freedom of expression and assembly "inalienable" rights, Mr Ban said on Wednesday that they "must be guaranteed and protected when they are used for common justice, common purpose."
"When some people use this freedom of expression to provoke or humiliate some others' values and beliefs, then this cannot be protected in such a way," Mr Ban added, speaking to reporters at the UN headquarters in New York...
The real shameless disgrace here—aside from the Islamic campaign of murder and destruction that has now spread to at least 20 countries as a result of the anti-Islam film—is this highlighted travesty of reason on the part of the UN chief. Curtailing the freedom of expression to safeguard against emotional offense is nothing short of eviscerating the core of the principle itself.
The freedom of expression concerns the right of filmmakers to produce an offensive film as much as it concerns the right of viewers to witness it. The further out an opinion rests on the fringe of consensus, the more important its protection becomes. If we are going to constrain our freedom of expression from breaching into areas of offense, then we must designate one or more human beings to define and outline those areas of censorship. This is to say that we must endow someone or some group with the authority to control what we can say or write and, by direct consequence, what we can hear or read.
I don't know about you, but I am at a loss for providing nominees.
.
