I'm honestly appaled that any cizilized nation anywhere would charge someone as a criminal for speaking. It isn't the govenments job to make sure we all hold hands and play nice, that's a load of shit. What really bothers me about this though is the fact that according to the article, the crime with which he is charged is "public insults based on origin, religious affiliation, race or ethnicity". He's not being punished for being an asshole. He's not being punished for pissing people off. He's being punished for his way of thinking. If he'd gone out and called a white guy every 4 letter word in the book, not a single **** would've be given that day. When it happens to a minority, now we've got a crime on our hands? Really? So, minorites have the 'right' to not ever have anybody call them names, but nobody else does? That sounds oddly like racism to me. As Sasquatch pointed out, equality means equality. Extra protection from the law and additional rights not given to anyone other than minorities is not equality. Either it's a crime to call everybody names, or it's not a crime to anybody names. Race has no place in the law, nobody is entitled to any more legal protection than anybody else, wronging one person is no worse than wronging any other. The motive for a crime shouldn't have anything to do with its consequences.
People have a right to be wrong (or at least disagreed with, don't wanna get into an argument about what is and isn't right or wrong). It's not the governments job to make sure we all agree with each other and share nice, popular tolerant opinions (which are ironically are usually only tolerant of those who agree with it... sounds like any other kind of intolerance to me). Thought policing is the worst of all forms of oppression. Freedom is the freedom to say 2+2=4, if that is granted, all else follows. This sounds to me just like any other case of those in power saying that two and two make five, and anyone who doesn't agree is wrong.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks