[kjo]

Actually, the right to offend is under constant attack, mostly from liberals. PC speech codes, "hate" crimes, university rules restricting free speech are all examples of the Left restricting the right to offend.

We have been on this road for a generation or more. It should not be a surprise that most of the MSM has backed off from publishing the rather harmless cartoons in question.

We lose our freedom, a little at a time.

[mewzilla]

Whether it was wise to exercise that right, is another matter.

Now what does that mean? What should wisdom have to do with it? I mean wisdom would be nice, but when has the lack of it ever stopped the press? And how about the wisdom of publishing all the stuff that's blasphemous to Christians? Or doesn't wisdom need to come into it when dealing with folks who'll turn the other cheek?

[FeeinTennessee]

Christians would not threaten violence against someone who bashed Jesus. But we would certainly state our displeasure over it.

Now with Muslims...who are now burning the Danish embassy, and threatening violence against anyone who would bash Islam or their prophet, they don't factor in the fact that newspapers or any other media have the freedom in their own countries to print whatever they want. They can disagree to civily, but apparently threatening violence against people is more convenient.

[dirtboy]

Whether it was wise to exercise that right, is another matter.

When you do not defend rights, even if you do not agree with how the rights were exercised, you lose them by proxy.

[Lurker]

Hang on a sec.

L

[Bob]

While most of those living in Western, secular, democratic societies have long since moved away from the days when blasphemy invited stoning, some have not.

There, I fixed it.

[Lurker]

Hey Canada,

Here's what the islamonazis think about freedom:

They want the freedom to cut your frigging empty heads off.,

L

[FierceDraka]

What's striking to me is the reaction from liberals on some of the other forums I frequent.

From Fark.com: "Am I the only liberal here who thinks 'nuke-and-pave' is a good idea?"

This was followed up by many responses from other liberals who agreed with the poster's statement.

What's really ironic is that the liberals have been screaming about OUR reaction to the endless murders committed by Islamic animals.

But when the Moozies get their panties in a wad over friggin' CARTOONS, that's when the liberals start wanting to literally go nuclear.

"Muslims kill thousands and thousands of people all over the world? No problem - it's OUR fault that they hate us! But if they go after our cartoons, I say nuke 'em!"

Well, what ever it takes to get them to wake up and get on board, I guess.

[Tzimisce]

Ban it in the name of tolerance!

[Peach]

For those who were disheartened to hear the State Department's official position regarding the Islamic cartoon matter, the press has misrepresented their official position (no surprise).

The statement in its entirety can be read here:

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1571906/posts

[kingu]

They bait Muslims and risk inciting hatred by equating Islam with terror and evil.

So they print a few cartoons and what happens? Violence around the world? That's not baiting them, that's exposing them. The Toronto Star is uncomfortable about that...

They would likely withstand a legal challenge here, because the courts wisely give wide latitude to political commentary. Papers are free to air a variety of opinion.

Just not this opinion because you're afraid of what this religion would do to your offices. You're afraid that they'll be exposed for being terrorists and evil.

Even so, some of the cartoons are gratuitously offensive.

That's a right that the Toronto Star reserves for conservatives and Christian religions. Because they generally don't go flying planes into buildings, or walk into your lobby and spontaneously explode.

The Star would not have published them, although we affirm our right to do so.

Typical liberal methodology here - we would do it, we have the right to do it, and some might even suggest we have the responsibility to do it, but we're chicken droppings and will hide behind our supposed moral superiority. If I walked into those offices right now and paid for an ad with those cartoons on it, you'd kick me out faster than the Democrat party throws reason out the window. And likely call the cops as well. The whole editorial was about freedom of speech. The way it came out is freedom of accepted speech, and the bunch at Toronto Star intend to determine what is, and what isn't, accepted.

[M203M4]

Those living in Western, secular, democratic societies have long since moved away from the days when blasphemy invited stoning.

Amen.

[popdonnelly]

I can understand people taking offense at these cartoons. But the violent response is totally out of line with the offense. And at some point, freedom of speech has to be protected from coercion.

[Dark Skies]

What is astonishing to me is that muslims think they have the right to dictate to other of different countries and religions, what can and cannot be done, said, graphically depicted, or portrayed in film.

While the administration is busy exporting democracy to the middle east, muslims are busy exporting sharia to the west (and based on the response of the U.S. State Department and Jack Straw in the U.K., it looks as though the muslims are winning).

[martin_fierro]

Islam is long overdue for a Reformation.

[spanalot]

Does anyone think that all bashing of any religion is wrong?

Having said that, to react to such offense with murder shows spiritual bankruptcy and forfeits the right to be called religious.

[fanfan]

Even so, some of the cartoons are gratuitously offensive. The Star would not have published them, although we affirm our right to do so.

Here we have the Red Star showing it's true colors.

Canada Ping!

Please FReepmail me to get on or off this Canada ping list.

[I see my hands]

I'd like to see a gallery of cartoons from the Arab press that have mocked 9/11. And then I would like to..

[PzLdr]

They would not have published them, but reaffirm their right to do so? Typical leftist drivel. Did they publish photos of "Piss Christ" or the Virgin Mary in elephant dung? If they did, more proof lefties are cowards.

[melt]

"Free, even to offend"

Pardon me, while I exercise my right to be in'sultan'.