Escaped to Texas: Charlie Hebdo

The inaugural Muhammad Art Exhibit and Contest hosted by Pamela Geller’s American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI) is sold out and ready for Sunday evening’s festivities.

The event is billed as an expression of free speech said to be under attack from radical Islamic groups like those who attacked Charlie Hebdo in January. The exhibit will be held on Sunday, May 3, at the Curtis Culwell Center, 5-7 p.m., in the Dallas suburb of Garland, Texas.

Garland, Texas: Muhammad Art Exhibit (and contest?)

-
OPINIONS:

1. This Does NOT Represent Texas ... as Evidenced By:

Pamela Geller Residence - New York City

AFDI - (American Freedom Defense Initiative)

AND

2. Texans Should Protest This

( and/or against any-n-all ... 'juvenile'-demonstrations. )
.

a reply to: FarleyWayne

Texas doesn't support exercising free speech?

Texans should show they don't support free speech by exercising their freedom of speech against this?

She sure has a lot of repressed anger for being a senior citizen.

A sold out gathering of Islamophobes their queen Geller should be so happy. Sorry but only a total idiot thinks hate speech is free speech. If someone wants to do something that makes the extremist mad fine go ahead but if you do something that is offensive to the religion as a whole then you are nothing but a hatemonger.

a reply to: Lysergic

Those who skew so far to right, or left, usually do I think.

a reply to: buster2010

Mohammed drawings - hate speech.

Pope jokes - hilarious.

Sounds about right.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I think this so-called 'exhibit' goes way beyond ...

'Freedom of Speech'.

I think it's another block-stacking for ...

more religious/racial-conflicts/riots/turmoil.

( or very non-constructive/non-productive )
.

I hope it goes away quietly and no one protests...
that's the opposite of what she and her group are seeking.

a reply to: FarleyWayne

Perhaps Texans should feel proud about this?

They obviously feel they'd be safer in Texas than anywhere else in the world...if i were a Texan, i'd chalk that up as something to feel good about.

a reply to: buster2010

All speech is free speech. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can strip that right from anyone. Isn't it relative? If I say your a hatemonger does that make me right? No. But is it my right to voice my opinion. Absolutely. Constitutionally protected thank you. So whether or not you like what I'm saying you can do nothing to stop it. Once words become actions then and only then is it punishable. Regardless of whether you like the content. Slandering someone else for their beliefs is just as bad as a hatemonger you are the thing you despise, look in the mirror.

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: buster2010

Mohammed drawings - hate speech.

Pope jokes - hilarious.

Sounds about right.

So what part of "if you do something that is offensive to a religion as a whole" was too hard for you to understand?

a reply to: FarleyWayne

What litmus test for free speech does it not pass?

Is it stupid and islamaphobic? Yea, that's pretty easy to see. But I don't see how it's legally not a free speech thing. Not in your opinion or mine, but legally.

a reply to: 5thNovember

All speech is free speech.

Wrong. If it were then there wouldn't be laws against slander.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean you can strip that right from anyone.

New to America huh? Many laws have been passed just because someone didn't like something.

But is it my right to voice my opinion.

Yes and it is also your right to face the consequences from voicing your opinion.

Once words become actions then and only then is it punishable.

Wrong again look into all the slander lawsuits that have taken place. No actions were ever taken but people were still punished.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: buster2010

Mohammed drawings - hate speech.

Pope jokes - hilarious.

Sounds about right.

So what part of "if you do something that is offensive to a religion as a whole" was too hard for you to understand?

No ones religion controls me. That is the point.

If I believed drawing Mohamed was offensive and did it anyway. That would be offensive.

a reply to: Shamrock6

I know it's 'legal' ...

but it can be protested too.

( i.e. i 'protest'-against 'this exhibit' )
.

I don't think we can forget that the purpose of some art is to provoke. And while I can certainly see that this exhibit can be seen by many as basically trolling in an attempt to provoke a reaction from those who find this type of display offensive, there's also an interesting aspect to this to see what these artists vision is of Muhammad.

With regards to the free speech aspect of it, of course this is protected as it should be. Sometimes the expressions we most despise the most are the ones we have to spend the most energy to protect....otherwise they will eventually come to attack the speeches and displays you make towards your own beliefs and there will be nobody there to help defend you.

a reply to: Shamrock6

My personal opinion is about the same as yours it seems.

Either a culture aspires to freedom of expression and of speech or they don't.

With such an aspiration, we are absolutely, 100% guaranteeing that there will be people, domestic or foreign who WILL most certainly be offended at both expressions and speech coming from those who value their freedoms.

The key is to self moderate if you are particularly sensitive to other people's sensibilities, or don't give a hoot if people like or dislike what you have to say or what you do...that's the freedom aspect, and it's what makes our culture what it is.

Fortunately, the majority of people who aspire to freedom do moderate their speech and actions according to their company or audience..although some do not..and that is absolutely fine, it's freedom.

Being rude and insensitive is part of the basic rights enshrined in our freedoms, just as it is other peoples freedom to be offended and insulted by that which we say or do.

Bottom line, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: buster2010

Mohammed drawings - hate speech.

Pope jokes - hilarious.

Sounds about right.

So what part of "if you do something that is offensive to a religion as a whole" was too hard for you to understand?

The part where I've yet to see anybody on ATS call somebody a hatemonger for making catholic priest jokes

originally posted by: Shamrock6

originally posted by: buster2010

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: buster2010

Mohammed drawings - hate speech.

Pope jokes - hilarious.

Sounds about right.

So what part of "if you do something that is offensive to a religion as a whole" was too hard for you to understand?

The part where I've yet to see anybody on ATS call somebody a hatemonger for making catholic priest jokes

Which reminds me...what did the Pope say to the kneeling Choirboy...?

On second thoughts, better not. (self moderation...it works!)

a reply to: FarleyWayne

Free speech doesn't mean without consequence.

Short of attacking a news office, of course.

In light of this, where does free speech end, and offensive speech begin?