|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: New catholic scandal | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Artemis Entreri  Suspended Member (Idle past 4256 days) Posts: 1194 From: Northern Virginia Joined: |
...but in order to force it to get rid of its rotten apples. Perhaps for starters an international arrest warrant can be issued on the grounds of incitement of violence against women? what kind of indictment can i bring against you for this nonsense thread? where are the EvC LEOs? how do we get rid of rotten threads like this one?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3741 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Jazzns writes: If it encourages violence towards others then it is considered to be Incitement and he would be arrested and tried for that crime. The point of the comparision was to elicit a further justification that the speech should be illegal. Can you justify it?The fact it is illegal is enough justification for arresting someone. And the fact that inciting violence is detrimental to society is enough justification for it being illegal. I totally support freedom of speech, but not at the cost of other's lives. Jazzns writes: This seems very vague. To any extent that someone should be imprisoned for something like that should be because they were orchestrating the riots BY their speech, not the speech itself.Could you provide a little more detail? Jazzns writes: Rioting (as opposed to protesting or marching) is illegal. Someone saying, "I am outraged! We should riot!" should be protected speech.Encouraging others to commit a crime is Incitement and is illegal (in the UK). Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
jazzns writes: Someone saying, "I am outraged! We should riot!" should be protected speech. It is. Our laws are pretty much the same as yours. I think you guys have the expression "you don't have the freedom to shout fire in a theatre" or some such, which was a similar situation at the time. (Although many people here thought the sentence was extremely harsh.)Life, don't talk to me about life. (Marvin the Paranoid Android)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3939 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
So if someone says, "I am outraged! We should riot!" and there is subsequently NO rioting, is that a crime? Should it be?
BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3939 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
I don't know enough about the particular case or how well it relates to the topic. I remember hearing that people were using social media to avoid police, etc. That is what I meant when I said there is a difference in using speech to orchestrate a riot.
I am sorry, again I think it is just the different sensibilities that shaped our cultures, I don't think it is worth the slight benefits to my physical safety to start throwing people into jail for thought crimes no matter how revolting what they think is. I do think that there ARE many in the US that would gladly make that trade though.BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
No, it not a crime. Unless it's part of a deliberate campaign to cause a riot.
Life, don't talk to me about life. (Marvin the Paranoid Android)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
frako Member (Idle past 333 days) Posts: 2932 From: slovenija Joined: |
Someone saying, "I am outraged! We should riot!" should be protected speech. Sure it should but when the ones listening to you rob my store blind i wil hold you responsible for inciting that sort of behavior. If no damage comes to me i have no problem with you screaming out anything you want. Your rights go to the point where they dont infringe on the rights of others. Christianity, One woman's lie about an affair that got seriously out of hand
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Modulous Member Posts: 7801 From: Manchester, UK Joined: |
Well, there are definitly some different sensibilities between the US and the UK regarding free speech. To any extent that someone should be imprisoned for something like that should be because they were orchestrating the riots BY their speech, not the speech itself. The facebook riot teenagers didn't just say 'we should riot' or something like that. That might well be protected speech. One of them set up a facebook event called 'Smash Down' and basically attempted to organize a riot by getting supporters to meet at a local McDonald's restaurant (I believe that the only people that showed up was the teenager himself and the police). Someone else did something similar, setting up a page called "Riot in the toon" (toon meaning 'town' generally referring to Newcastle where their accent causes 'town' to be pronounced 'toon') with an incitement for people to "kill some daftys" (a dafty, I believe, is someone who is daft). That person had previously lead a small civil disturbance of about 30 youths. There were some other similar cases too, I believe. From the limited information I have the priest said that it
quote: It's a google translation from Portuguese, but I think the meaning makes its way through well enough. So I wouldn't necessarily regard this as incitement in the same way the Facebook cases might have been, it's 'just' rape apologetics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3741 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Jazzns writes: Yes, it is a crime. So if someone says, "I am outraged! We should riot!" and there is subsequently NO rioting, is that a crime?The law is anticipatory in nature. Obviously, there is 'small print' in relation to the crime (details regarding intent and context) but that is what the prosecution service and the courts are there for. But, at its most basic, it is a crime to tell people to riot. If someone carries a concealed weapon but no-one is shot, is that a crime?If someone is in possession of explosives but no-one has been blown up, is that a crime? For similar reasons, encouraging crime is illegal. The law's aim is to prevent crime before it happens. Jazzns writes: As I said in my previous reply: "I totally support freedom of speech, but not at the cost of other's lives." Should it be? Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
I Predict A Riot lyrics
Songwriters: James Simon Rix;Charles Richard Wilson;Andrew Robert White;Nicholas James David Hodgson;Nicholas Matthew Baines Watching the people get lairyIt's not very pretty I tell thee Walking through town is quite scary It's not very sensible either A friend of a friend he got beaten He looked the wrong way at a policeman Would never of happened to Smeaton An old Leodensian I predict a riotI predict a riot I predict a riot I predict a riot I tried to get to my taxiThe man in a tracksuit attacks me He said that he saw it before me And wants to get things a bit gory Girls scrabble round with no clothes on To borrow a pound for a condom If it wasn't for chip fat they'd be frozen They're not very sensible I predict a riotI predict a riot I predict a riot I predict a riot And if there's anybody left in hereWho that doesn't want to be out there Watching the people get lairy It's not very pretty I tell thee Walking through town is quite scary It's not very sensible I predict a riotI predict a riot I predict a riot I predict a riot And if there's anybody left in hereWho that doesn't want to be out there I predict a riotI predict a riot I predict a riot I predict a riot So far no prosecution for incitement.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3741 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Tangle writes: I Predict A Riot lyricsSongwriters: James Simon Rix;Charles Richard Wilson;Andrew Robert White;Nicholas James David Hodgson;Nicholas Matthew Baines So far no prosecution for incitement. Au contraire...
quote:http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/...d_for_predicting_the_future quote: If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9512 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Panda writes: Au contraire... For clarity and for those readers lacking a sense of irony - this article is a spoof :-) UnNews:Kaiser Chiefs arrested for predicting the future Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3734 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
I think the problem with the Archbishop's sermon is that he has made the comments in his professional role. He is an authority who was teaching (or preaching) to a congregation he has authority over. As far as I can tell, what he was saying goes against what the Christian church teaches, not casting stones etc. Law enforcement agencies in his area may want to point out that nothing allows people to disregard the law with regard to rape. The RCC who he represents should be taking him to task over this, unless of course they think he has a point. If they do nothing they are demonstrating that they are aligning themselves with his statement. If that is what happens then the RCC will deserve all of the fall-out they get. Have they learned nothing from the various child abuse scandals?
In the UK there is a law against incitement to violence and giving people carte blanche to commit rape may come under this. Whether the law in Spain is the same I have no idea. Imagine a school teacher in a religious education class making this statement. If your child was in that class what would you do? I think the local authorities would be removing that teacher from it's payroll swiftly and issuing apologies to all concerned. While we may all yell about the right to free speech, does this archbishop have the right to "free teach"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1052 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined: |
I don't think you could make a case for this being incitement. We only have a limited part of what he said, but from my understanding he is not telling people it is okay to rape anyone. I'd expect that he still considers rape a sin (although, in his twisted, medieval morality it probably ranks as a lesser sin than having an abortion).
Rather, he is putting across that view that it would be churlish for a woman to complain about being raped after having an abortion. After all, she's made it clear that it's okay to abuse her body by doing so herself, God's will be damned. The argument is in some way akin to 'it's her own fault for wearing a short skirt'. It's not an enouragement to rape, but a declaration that 'she brought it on herself'. So, abhorrent, but not illegal. Incidentally, incitement is no longer a crime a Britain, having been replaced with a new, statutory offence of 'encouraging or assisting an offence'.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3741 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
caffeine writes: This is probably the most important aspect of this particular story. We only have a limited part of what he said...I would not want him solely convicted on what a newspaper has printed. caffeine writes: In a colloquial sense 'incitement' is illegal, but yes, the actual offense of 'Incitement' has been replaced with a different (but very similar) offence. Incidentally, incitement is no longer a crime a Britain, having been replaced with a new, statutory offence of 'encouraging or assisting an offence'.(tbh: I am having trouble telling them apart.) Edited by Panda, : No reason given.If I were you And I wish that I were you All the things I'd do To make myself turn blue
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024