A recent story out in the news today details the case of Fitna, a controversial movie made by Geert Wilders that hasn't even been released yet, and American company Network Solutions' decision to suspend his website. Network Solutions is also known for its hosting of terrorist group Hizbollah's website.
I have a great many problems with this decision.
For starters, I think any "preemptive strike" of a website hosting company against a site it host is pretty ridiculous, especially based off of the complaints of another group. If the company honestly has a big problem with what's being hosted, that material should be reviewed extensively before it is banned.
Even as an advocate of free speech, I understand why a company would not want to have certain sites associated with its name. However, that same standard should be applied evenly across the board. And you really really can't say you're against all words that might be misconstrued as "hate speech" if you register freakin hizbollah.org, I mean, this group spreads anti-Semitic crap all the time, including the ridiculous rumor that Jews are deliberately spreading AIDS. They also spoke against the 90's movie "Independence Day," which showed a Jewish character joining with others to save the world from an alien invasion, calling it, "''propaganda for the so-called genius of the Jews and their alleged concern for humanity." I'm not even going to dignify that idiocy with a response.
Secondly, I'm not exactly certain why so many people have a problem with this film. Fitna, which means "discord" in Arabic, supposedly is about 15 minutes long. This is how it is described in another article.
"Geert Wilders' film, which supposedly will be shown on a split screen, with verses and suras from the Koran on one side and examples of Sharia law being carried out on the other, including a beheading and a stoning"
Look at that. It says straight out itself, examples of Sharia law being carried out.
In addition, Wikipedia (not reliable, I know, but sometimes an accurate gauge for what people are thinking) says, "Wilders has said the 15-minute film will show how verses from the Quran are being used today to incite modern Muslims to behave violently and anti-democratically based on those verses."
What is so offensive about this? If it's in the law you follow, what can you see wrong in watching it being carried out? It seems so hypocritical to me for a group following such laws to object to the filming of such laws being carried out.
Now of course, since the film still hasn't been released, it could feature something much, much more agregious and insulting. However, this leads me to my final and most important point.
Why the hell is it considered so wrong for anyone to criticize Islam? I'm Christian- people crap on my religion all day. There are Jesus action figures, naked chocolate Jesus statues, cartoons of the savior blowing a capitalist pig, and ridiculous representations on South Park, Family Guy, and everywhere else (those are not getting links because I personally don't wish to promote that type of imagery). Do these piss me off and offend me? Yes. Does it hurt me when people say that my religion promotes hate, injustice, inequality, and selfishness? Yes.
But because I live in a society where people are allowed to voice their opinions in both speech, print, and every other media, I have to understand that these things will be said. And I honestly believe that these criticisms of every religion helps it and its followers to grow. When people tell me Christianity is hateful and promotes inequality, it pushes me to really look at what I believe in and find out why people think such things.
You can't go around living in a free society claiming all its rights for yourself without realizing how other people's rights affect you as well. It's part of the deal. You have the right to criticize other people, ideas, films, religions, everything- so does everyone else. You deal with it. You don't demand special treatment for yourself.
And we need to stop pandering to people who demands rights that don't exist. Get over yourselves. Seriously.
This is probably going to get me in trouble, but oh well, it's what I really think.
Y'all have a good one,
HG
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
don't forget what this means in the meta-subject of Net Neutrality. Network Solutions' has a history of offences when it comes to that topic.
http://fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com/2008/03/hecklers-veto.html
Check this out.
Post a Comment