3 ms·

Which is why they are being changed. Though I still see no value in allowing people to call other people "goat f*rs" for sake of a political argument.

ceejayoz 11y ago
> Which is why they are being changed. Then why cite the age of a law like them as evidence of the law's legitimacy? > Though I still see no value in allowing people to call other people "goat f*rs" for sake of a political argument. That places you in the very dangerous position of deciding what's a valid political argument and what isn't.
- DanBC 11y ago
  beyseian horse didn't cite old laws like them, you did.
  - cname 11y ago
    Are you sure? > bayesian_horse: Actually, laws against defamation and insults are very old. > ceejayoz: So are other laws. So what? [paraphrased]
    - DanBC 11y ago
      Yes, I'm sure. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11504575 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11504575 > ceejayoz 3 hours ago | [-] > So are laws against blasphemy, witchcraft, etc.
- bayesian_horse 11y ago
  The important thing here is not that the law is legitimate, but rather that it is from an era when manners and respect where more important than extremer notions of free speech. It hasn't been a problem, because normally, nations which have the respect of the German state to require such prosecution know better than to use it. On the other hand, accusing foreign heads of states of fucking goat on public television isn't exactly something people expected. Erdogan has ensured that the oppression of his media will stay in European media for months.
- 7Z7 11y ago
  It wasn't evidence of the law's legitimacy, it was to counter the hand wringing of the parent comment: >the screws are being tightened on free expression over much of Western Europe these days, not least as concerns potential offense towards a certain easily offended religion
gaur 11y ago
Fortunately, Western countries don't regulate speech based on what the majority of people at a given time find valuable. If they did, probably every civil rights movement in the West could have been made illegal simply by the government declaring that the speech is not valuable. Fuck that.
kirykl 11y ago
goat fuckers. see how it works? you can swear with out pretending to
tim333 11y ago
The value is you can say what you think without having to run it by a lawyer.
Retric 11y ago
It was clearly political speech. He was protesting about what someone took as an insult. ~"That's not an insult, this is an insult: &@##$ @#$@#$." He said, "&@##$ @#$@#$"! Burn him! When in context the actual insult was said before then.

ceejayoz 11y ago

> Which is why they are being changed. Then why cite the age of a law like them as evidence of the law's legitimacy? > Though I still see no value in allowing people to call other people "goat f*rs" for sake of a political argument. That places you in the very dangerous position of deciding what's a valid political argument and what isn't.

DanBC 11y ago
beyseian horse didn't cite old laws like them, you did.
- cname 11y ago
  Are you sure? > bayesian_horse: Actually, laws against defamation and insults are very old. > ceejayoz: So are other laws. So what? [paraphrased]
  - DanBC 11y ago
    Yes, I'm sure. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11504575 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11504575 > ceejayoz 3 hours ago | [-] > So are laws against blasphemy, witchcraft, etc.
bayesian_horse 11y ago
The important thing here is not that the law is legitimate, but rather that it is from an era when manners and respect where more important than extremer notions of free speech. It hasn't been a problem, because normally, nations which have the respect of the German state to require such prosecution know better than to use it. On the other hand, accusing foreign heads of states of fucking goat on public television isn't exactly something people expected. Erdogan has ensured that the oppression of his media will stay in European media for months.
7Z7 11y ago
It wasn't evidence of the law's legitimacy, it was to counter the hand wringing of the parent comment: >the screws are being tightened on free expression over much of Western Europe these days, not least as concerns potential offense towards a certain easily offended religion

gaur 11y ago

Fortunately, Western countries don't regulate speech based on what the majority of people at a given time find valuable. If they did, probably every civil rights movement in the West could have been made illegal simply by the government declaring that the speech is not valuable. Fuck that.

kirykl 11y ago

goat fuckers. see how it works? you can swear with out pretending to

tim333 11y ago

The value is you can say what you think without having to run it by a lawyer.

Retric 11y ago

It was clearly political speech. He was protesting about what someone took as an insult. ~"That's not an insult, this is an insult: &@##$ @#$@#$." He said, "&@##$ @#$@#$"! Burn him! When in context the actual insult was said before then.