Double standard for freedom of expression

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4673908.stm (also many other sites)

Today, there was serious media and political unrest. Over ... cartoon drawings in newspapers. Of the prophet Mohammad, founder of the Islamic religion.

I have a problem with this. The whole point of critical awareness and examination of things is to accept criticism, providing that it is not inciting hatred or violence, and does not specifically attack one person who could then be harmed personally by those remarks.

Islam seems to be removing itself from the arena of comedy and artwork, enforcing the old law that Mohammad may not be depicted in art.

Images of Jesus which are often highly rude and suggestive of various non-christian things are frequently presented throughout global media, and are left un challenged almost entirely. It seems Christians, who are seen as a soft, loving majority who'd better shut up and not complain, are allowed and even expected to be silent in the face of highly critical and sometimes down right mocking (see a recent confession by the National Secular Society concerning their desire to mock religious people and their faith using free speech) attacks from secular folk as well as folk of other faiths.

There should quite blatently be one, global rule for everyone, for all depictions of anything or anyone - whether they support or deride a school of thought.

Of course people should act with respect. I have never disrespected a religion using images or lies. But freedom to do so in order to allow free criticism of all things equally must be in existance, otherwise what we have is a two tier system. A suspicious mind may say that a 'religion of peace' needs to back up that claim by not having gunmen surround an embassy to persuade governments to stop their press drawing cartoon images of Mohammad.

Should Blizzard have banned 'sexuality talk' on their game?

www.joystiq.com/2006/01/31/blizzard-vs-gaymers-are-other-minorities-next/

Heh heh. A bit of a fuss over nothing perhaps, but they make a fair point. However, if the game makers want to say 'we don't have the staff to police sexuality/religious/political issues' then it's their damn server. People often miss this amid an emotional roller coaster of 'freedom of expression', and they forget that there are still some counter rights to take into account. For example; if you come onto my property, I have the right to dictate to you what you can and cannot do based upon any whim I wish. If you don't like it, you can leave. Harsh, but remove that right and you have supreme 'Big Brother' action.

It's the old 'should a Jewish club have to accept membership from a KKK member?' argument archetype all over again.

It's saying you can't pick who you want at work or whatever, you have to have anyone. If it's my money, I can spend it on whoever and whatever I want. I resent any authority telling me that I have to be 'fair' in a Government-set sense, with what's mine. There's two sides to the issue; Blizzard's server rights and people's right to express themselves.

You can't swear in game. That's freedom of expression limited right there, and you don't see people really objecting, because it's common sense. At the end of the day, you can ask for permission to do something anywhere, but if the answer is no, you have the option to leave. Personally I don't play MMOs to discuss religion, politics or sexuality - so I don't feel effected by such a rule. Those who do, I have a degree of sympathy with, but at the end of the day, I fear any society that tells owners of property (whether cyber or real) what they can and can't do with their own land/space.

The trouble with people's rights, is that there's more than one person's rights to consider. Always.