WTH :Is it a Ramzan transmission or a Circus?

[VCheng]

So you are now saying that censorship is what is wrong?

I am saying that pandering to such views only worsens matters for freedom of expression for everyone, as has happened many times in the past, and continues to happen even now.

 

[Arsalan]

I am saying that pandering to such views only worsens matters for freedom of expression for everyone, as has happened many times in the past, and continues to happen even now.

All i am saying is that as per the progressive society rules, pandering one view over other should worsen the matter of freedom of speech. No matter what that view is.

 

[VCheng]

All i am saying is that as per the progressive society rules, pandering one view over other should worsen the matter of freedom of speech. No matter what that view is.

Trying to pick one rule from a progressive society to apply it in a society that definitely is not progressive is not a valid exercise.

 

[Arsalan]

Trying to pick one rule from a progressive society to apply it in a society that definitely is not progressive is not a valid exercise.

we have to start somewhere. Or that too that society will decide for us from where should we start? so much for freedom of will.

 

[VCheng]

we have to start somewhere. Or that too that society will decide for us from where should we start? so much for freedom of will.

Well, looking at Pakistani society clearly shows the power of the few to decide what is best for all, whether they like it or not. Good luck with what you would like to have!

 

[Arsalan]

Well, looking at Pakistani society clearly shows the power of the few to decide what is best for all, whether they like it or not. Good luck with what you would like to have!

you or we?
Anyway, i was of the view that we were discussion how it should be in a "progressive civil society" Yeh Pakistan kahan sa aagya?

 

[VCheng]

you or we?
Anyway, i was of the view that we were discussion how it should be in a "progressive civil society" Yeh Pakistan kahan sa aagya?

Okay, in a progressive society, any view that advocates depriving others of the same rights to express views would get drowned out by laughter.

 

[Arsalan]

Okay, in a progressive society, any view that advocates depriving others of the same rights to express views would get drowned out by laughter.

lolz,
we that is strange, we never saw that bill to ban hijab drowned in laughter. That itself was a ban to express oneself right?

Anyway, staying on topic, AGAIN, by not allowing one to express his views and thinking about something that society is still depriving him right? Or is it that it weights depriving certain things differently compared to depriving of certain other things?

 

[Hacris RAO]

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=257106144648328

Inaam ghar should be completely shut down.

 

[VCheng]

we that is strange, we never saw that bill to ban hijab drowned in laughter. That itself was a ban to express oneself right?

If you are referring to the French ban, it has more to do with hiding one's face in a public place. It was sued in the ECJ as a ban on expression, but was upheld by the court:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28106900

"A case was brought by a 24-year-old French woman, who argued that the ban on wearing the veil in public violated her freedom of religion and expression.

French law says nobody can wear in a public space clothing intended to conceal the face. The penalty for doing so can be a 150-euro fine (£120; $205). The 2010 law came in under former conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy. A breach of the ban can also mean a wearer having to undergo citizenship instruction.
.......

The court ruled that the ban "was not expressly based on the religious connotation of the clothing in question but solely on the fact that it concealed the face". The Strasbourg judges' decision is final - there is no appeal against it. A court statement said the ruling also "took into account the state's submission that the face played a significant role in social interaction". "The Court was also able to understand the view that individuals might not wish to see, in places open to all, practices or attitudes which would fundamentally call into question the possibility of open interpersonal relationships, which, by virtue of an established consensus, formed an indispensable element of community life within the society in question."

 

[Zibago]

Mazhab Faroshi?

 

[Arsalan]

If you are referring to the French ban, it has more to do with hiding one's face in a public place. It was sued in the ECJ as a ban on expression, but was upheld by the court:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28106900

"A case was brought by a 24-year-old French woman, who argued that the ban on wearing the veil in public violated her freedom of religion and expression.

French law says nobody can wear in a public space clothing intended to conceal the face. The penalty for doing so can be a 150-euro fine (£120; $205). The 2010 law came in under former conservative President Nicolas Sarkozy. A breach of the ban can also mean a wearer having to undergo citizenship instruction.
.......

The court ruled that the ban "was not expressly based on the religious connotation of the clothing in question but solely on the fact that it concealed the face". The Strasbourg judges' decision is final - there is no appeal against it. A court statement said the ruling also "took into account the state's submission that the face played a significant role in social interaction". "The Court was also able to understand the view that individuals might not wish to see, in places open to all, practices or attitudes which would fundamentally call into question the possibility of open interpersonal relationships, which, by virtue of an established consensus, formed an indispensable element of community life within the society in question."

point of view? excuses and justifications? I am sorry but i don't see anything else in there. It is only as good as someone saying that he wants to get those programs banned because the noise level is contributing to the world pollution and ask for ban by censor authorities. Will that be a nice enough justification for you to allow someone to express his opposition to something? If you think people need to justify there freedom ( i don't think it will be like this in those free societies? )
But then again you say that censor is also not the right thing.

Is this whole debate about proving a point or about discussing to get to a point (wherever it may take us?)

 

[VCheng]

point of view? excuses and justifications? I am sorry but i don't see anything else in there.

It is a considered decision of the ECJ on record, with the reasoning laid out clearly.

 

[Arsalan]

It is a considered decision of the ECJ on record, with the reasoning laid out clearly.

I know and even then i made my post. Excuses and justification,, nothing else. Just like the one about noise pollution.
We cannot have double standards in that progressive society now, if so who can we differentiate it from one like mine?
Freedom of expression, FOR all!
A man opposing certain thing is only as wrong as a man opposing that opposition. It is more of a paradox, lassi as we call it here.

Mazhab Faroshi?

oh no,, how can a transmission be related to Mazhab dear? I mean, it is just some people doing what they like to do. Even labeling it ramzan transmission do not makes it part of ramzan and we all know that. Calling it mazhab faroshi will be extreme i would say.

 

[Zibago]

I know and even then i made my post. Excuses and justification,, nothing else. Just like the one about noise pollution.
We cannot have double standards in that progressive society now, if so who can we differentiate it from one like mine?
Freedom of expression, FOR all!
A man opposing certain thing is only as wrong as a man opposing that opposition. It is more of a paradox, lassi as we call it here.


oh no,, how can a transmission be related to Mazhab dear? I mean, it is just some people doing what they like to do. Even labeling it ramzan transmission do not makes it part of ramzan and we all know that. Calling it mazhab faroshi will be extreme i would say.

They are using religion to boost ratings and make a profit what else do you call it?