One day i will demostrate my stone throwing ability when some1 hurls a brick at me….but 2day ,i’m greedy for a debate.my response below yours:===

Third, I also happn 2 b a gr8 fan of truth. In the spirit of that truth, I’ll presently lay out an argument contesting your pretence that any execrable idea given what is seen by some as an “artistic” form deserves protection under the rubric of “freedom of expression”. Subsequently, I will also show that freedom of speech is truly under threat not in the Hussain case, but in the Danish cartoonists and Taslima Nasreen case, both of who are under attack not only from Islamists but commie loonies as well. Don’t tuck your tail in and flee from the argument claiming injury from “abuse” even as I show you that what you claim to be “freedom of expression” is actually “freedom to abuse”

===i v much look forward to this===

Let us begin with a hypothetical situation. Many more examples will follow as the argument progresses, and I hope that you’re willing to put your money where your mouth is. Suppose someone pens the following poem:

What a pity the mother of Aparajita,
Alack is not my naughty inamorata!
What a loss the seeds that made this damsel
Alas were not sown by my prodigious love tool!!

===for those like me who have trouble with the english language/poetry and had to reread 2 get the import—yeh poet, sophisticated way mein ,ma ki gali dey raha hai===

Will you be offended at this expression of affection for your mom by a person other than your dad?

=== yes i will ,how else will the debate proceed===

If so, should others — say myself — give a damn?

===lets get something clear here—there can be only two parties to this type of a dispute:

a) the offending one

b) the offended one(i have claimed reciprocal rights for this group)

when u ask whether u should give a damn, u r creating a thrid group

c) bystander

the locus standi of this group is more tricky and is actually a distraction to the central thrust(i think the whole question of unltd freedom of ex will get resolved when we arrive at some conclusion about rights of offended party ) but u will accuse me of ducking so here is what think:

I make morality/politeness/good manners the basis of deciding this groups role:

Morality—in deciding whether you must come to anothers aid.

good manners—you should know when not to interfere in someone elses affair.

because there is some conflict ,from eg to eg ,response will vary–choose the moral one.===

After all your mom is not my mom, because my dad is not yours.

===does’nt bear repitition===

Are you in favor of curbing freedom of poetic expression that involves your mother or wife as subject matter on the grounds that it offends you, though it may offend none other?Let us start with that question, comrade.

===only if you curb my freedom of expression to offend the poet in turn. i’ve already stated freedom of ex is a two way street for me.Do you agree and if not why?regards===

First off, I doff my hat at your flame-baiting excellence. I truly admire the way you carry it off, despite the fact that it requires a bit of shamelessness.

Second: I will not challenge your assessment of yourself as an Idiot. That is matter truly between you and your inner voice. But to forcibly include others in your circle is no freedom of expression — about which subject I will talk at great length presently. So please refrain from attributing your problems to me next time.

Third, I also happn 2 b a gr8 fan of truth. In the spirit of that truth, I’ll presently lay out an argument contesting your pretence that any execrable idea given what is seen by some as an “artistic” form deserves protection under the rubric of “freedom of expression”. Subsequently, I will also show that freedom of speech is truly under threat not in the Hussain case, but in the Danish cartoonists and Taslima Nasreen case, both of who are under attack not only from Islamists but commie loonies as well. Don’t tuck your tail in and flee from the argument claiming injury from “abuse” even as I show you that what you claim to be “freedom of expression” is actually “freedom to abuse”

.Let us begin with a hypothetical situation. Many more examples will follow as the argument progresses, and I hope that you’re willing to put your money where your mouth is. Suppose someone pens the following poem:

What a pity the mother of Aparajita,
Alack is not my naughty inamorata!
What a loss the seeds that made this damsel
Alas were not sown by my prodigious love tool!!

Will you be offended at this expression of affection for your mom by a person other than your dad? If so, should others — say myself — give a damn? After all your mom is not my mom, because my dad is not yours. Are you in favor of curbing freedom of poetic expression that involves your mother or wife as subject matter on the grounds that it offends you, though it may offend none other?

Let us start with that question, comrade.

I have picked up these points from Sailendra Mathurs post but this is @ to anyone who cares to punch holes in my arguements without hurling accusations ,attributing motives, or calling me names.Here goes:

Ok, I would beg to differ with the majority. Above all, I believe in the individual’s right to freedom of expression.

===all individuals ?generally when people make this point they are refering to a special interest group –the artists(or offenders).My point is– those who vent against those artists(the offended or offendee ) are also expressing themselves–why not unlimited freedom for them also?===

What that boils down to is, MF Hussain is free to paint what he wants.

===ok===

If you don’t like his paintings, don’t buy them.

===ok===

Heck, don’t even look at them.

===i won’t===

But you cannot burn them or vandalize the art galleries.

===y?vandalisation can come in the form of a picture too.does it matter what weapon u use for murdering?a gun/a sword/a knife or in this case a picture?so if an artist is allowed to vandalise i should get the same rights===

That would be akin to the Muslim destruction of Nalanda university.

===i)for the moment lets eliminate muslims from the debate.lets keep things simple.if we need an analogy lets use the meri ma/teri ma one(everybody may not love hinduism but everybody will love their mother–this way hackles are not raised).

ii) the point being made is again respect on the basis of reciprocity—if u want total freedom of expression this is the key.

iii) from ii) above it follows those who offend(artists) must in turn be prepared to get offended themselves,hence artists should not crib when their painting and gallery are set on fire.===

Saying that his paintings hurt our religious or pious sentiments and hence they should be banned is bull.

===follows from above===

By the same arguments, we will never be able to criticize the actions of the paed Mohammad, because the Muslims will claim our criticism hurts them.

===

i) again the same principle of reciprocal rights.

ii) i want to raise a point here.does’nt good manners and politeness amount to anything in this world?could’nt we /should’nt we extend our private manners (eg we don’t interfere in affairs of our neighbours), to communities /other religions .After all isn’t good manners the lubricant of civilization?

iii) i want to make a small note on criticism,why i am allowed to criticise my mother and not u, “old ideas must be challenged”etc –but this after someone responds/is interested at all in carrying the debate any further.===

By the same argument Muslims would be right in wanting to kill Taslima, and the Vatican would be right in condemning Da Vinci Code.

===and let Taslima/Dan Brown fight their own battle–sounds harsh even as i write but i think this is right?===

Why should our religious sensibilities be more important than Husain’s right to artistic expression?

===revert the ?.y is his artistic expression more important than my religious sensibilities?===

And who decides what is more important in a set of conflicting interests? If it is going to be decided by brute force, then we are not living in the enlightened 21st century but in 7th century Arabia,

===it will be self correcting–you don’t abuse my mother , i won’t abuse yours===

Our barbarism cannot be justified on grounds of Islamic barbarism. We are not competing with them for the bottom spot of the world’s most intolerant ideologies. I am sure most people on this forum won’t agree with me, but this was just my two cents on the issue.

===i’ll ignore this for now===

By the by, I have seen some of Hussain’s paintings, and while I don’t understand art much, I did not feel mortally offended by looking at them.

===i should’nt address this but hussain thus far is also not –mortally wounded===

Its just that they did not strike me as deserving of much attention.

===a large subset of the population thinks otherwise.democracy is decided by majority vote ,so there has to be some allowance for majority sentiments===

Any1 think otherwise???

I hope your ‘u’ doesn’t refer to me since my scron/contempt for the artist/paintings would not be any different irrespective of his religious affiliations.

===let me correct myself “sometimes one(in case of further doubt i don’t mean by it a universal one) feels a little more tolerant 2wards ones own idiots(as currently i feel for OT who is calling me a comrade)===

hmmm…no…..not for me–who was it that said “he maybe a Son of a bitch but he is our SoB” makes sense to me.

I understand; without that line of reasoning, rest of the argument crumbles. But for some SOB is a SOB, ain’t matter if the SOB is ‘ours’ our ‘theirs’.

===neither of us is giving reasons/evidence y it should be so–so you r as much entitled to your opinion as i am to mine===

Take a poll here and see as to how many around here would have approved/admired MH’s work if MH stood for say Mahendra Haldipur or Michael Hart?

===it seems u already know what the majority opnion will b .i don’t mind even if i am in the minority of one,i’m not specially seeking to join the bandwagon.for me logic/reason/morals (someone was discounting all these above)all matter to arrive at some conclusion.my thoughts on freedom of expression are slowly crystalising but about that in the next post.and once again it is perfectly ok by me if you think otherwise.regards===