22 Jun 2006

Pensées: 10 short notes on sedition

"The police will investigate when someone complains about offensive material on the Internet because it can have an impact on the public" - Wong Kan Seng, 17 June 2006

What counts as overreaction in a case of sedition? Even in the bad old days when the sedition laws were designed, sedition - like treason - was an accusation not lightly made, a charge not taken up by the state unless there was a clear case to answer to.

Any man with common sense will ask: are the pictures really seditious? do they offend Christians? a vast majority of Christians? to the extent of inciting riots?

Any man with common sense will state: material that mildly offend, that a sizeable proportion of Christians do not find offensive, is not seditious, and warrants no investigation.

Any man with common sense and more brains will believe there must be clear guidelines to prosecute only cases that are offensive enough to threaten the population.

Read the rest of the post here.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

WTF would Jesus do?

Jesus will dismiss it, that's what. Christians should know that He who was apparently crucified for the sins of Man would not hold any grudge over such a petty matter.. Satan's kids would, though.

atheist said...

On those Danish cartoons Muslims deemed offensive, it is understood that images of their prophet are forbidden and would be offensive to them, not to mention caricatures. So I accept the local ban on publishing them. But what about those of Jesus Christ and Christianity? Christians say they condemn idolatry and symbolic items. What bullshit. The most common 'idol' of Christianity is their famous Cross. Most famous symbol in the world, much more than the defiant and symbolic middle finger. Or go inside any church - Catholic or otherwise - and you'll see idols-like statues of Jesus hanging on a cross or the Virgin Mary carrying an infant Jesus in her arms. How is that not idolising? If images and depictions of Jesus Christ aren't forbidden, then caricatures of Him certainly wouldn't be seditious. And come on, if a cartoon depicting Jesus biting someone is remotely seditious, then what about films like Passion of the Christ and the Da Vinci Code? Jews find the former anti-semitic and Christians find the latter blasphemous. So why weren't they both banned?