Re: (TV) rushdie - the first cut is the deepest (OT)

["Martin McClellan" <martin@rosacordis.com>]

> If there had been a legal avenue to prosecute Rushdie then it would have
> been "disproportionate" for the fatwah, but Rushdie did all he could
> (whether it was publisher led or not) to exclude a legal route

I'm afraid I don't follow the logic at all. You're saying that because
there was no legal discourse available, asking for somebody's head is
okay? So, if I've been wronged, either in reality or in my twisted
imagination, then it's okay for me to kill them so long as I have exausted
my legal remedies first?

>
> How about this as an analogy, a stranger walks into my pub tonight, one of
> the regulars walk up to my landlord and say "I really like you, dont be
> offended by anything I say in the next 5 minutes" and then goes up to the
> stranger and say "your god is a fucking arsehole, your whole life is based
> on total shite, fuck you"
> I mean, as someone who was brought up as a christian, I would obviously
> turn
> the other cheek, but really, who could blame anyone for taking the lippy
> cunt regular outside and beating the shit out of him ?

The analogy might be more accurate if the offended party offered to pay
anybody to kill the man that offended them. Then, went on television and
offered to pay anybody to kill them. Then kept requesting that they do
over and over again. Oh, and they've killed other people before. Like
women for, you know, for defiling the men in their family by having the
gall of being raped.

But, let's forget that and go with your analogy. I would say that the guy
who throws the first punch is in the wrong. That's how the laws here read,
and I agree with them. My right to being offended ends where my fist
begins. At least, that's what we're striving for in a civilized society.

Like, for instance, this discourse here. If said "Wow, Murray is really
offending me. I think I'll call for my peeps in England to go wipe him
out" that would be a disproportionate response to what is (seemingly to
me) a polite gentlemen's disagreement. I harbor no ill will to you because
I believe something different, but I'm interested enough in the topic to
argue about it.

Of course, I have no peeps in England--well, no "wiping out" types anyway.
Nor would I ever call for that, because I think somebody insulting me
tells me more about them then about me.

Martin
--------------
To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"