Maharashtra police to crack whip on those who ‘like’ offensive Facebook posts

[wolfschanzze]

Owaisi's speech was indeed hate mongering. No brainer there.
Lol about 'motherfvcker'. BC, MC, CKD, LKB etc all these choice words are cool with you then? They mean much vulgar things than a simple MF'er!!
But your telling me "take it or leave it", makes no sense. As an Indian, I do NOT accept this stupidity, although, I do respect your right to have such an opinion, begrudgingly

I said you say those words to someone you don't know you get bashed.There is your freedom of speech giving it back in your face

 

[gubbi]

finding fathers of Indian constitution took into account indian spirituality and it's morals and the constitution was drafted accordingly,
Any thing excess is bad, for both body or society.Therefore,moderation in everything so that you dont overdo it.
America has no such values so it let's people run amok on the name of free this and that.

This I call absolute BullShyte!! Show me where they took this Indian spirituality/morals into consideration when drafting the Constitution?
Now you really are treading into troll-land!

Btw, Ravana died of limitless lust? How ridiculous con one get? The greatest Shiv Bhakt ever died of lust? I though Ramayana was clear that Lord Rama killed Ravana in battle, a battle of equals, in that Ravana was a great devotee of Lord Shiva!!

 

[JayAtl]

My dear friend do explain following to me

PS: i studied law a little bit

You are misunderstanding the highlighted parts. what the highlighted parts are saying is an individual cannot incite an offense i.e. they cannot say go burn down this guys house. an opinion about a historical figure is not an incitement- violence was not asked as a follow up within that opinion... you get it now?

 

[wolfschanzze]

so if an indian newspaper writes scathing opinion about shivaji... it is incitement? you will ask that like pakistan that media channel should be shut down and journalist arrested? that is where you want your country to go next?

Distortion of history and writing fiction is not freedom of speech, but hurting others who have respect for such a figure, naturally you will get reactions, if you think you can write shit about everyone and get away with it, then you should not go running for police protection when people come to you to show their freedom of expression of what they think should be done with you.
Are you ok with that?

yo bro-- founding fathers = the ones who wrote your constitution. not fables ...

They had a deep knowledge and took into consideration the aspects of hinduism and ram rajya etc. while drafting the constitution.
It might be fables to you but for us our epics are as good as real.
Btw, ATI=excessive, your name suggest that jayati

 

[gubbi]

I said you say those words to someone you don't know you get bashed.There is your freedom of speech giving it back in your face

It is precisely for people like you and opinions like yours why Freedom of Speech and Expression, in its entirety and absolutism, is so important! Lest Darwinism comes into effect...

 

[JayAtl]

Distortion of history and writing fiction is not freedom of speech, but hurting others who have respect for such a figure, naturally you will get reactions, if you think you can write shit about everyone and get away with it, then you should not go running for police protection when people come to you to show their freedom of expression of what they think should be done with you.
Are you ok with that?

that is very convoluted way of thinking my man. History and historical scholars have always had some differences. a difference between them even if a distortion - it is an OPINION. you guys debate history and opinions out of that debate is protected.

if you are threatened bodily harm for opinion , it is okay to ask for protection. Shahrukh Khan was threatened by the shiv sena for his opinion...he had a right to have protection. because protection was not just about him but to his rights.

 

[wolfschanzze]

This I call absolute BullShyte!! Show me where they took this Indian spirituality/morals into consideration when drafting the Constitution?
Now you really are treading into troll-land!

Btw, Ravana died of limitless lust? How ridiculous con one get? The greatest Shiv Bhakt ever died of lust? I though Ramayana was clear that Lord Rama killed Ravana in battle, a battle of equals, in that Ravana was a great devotee of Lord Shiva!!

B.R. Ambdekar did, use Rama Rajya as a ideal and took its ideals while drafting it.

 

[Kloitra]

Distortion of history and writing fiction is not freedom of speech, but hurting others who have respect for such a figure, naturally you will get reactions, if you think you can write shit about everyone and get away with it, then you should not go running for police protection when people come to you to show their freedom of expression of what they think should be done with you.
Are you ok with that?

Such reactions are the sign of immaturity. I oppose such "expressions of opinion" not because they are wrong but because the society is too primitive to behave in a proper manner. Blame those who would burn down a city because an idiot somewhere said something stupid.

You don't like someone's opinion, criticize them, at most go to the authorities. You don't prove him wrong by using mob-justice.

 

[Sergi]

You are misunderstanding the highlighted parts. what the highlighted parts are saying is an individual cannot incite an offense i.e. they cannot say go burn down this guys house. an opinion about a historical figure is not an incitement- violence was not asked as a follow up within that opinion... you get it now?

ok im tired. As you say. I rest my case

 

[wolfschanzze]

This I call absolute BullShyte!! Show me where they took this Indian spirituality/morals into consideration when drafting the Constitution?
Now you really are treading into troll-land!

Btw, Ravana died of limitless lust? How ridiculous con one get? The greatest Shiv Bhakt ever died of lust? I though Ramayana was clear that Lord Rama killed Ravana in battle, a battle of equals, in that Ravana was a great devotee of Lord Shiva!!

Yes Lust lead him to abduct sita and even after being warned by many advisers he was not ready to let go,thereby it lead to his death.
Duryodhana was jealous of Pandavas,it led to his doom.
Ravana was a great Shiv Bhakt, indeed, but he lusted for a lot of things.
He got lanka being built by Vishwakarma which was supposed to be new home of shiva and parvati.
Second time he lusted for Shivas atma linga,
another time he lusted for parvati.
you should read about Ravana more.

that is very convoluted way of thinking my man. History and historical scholars have always had some differences. a difference between them even if a distortion - it is an OPINION. you guys debate history and opinions out of that debate is protected.

if you are threatened bodily harm for opinion , it is okay to ask for protection. Shahrukh Khan was threatened by the shiv sena for his opinion...he had a right to have protection. because protection was not just about him but to his rights.

See the difference, Shah rukh khan gave his opinion,shiv sena gave theirs,.Freedom of expression at work see? That is why i said there should be a bit moderation.It doesn't mean stiffing voices but letting cooler heads speak.

 

[Sergi]

Good. I have no idea about law, but I read. So clarify this.
It simply means, your right is absolute, unless you break a law. Laws can be passed or repealed based on the whims of a government in power. So what was an offense during the "Emergency" times is no longer an offence. What is an offence in Kashmir or the North East, would not be an offence elsewhere. So the laws are different, but the right remains absolute. Now the "reasonable restrictions" part is debatable, and one can make a very good arguments to do away with that in the present context of the debate.

In present context and actual meaning in simple language is
You can enjoy your freedom of expressions unless you endanger the bolded part simple as that.

You are free to make your opinion but the the interpritation in the court will be as i said.
M tired of arguing. So i rest my case

 

[wolfschanzze]

Such reactions are the sign of immaturity. I oppose such "expressions of opinion" not because they are wrong but because the society is too primitive to behave in a proper manner. Blame those who would burn down a city because an idiot somewhere said something stupid.

You don't like someone's opinion, criticize them, at most go to the authorities. You don't prove him wrong by using mob-justice.

Like i said immature or not, that is how it goes in India, "When in rome do as romans do,When in India do as Indians do". Try Us here it will fall flat on face

 

[gubbi]

Yes Lust lead him to abduct sita and even after being warned by many advisers he was not ready to let go,thereby it lead to his death.
Duryodhana was jealous of Pandavas,it led to his doom.
Ravana was a great Shiv Bhakt, indeed, but he lusted for a lot of things.
He got lanka being built by Vishwakarma which was supposed to be new home of shiva and parvati.
Second time he lusted for Shivas atma linga,
another time he lusted for parvati.
you should read about Ravana more.

Are you sure lust got Ravana to abduct Sita? Or was it because Laxman cut off his sister, Surpanakha's nose that he came looking for revenge? Ravana got Lanka from his brother, who in turn got it from their Brahmin father, who earned it as a dakshina! Indian history is replete with brothers usurping brothers' properties. Do you know even your own epics?

Like i said immature or not, that is how it goes in India, "When in rome do as romans do,When in India do as Indians do". Try Us here it will fall flat on face

Exactly. That's why Freedom of Speech and Expression is so important.

 

[JonAsad]

Ya right
Govt of Maharashtra is Congress led govt.

BTW what was your opinion on freedom of speech when a cartoon was published on prophet ???

Well we are never known to be the tolerant kind to such offences- nor we pretend-
On the other hand you guys behave like champions advocating free speech or expression-
The two situations are not comparable at all-

 

[wolfschanzze]

Are you sure lust got Ravana to abduct Sita? Or was it because Laxman cut off his sister, Surpanakha's nose that he came looking for revenge? Ravana got Lanka from his brother, who in turn got it from their Brahmin father, who earned it as a dakshina! Indian history is replete with brothers usurping brothers' properties. Do you know even your own epics?

Exactly. That's why Freedom of Speech and Expression is so important.

Surpanakha nose was cutt off, yes he came for revenge and abducted her, but many advised him to send her back he didn't listen to his brothers advice Vibhishana,Rama even at the last moment asked Ravana to give up sita and avoid bloodshed, he didn't listen.
Lanka was built by Vishwakarma with the money donated by kuber, as paravati was sad at living in mountains while her sisters all lived in luxurious palaces.So shiva ordered lanka to be built so they could shift their home,Ravana was granted a boon for his penance and he chose lanka and some other powers and shiva being bholenath, readily gave his newly built home to his favourite bhakt.