Does the right to freedom of speech justify printing the Danish cartoons?
When one person’s liberty collides with another’s values, there is no clear occupant of the moral high ground.
When it comes to ethical conduct in regards to any issue, what makes an action right and wrong is the principle inherent in the action. If an action is done from a sense of duty, if the principle of the action can be universalised, then the action is right. Although, it is essentially impossible for all people to share the same applied eithics in details and thus applying certain ethical rule to conclude to the subject at hand is not fair. Morality is questioned again.
Therefore as rightly said by Gary Younge a columnist at the Guardian in regards to freedom of speech and I quote :
But the right to freedom of speech equates to neither an obligation to offend nor a duty to be insensitive. There is no contradiction between supporting someone’s right to do something and condemning them for doing it.
A full debated write up between Philip Hensher and Gary Younge, both columnists, in regards to the subject at hand can be read here.
Does the right to freedom of speech justify printing the Danish cartoons?
Also you wouldnt want to miss an update on the issue in regards to the printing of a related but differently targetted comic?
Danish paper rejected Jesus cartoons
Socialist Michelle Bachelet, would be swon in as Chile’s first woman president in March 11. The interesting thing about this is, a cabinet of 10 women and 10 men, fullfilling a campaign promise of equal opportunity government, was unveiled on Monday.