The Instigator
LouisLion
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Elord
Pro (for)
Winning
2 Points

Does Charlie Hebdo Magazine deserve the 'courage' award from PEN?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Elord
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/13/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 313 times Debate No: 75259
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

LouisLion

Con

No. What Charlie Hebdo did was not courageous. It was just plain stupid.
I'm all for free speech but there's a fine line between making harmless jokes about people's ethnicity/religion and actually saying things that are offensive.
Charlie Hebdo crossed that line.
Charlie Hebdo was first attacked for distributing a magazine with a caricature of Muhammad on it.
What was the next thing Charlie Hebdo did? THEY DISTRIBUTED ANOTHER COMIC OF MUHAMMAD.
The result was Muslims rioting in Niger, killing Christians and burning Churches.
I'm not saying that what any of these terrorists did was right. That was no justifiable reason to kill people. However, Charlie Hebdo knows that there are radical Muslims out there (not all Muslims) but they continued to offend them anyway.
So no, Charlie Hebdo isn't brave. There just being obnoxious.
There are better ways to support freedom of speech
Elord

Pro

I would like to note that I am not Islamophobic, nor would I be so insensitive, but for the sake of arguing the Devil's advocate, I will say why Pro are justified.

I'm going to start off with some rebuttals to my opponent's points.

1. "I'm all for free speech but there's a fine line between making harmless jokes about people's ethnicity/religion and actually saying things that are offensive."
From what I understand, free speech is fine unless it directly hurts someone. Saying/drawing things towards a religion is more a criticism of an idea rather of a personal attack, no matter what that person of faith believes. The funny thing about the freedom of speech is that it hurts sometimes.

http://www.uscourts.gov...

2. "Charlie Hebdo was first attacked for distributing a magazine with a caricature of Muhammad on it.
What was the next thing Charlie Hebdo did? THEY DISTRIBUTED ANOTHER COMIC OF MUHAMMAD."
I feel that it's good for society to poke at hot issues and it was to prove a point. The point was that the freedom of speech is an universal right, that is granted to everyone. How one uses it is another matter, but it was well within their right to do so.

3. "The result was Muslims rioting in Niger, killing Christians and burning Churches."
Source? Also, just because I say the Earth is round, gives no justification for the Flat Earth Society to burn down science labs. It also shows that deeply conservative societies need to be modern. These radicals need to understand the freedom of speech is a right, and destruction will not do anything but will only destroy the reputation of the Muslim community, who treat the matter with a grain of salt. They don't have to buy it nor associate with people that read it. This form of retaliation is unjustified, which freedom of speech is.

4. "T
here are better ways to support freedom of speech"
You and I agree but they did what they did.

5. "So no, Charlie Hebdo isn't brave. There just being obnoxious."
They made a statement about the freedom of speech and stuck with it. You actually contradict this point by talking about radical Muslims who may be violent. The risk was there and they took it.

Mainly, as Pro, my points revolves around the fact the freedom of speech hurts especially if it hurts something you care about, but people are entitled to the right, and it will help you rethink your ideas. They do deserve it since they are touching on deep issue.

I apologize if I sounded repetitive.
Back to you Con!






Debate Round No. 1
LouisLion

Con

LouisLion forfeited this round.
Elord

Pro

Extend all.
Debate Round No. 2
LouisLion

Con

LouisLion forfeited this round.
Elord

Pro

Extend all and vote for me.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
tejretics
LouisLionElordTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Multiple forfeits by Con. Thus, I award conduct to Pro. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.
Vote Placed by Skepticalone 1 year ago
Skepticalone
LouisLionElordTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture