Censorship in this forum

Spear2 — Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:35:29 +0800

There is a serious imbalance of censorship in this forum.

When someone complains about sensitivities particularly of Islam, the thread will be locked, removed and the poster may be banned or removed.

So the question is how about the rights of the individual or a few against the rights of the majorities? On the pretext of disrupting harmony as viewed by some self righteous pompous persons who complaint, it is right to oppress the individual and ignore his/her rights to air his/her views? Who are the few to judge what should be allowed or restricted? Why would Lowyat mods bend to their requests so easily?

Does this not constitute a form of restriction of freedom in a new Malaysia? If so why pick on people or threads that disagree with the mainstream religion, might as well ban everything for or against religion? That would be fair, yes? Sterilize the forum from any elements that may cause disharmony.

The post as expected is reported by that someone who thinks he/she is the judge and the executioner for the betterment of our society. Do we allow our intelligence to be insulted, that we cannot better judge ourselves but need a caretaker a babysitter?

If the mods agree to this, the thread will be locked and removed, then we travel down a slippery road of anti-enlightenment. This is NOT the progressive society we want to be.

The same thing we see in international front, these people cannot be censured and criticized least the society falls apart, causing civil unrest! For the sake of harmony, some need to be sacrificed which I guess a very sensitive issue especially when it comes to Islam (there are others of course)

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/13/opinion/...-tweet-mbs.html
Quote,
Let’s be clear: This has nothing to do with Prince Mohammed’s status as a reformer. The crown prince’s stated goal is social, economic, and cultural and religious transformation of his kingdom — not political reform. This is a point his Western critics often forget. In fact, to implement the enormous changes he wants, he has felt the need to further limit the margin of free speech in order to control public debate on these reforms and ensure that they do not escalate into civil unrest.

So what is the problem here? It seems to be that the majority is the one who causes civil unrest, who does not understand the finer argument, who hide behind self-righteousness, pays lip service that they are all moral and kind, but yet leap to defend at the slightest provocation and display no tolerance for others point of view. Bigot yes, so when can we correct this if not now?

Lowyat.NET: Latest topics by Spear2

Censorship in this forum