[carboy]

Voltaire once said - "I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it."

Noam Chomsky supported Faurisson's (a Holocaust denier) freedom of speech. Chomsky defended Faurisson's right to express and publish his opinions on the grounds that freedom of speech must be extended to all viewpoints, no matter how unpopular or fallacious.

Freedom of speech by definition cannot be conditional. Freedom of speech means freedom to express stuff which may be rotten, bad, racist etc also.

Because of this, I will never support going to court to support to stay the release of a film you don't approve of. There are other ways
- don't watch the movie
- don't watch any movie made by same actors/directors as a protest
- Publicise the bad things in the movie, so that other people also can protest by not watching the movie.

But please don't take away somebody's freedom of speech.

Originally Posted by tsk1979

Nice logic being thrown around.
I would also disagree with Ntomer now. You guys have convinced me.
I would also like to petition the supreme court to uphold freedom of speech and direct the govt not not pursue any cases in India and abroad which involve
1. Racial slurs or humor directed against Indians, for example recent Australian policemen emails and the New Zealand incident. As long there is no physical violence involved Indians should be directed to respond by laughing at themselves any time a racist joke or slur is directed at them
2. Stop prosecution of all people who are under trial for making fun or using derogatory words against certain castes
3. Allow minority/castist jokes
4. Allow people to make fun of specific groups, for example victims of a terrorist attack
5. Allow people to make fun of "certain claimed to exist" personalities sacred to some people following certain religious practices
.
.
.

The list goes on. Please contribute.

I am not sure whether you made this post seriously or in sarcasm, but I feel none of the above should be against the law.

[alpha1]

I think the basic premise of this thread is that Movies like these, cause general public to make fun of ppl who has disabilities.

To some extent, it might hold true - temporarily (like till the movie is on screen) - but I believe, and it has been my experience that a prolonged behavior is because of values ingrained into the social fabric of society.

And in India - values are limited only to a girl not having premarital sexual experience.
Everything else is OK and allowed.


Will singing petition, and ban of such movies make any impact on our society?
No.

[ntomer]

Originally Posted by alpha1

I think the basic premise of this thread is that Movies like these, cause general public to make fun of ppl who has disabilities.

To some extent, it might hold true - temporarily (like till the movie is on screen) - but I believe, and it has been my experience that a prolonged behavior is because of values ingrained into the social fabric of society.

Will singing petition, and ban of such movies make any impact on our society?
No.

A minor correction: premise is that movies like these encourages such behavior and educating film-making about people's sensibilities will have an impact on their movies and in turn on society.

[carboy]

Originally Posted by ntomer

A minor correction: premise is that movies like these encourages such behavior and educating film-making about people's sensibilities will have an impact on their movies and in turn on society.

Educating people is one thing & filing a case is a totally different thing.

[prateekm]

So finally you guys have been heard Here's a quote from today's edition of Mumbai Mirror.

No, hold the jokes - The Indian Stammering Association (TISA) based in Dehradun is livid that Golmaal 3 mocks people who stammer; slams its makers with a suit

The title of the film now seems like a cruel irony because Golmaal 3 is in serious trouble. The film is a comedy but an organisation based in Dehradun took serious offence to the film: the Indian Stammering Association (TISA) sent a legal notice to the makers of the film accusing them of mocking people who stammer.
Our source said, “This association has taken the makers of this film to court for poking fun at a sect of people suffering from a disability. In Golmaal 3, Shreyas Talpade plays Laxman, who stammers and the other characters, played by Tusshar Kaporr, Kunal Khemu and Arshad Warsi, constantly make fun of him in the film. The association has now sent a legal notice to the makers asking them to delete all the scenes where the character stammers.”
Apparently, the producers are in a fix now because the film has been released over a week ago and it is now practically impossible to remove or delete the scenes. Moreover, it would also not be commercially viable for them to do it at this stage. The source added, “The producers now plan to respond to the notice sent by the Uttarakhand court. And they must respond to it before a December 14 deadline.”
When contacted, the spokesperson of Shri Astavinayaka Cinevision said, “Yes, it is true that we have received a notice from the Indian Stammering Association. Our legal department is looking into it However, we would just like to say that we have not tried to put down any person with a physical dis ability. Golmaal 3 is an entertainer and it should be taken that way.”
When contacted Shreyas Talpade said, “The legal team of Astavinayaka is looking into it. But I want to say that no one does it intentionally and people should look at it in a positive way, as the character play is the hero of the film. One should not make an issue out of it. I want to ask the association, why are you all considering yourself to be different when we are not? We are not pointing fingers at anyone. It is just a character. Today we have so many constraints in making a film and if these issues continue then we will have to make silent films.”
Let’s see if Shreyas’s loud and clear message reaches the members of TISA. Good luck, guys.

Source : http://epaper.timesofindia.com/Defau...Mode=HTML&GZ=T