Sargon of Akkad Challenged by Muslim on Freedom of Speech
Date:
Channel: Mohammed Hijab
File Size: 3.47MB
Related
- Aarij Anwer – Yusuf (AS) in Prison
- Ahmad Saleem – Tafseer of Surah Qaf #2
- Tom Facchine – 99 Names of Allah #75 Al-Haadi
- Asim Khan – The Beauty of Iron – Tafsir of Surah al-Hadid – Episode 11
- Adnan Rashid – Jesus of Islam – Theology and Eschatology
- Zakir Naik – Was Islam spread by the sword?
- Wasim Kempson – Guidance in Times of Adversity
AI Generated Summary ©
The speaker discusses the use of freedom of speech as a way to assert one's views on certain topics, such as racism and child abuse. They argue that freedom of speech is different to freedom of expression, as it leads to the pursuit of truth, rather than just what is wrong. The speaker also mentions that political leaders have a responsibility to address these issues, as they are critical of Islam.AI Generated Transcript ©
Now I'll give you a few examples of that freedom of speech. I've heard Sargon of akkad say that he's a freedom of speech absolutist. And I would say that's a ridiculous position to hold. It simply is a ridiculous position to hold. The reason why is because if you say, if you're an absolutist, what absolute indicates that you actually would you endorse something like for example, someone revealing the secrets and these are the classical examples of a poison gas and you poison gas, putting it on the internet? Or let's even say, what about child pornography? Because freedom of speech and freedom of expression are sometimes interchangeable. What about for instance?
What about for instance? I mean, we just saw a kid walking by now. What if someone in a school context was racist to a child? And it was bullying a child using freedom of speech is that guys, most people in society say that's not acceptable.
Try it out. So Jordan Peterson, I wouldn't say I wouldn't evolve over and over in this side of things that you've got people with, you know, people that you can label as the right wing whether or not you call it far right. You know, however, that's your choice. But right wing nationalists have latched on to that.
There's always been a kind of a protectionist and nationalist stance. Yeah, using freedom of speech, because it's a it's a hot topic, and you always use that to legitimize. Absolutely. And everyone knows, every democratic civilized
society has certain limits, like for example, libel, plagiarism, copyright, trademarking, all of these are all embedded in the social infrastructure and, and to be honest with you, they haven't tackled that. They're talking freedom of speech, freedom of speech, the kind of freedom of speech Jordan Peterson talks about is the one is a kind of freedom of speech that leads to the pursuit of truth to kind of finish speech that JJ Snell talks about. But that kind of freedom of speech is different to the kind of freedom the the absolute freedom of speech, potentially that Sargon of akkad is all about. The point being is that they use these slogans, these post enlightenment
dogmatic slogans and aren't saying just because the chromatic it's wrong, but these are slogans, in order to kind of preach to the choir, as it were, in my opinion, the western choir, they have already accepted the democratic principle that there are no disadvantages or that democratic democracy or liberalism is an ultimate truth of some sorts, or, you know, the ideal philosophy that we should be living by.
And they're preaching to that particular quiet.
Hell yeah. So that's why the point being is what needs to be challenged is the presuppositions. Now when we have a discussion, and they ask to be frank, we have to look out for example, those guys I've mentioned those two, because they're quite popular, but also because they're quite critical of Islam. I started off by saying that their criticism of STEM is valid. For more on what premise on the premise that they accept philosophical liberalism as a truth. For example,