Actress Brigitte Bardot on Trial in France for Offending Islam

[Chairboy]

Great question, wrongwayric, I was going to ask that myself.  Under US law (if she said that here), prosecuting her for making an unpopular statement would be forbidden.  Same if she said it about any other religious group.  This is a fine example of why the government shouldn't recognize any religion as superior.  Just because things work out when your religion is on top doesn't mean that'll always be the case.  20 years ago, the french would have probably laughed at the idea that this could happen.

This is why the separation of religion and politics is a Good Thing, because things change, and it's not always the religion you like that's in favor.

[lazs2]

Not really true chair.. we have "hate speech" here..  if it can be applied to race... why not religion or.. the government itself?  It is not religion that is the problem but free speech.

lazs

[SirLoin]

How can we have a truly free society if there are hate speach laws?You can't....Even if it's a Holocoust denier..he must be allowed to speak,write or express one self,regardless of how whack his opinion is.

By silencing someone with hate speach laws,"you are making yourself a slave to your own opinion"...Thomas Paine.

[Chairboy]

Lazs, help me understand by providing an example where someone was prosecuted by the government for making a statement like she did.  It'd be good to know.

[moot]

Is muslim a race? I thought it was a religion? If that's the case that it is a religion then how could she make a racist statement? I actually agree with her but then again there are groups of people here in the U.S. doing the same thing. We call them politicians.

Well, and Chairboy this answers your post too, when you've seen that bimbo do and say all she has, as much as me, or Saintaw or Straffo.. There's very small chances that you won't agree what she says about muslims is out of blind racism, rather than some clear and well thought out theological opinion.
Her statements don't fall into any ambiguous or arguable religious category because the judge and lawyers involved know exactly what her thoughts are.  And it's neither the first time she does this, nor a recent development.

[Charon]

Racist or not, she was Smoking Hot back in the day.

Just wanted to ad that important point.

Charon

[GtoRA2]

Racist or not, she was Smoking Hot back in the day.

Just wanted to ad that important point.

Charon

It would have been a better point with an image

[SirLoin]

Her statements don't fall into any ambiguous or arguable religious category because the judge and lawyers involved know exactly what her thoughts are. 

Here's a big part of the problem..Someone claiming to know the thoughts of someone else.Something that they can not possibly know..and that person being charged with "thought crime".

Welcome to North Korea gentelmen.

[moot]

Uh yeah, if NK is suddenly populated with brainless zombie bimbos preaching PETA spiels and that parrot whatever their closet nazi husband says, yeah.
You just don't know what you're talking about

[Charon]

It would have been a better point with an image

Here's an average shot.

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.artland.co.uk/Bardot_E-PP001.gif&imgrefurl=http://www.artland.co.uk/page2019aa.htm&h=100&w=74&sz=5&hl=en&start=62&um=1&tbnid=FBiYlYdR9Aj-1M:&tbnh=82&tbnw=61&prev=/images%3Fq%3DBridget%2BBardot%26start%3D60%26ndsp%3D20%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26sa%3DN

[moot]

She deserves nothing more than to be reincarnated as a non-white girl in the middle of a neo-nazi ghetto.  How you guys can get turned on by what's might as well be nazi piece trash is beyond me.

[texasmom]

Usually when you think of someone using racial slurs, you'd think that would be considered free speech. If you want to be a total dick with everything you say, you're welcome to it.  I know lots and lots and lots of people who are total good-for-nothings, and of whom I can't stand any of the words that come out of their mouths.  Doesn't make it illegal for them to be total jerk-offs though.

The article doesn't say she's being indicted for any actual slurs (it only implies that by the title). It actually says she's being indicted for inciting hatred.  That is more in the line of 'her words were followed by hateful, physically harmful action.'  So, I'd say there's more there than is being published in that one article.

[wrongwayric]

WOW! Useing that law or what ever blind logic then President Bush and all the others should be charged also. They have inspired hatred against terrorists! Then you follow that to the next conclusion that the majority of terrorists are muslim/arabs OMG! String em all up. When the muslim and arab nations step up and condem the terrosists and start turning them in or hunting them down and taking them out then maybe they will not have these type of statements made against them.   Seems to me the french courts are trying to appease the muslim/arabs again and the last time they did that terrorists blew up a train. Sure seemed to work then didn't it?

[john9001]

WOW! Useing that law or what ever blind logic then President Bush and all the others should be charged also.

that may happen, obama said after his is chosen Prince of America he will have the justice dept investigate bush and gang for war crimes.

[moot]

Usually when you think of someone using racial slurs, you'd think that would be considered free speech. If you want to be a total dick with everything you say, you're welcome to it.  I know lots and lots and lots of people who are total good-for-nothings, and of whom I can't stand any of the words that come out of their mouths.  Doesn't make it illegal for them to be total jerk-offs though.

The article doesn't say she's being indicted for any actual slurs (it only implies that by the title). It actually says she's being indicted for inciting hatred.  That is more in the line of 'her words were followed by hateful, physically harmful action.'  So, I'd say there's more there than is being published in that one article.

No... You guys are talking about someone you don't know, that's the first fact.  Second fact is that the only reason what she says isn't quite deserving of the full on "incitation to hatred" sort of sentence is that she's broke down stupid.  If she was smart, she'd use a minimum of clever wording like every other neonazi scumbag and be off scott free every time.. She'd get some benefit of the doubt like Michel Houellebecq. It would all be taken as so much impertinent noise, except that over in France you're a lot closer to the sort of culture that Germans have, not really censoring nazi revivalism as much as having zero tolerance because they know exactly where that path leads.

wrongwayeric, that's rubbish.  You neither know the context nor understand what's going on.  But it's not like you need any good excuse to pull a white flag joke. :P