Freedom of Expression should have limit?

hi, from the word itself freedom meaning unlimited to express what we want,and if they will give any limit for that it will no longer a freedom because they are controlling it through putting a limitation.even they disrespect other that's is their opinion and they only wanted to tell it.

I think the media and all those officials should shut up about things like this. After all, art is freedom of expression jus as music is. I think they should lay off the people that create works of art. And, religious institutions should keep their mouth shut also. Look, if you don't like it, then don't go to view it.

Yes. Freedom of expression is never absolute, it comes with great responsibility. Being free does not entitle you to do or say what you want most specially if it is wrong.

I'm all for freedom of expression. After all, that's one of the pillars of democracy. As for the Medio Cruz' art, others could easily claim that it's his way of expressing his piece but art is not only about how the artist feel but also how the audience would react to his work. Maybe his intention is to be controversial but to a christian audience it's more of an attack to their faith and therefore a direct offense. Now Mideo Cruz has to face the reality that people see his art as a piece of shet and suffer the consequences of being scorned by those that he offended. The guys got to eat too. If people will give him a bad time then he only has himself to blame, after all, the bible teaches us to make friends and not to make enemies and his art seems to be doing exactly that.

"I may not agree with what you said, but I will stand up for your right to say it." That was what Mareng Winnie Monsod said in a discussion she and Arnold Clavio had in Unang Hirit regarding Mideo Cruz' controversial artwork. I share her opinion. Every person has the right to say or express his/her opinion. What Mideo Cruz and the other artist's who had pieces in his exhibit did was to express their views and create representations of it through art. I think having a debate about this matter in the senate is a waste of time. If private entities want to file a case against Cruz then they can do so. But for the Senators to start an Inquiry about this is too much. They should focus on more important things. Freedom is not freedom if it has limits. Since we are talking about freedom, maybe we should exercise ours by not looking at this exhibit. No one is forcing us to anyway.

for me, there is indeed a limit for your freedom. the limitation is the respect for the beliefs of others. also, it is not humane to just put lots of disgusting things to the symbols of catholicism. no one has the right to do that things. aside from,i managed to see the art exhibit in person and i would say that should not be considered as an art. it is like a dirty collage with lots of symbols which will really irritate your eyes. and as what i saw on those artworks, i really cannot understand the true meaning of those. maybe the artists themselves can really understand but how about the people who are not that knowledgeable on the symbolisms he used? one more thing, a bad usage of democracy is called anarchism. maybe that's what mideo did. he completely misunderstood the true meaning of democracy.

Honestly, if art like that is going to be displayed, I don't mind it so long as it is labeled and there is art in or around the area that caters to other religions as well. Personally, I don't have a problem with it because I used to be Catholic and I used to, and still do, love seeing the artwork in the churches and cathedrals. I also love looking at the artwork in many of the Greek Orthodox churches and cathedrals. I think that people just need to except that it is art and just get over it. Art is only offensive if people make it such. Now I will admit that there is probably some art out there that goes way too far, but it's very rare and very few and far between. I think that people are too sensitive about a lot of things these days, and if we are going to make a big deal out of this, what are we going to make a big deal out of next?

Hi Vycess. Ive heard of that issue last week and i am one of the many catholics who were offended by the art. He is right about freedom of expression though. The artist, as he explained is not an artist who paints beautiful sceneries, he likes creating art which the mind can only appreciate. The artist apologized but he was not sincere at all. In fact, when he apologized and mentioned that his art is abstract and would need deeper meanings, he has insulted the catholics who were disgusted by the art. It is as if he thinks that catholics are emotional and lacks intellect. I am an artist myself and i appreciate abstract art but his works... eewwwrr it was really disgusting! You should see it for yourself!

I dont think we should tinker the constitution to limit the freedom of expression. There are already safeguards against abuses by individuals and the judicial branch of the government will handle that. If somebody went too far like Mideo Cruz - then file a case against him in the court of law. Also nothing wrong if you express your anger in any way possible like tweeter, facebook, or rallying peacefully on the street against Mideo's works. We do not have to resort to changing the Constitution, then reverting back to totalitarianism just to censor such artwork deemed blasphemous by a religion - no matter how influential is the Roman Catholic, our country is still a democracy not a theocracy. Just imagine how deep the hole will go if we resort to theocratic dictatorship. Think of something like Iran.

I don't think we should limit the freedom of expression becuase there will be a difficulty in determining the limit of the said freedom. It will take numerous debates on how to define the limitation and everybody will have their own interpretation of the said limitation. It's better if all the people should use their freedom responsibly and for some people to tolerate and be open-minded of others. Sometimes, people react too quickly and hastily on other people's actions or words . Remember that limitation of freedom of expression is censorship and some entities that function under this right will cry foul, knowing that their practice has every chance of being curtailed. People will also ascribe it to the former Marcos era where everything is suppressed especially this right. I think that freedom of expression is both a right and a privilege. People are just more into exercising their rights and any action into curtailing those rights will make them more hasty in their judgements.

if there is a "limit" to the Freedom of Expression then its not anymore a so-called Freedom...Right? What actually come with Freedom is Responsibility...the responsibility too know if you action of freedom badly affects others in one way or the other then must hold back such action else if you abuse your freedom then shall be dealt with appropriate counter measures.

I think that nobody can limit the freedom of expression. We all have free will and with that we have the right to express ourselves about things. But at the same time, for every bit of freedom, there is responsibility. I think that freedom of expression should not be limited, but then on our part, we should keep that we have to be responsible on how we express ourselves. It should not be in a manner that we will harm other people or cause an interruption to the society. Freedom comes with responsibility, it does not mean we can do whatever we want. We should think first before we act.

I will only express my opinion regarding the point of limiting freedom of expression. Yes, there should be a limit of freedom of expression considering that this kind of freedom can also be misused and could cause damage to someone or something. It is like having a driver's license. The possession of it doesn't mean that you can drive the way you want it without any consideration for traffic laws which if disregarded can put somebody's life in danger or damage a property. The ability to express is a wonderful gift from God, but should be use in a responsible way. Freedom of expression should be limited only on terms that could cause potential damage or where it could be use irresponsibly.

I think that freedom of expression should have a different meaning in terms of limit. Personally, you should never be limited in expressing yourself. However, in public, people may get offended by your personal views, so maybe it's best to keep it to yourself. In the end, I think it just depends on the situation. Regarding art, there are so many various art forms and beautiful paintings that were done on controversial issues. I don't think people should take too much offense regarding art because it is just the artist trying to express themselves, not anyone else.