There is something that recently read that made my blood boil. It appears that the United Nation’s Human Rights Committee, that is anything but, has approved and passed a proposal that urges the passage of laws around the world protecting religion from criticism.
Put another way, if you criticize religion, you will be punished.
Predictably, a Muslim nation (Pakistan) wrote the proposal on behalf of other Islamic nations. Twenty three (23) nations out of 47, voted yes. More significantly, only 11 nations voted against the proposal and the rest abstained – were they scared?
Obviously, this proposal carries no legal weight and the United States is not even a member of this committee which it considers bogus and dominated by Muslim and African countries that protect member countries from a variety of human-rights violations.
You notice that we are exclusively talking about Islam and the proposal mentions how Islam must be shielded from criticism in the media and other areas of public life; the Danish Muhammad cartoons were an obvious example. The proposal cited attacks or just depictions of the prophet Muhammad as UNACCEPTABLE EXAMPLES OF FREE SPEECH.
The immediate response should be, what the hell do you think free speech means, free only if it does not contain criticism of Islam? You have a lot to learn about the definition of free speech and since you never have experienced it, I can understand why you don’t understand the concept.
But the concept of free speech and its practice should never be allowed to be compromised – ever. I say that emphatically because I have detected signs where certain authorities (even in the U.S.) have expressed a willingness to abrogate free speech if it in someway insults, embarrasses or is offensive to certain people (in many cases, religious people). Some U.S. newspapers refused to publish pictures of the Danish cartoons even though the cartoons were legitimate news.
The only free speech I would legally prohibit is the yelling of “fire” in a crowded theater or any other speech that would willingly endanger human life, everything else is a go!
I have pocked fun at these outraged Muslims by asking why their god needed protection from his rag-tag followers; can’t he defend himself or maybe he does not object to people making fun of him.
All that logic is lost on people who do not use logic in their lives but follow what they are told to do by their religious leaders who have a stake in keeping their flock as stupid as possible; the better to control them!
Put another way, if you criticize religion, you will be punished.
Predictably, a Muslim nation (Pakistan) wrote the proposal on behalf of other Islamic nations. Twenty three (23) nations out of 47, voted yes. More significantly, only 11 nations voted against the proposal and the rest abstained – were they scared?
Obviously, this proposal carries no legal weight and the United States is not even a member of this committee which it considers bogus and dominated by Muslim and African countries that protect member countries from a variety of human-rights violations.
You notice that we are exclusively talking about Islam and the proposal mentions how Islam must be shielded from criticism in the media and other areas of public life; the Danish Muhammad cartoons were an obvious example. The proposal cited attacks or just depictions of the prophet Muhammad as UNACCEPTABLE EXAMPLES OF FREE SPEECH.
The immediate response should be, what the hell do you think free speech means, free only if it does not contain criticism of Islam? You have a lot to learn about the definition of free speech and since you never have experienced it, I can understand why you don’t understand the concept.
But the concept of free speech and its practice should never be allowed to be compromised – ever. I say that emphatically because I have detected signs where certain authorities (even in the U.S.) have expressed a willingness to abrogate free speech if it in someway insults, embarrasses or is offensive to certain people (in many cases, religious people). Some U.S. newspapers refused to publish pictures of the Danish cartoons even though the cartoons were legitimate news.
The only free speech I would legally prohibit is the yelling of “fire” in a crowded theater or any other speech that would willingly endanger human life, everything else is a go!
I have pocked fun at these outraged Muslims by asking why their god needed protection from his rag-tag followers; can’t he defend himself or maybe he does not object to people making fun of him.
All that logic is lost on people who do not use logic in their lives but follow what they are told to do by their religious leaders who have a stake in keeping their flock as stupid as possible; the better to control them!
No comments:
Post a Comment