Islamists continue to threaten free speech

[DMB]

This is nothing new, but it is getting slowly worse.

http://www.secularism.org.uk/nss-raises-alarm-over-new-islami.html

“While non-binding,” said UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer, “the resolution constitutes a dangerous threat to free speech everywhere. It would ban any perceived offense to Islamic sensitivities as a 'serious affront to human dignity' and a violation of religious freedom, and would pressure U.N. member states — at the ‘local, national, regional and international levels’ — to erode the free speech guarantees in their ‘legal and constitutional systems.’”

“This is an Orwellian text that distorts the meaning of human rights, free speech, and religious freedom, and marks a giant step backwards for liberty and democracy worldwide,” said Neuer. “The first to suffer will be moderate Muslims in the countries that are behind this resolution, like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, where state-sanctioned blasphemy laws stifle religious freedom and outlaw conversions from Islam to other faiths,” said Neuer.

[Uthgar the Brazen]

One time, when Mohammed and I were having teh buttseckz, he told me that Muslims smell bad and dress funny. We laughed about it over pork rinds later.

[DMB]

One time, when Mohammed and I were having teh buttseckz, he told me that Muslims smell bad and dress funny. We laughed about it over pork rinds later.

That's it. Off with your head!

Behead those who insult islam! (http://www.millionface.com/l/behhead-those-who-insult-islam-europe-take-some-lessons-from-911/)

[Lady Mondegreen]

Overheard at the Human Rights Council, Geneva on 24 March 2009 during a discussionof the resolution "Combating Defamation of Religions"
NGO representative: "You can't defame an object or an idea. You can't defame a dead person, you can't defame the Prophet Mohammed."
Pakistani delegate: "That's precisely why we need this resolution. He's not around to defend himself!"

[premjan]

That's an interesting justification, I wonder if it would apply to other historical figures? Attila the Hun? Chingis Khan?

[Lady Mondegreen]

There's a good summary here of exactly what has been going on in the UN to silence Freedom of Expression over the last 10 years.
http://www.indexoncensorship.org/2009/03/26/the-slow-death-of-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-1231

[tjakey]

The liberal in me wants to think the UN is a good idea. The realist in me wants to toss the sorry fuckers into the ocean.

[Uthgar the Brazen]

I've given in to my inner realist. Stuff like this has done nothing to make me rethink that capitulation.

[Free Thinkr]

That's an interesting justification, I wonder if it would apply to other historical figures? Attila the Hun? Chingis Khan?
Presumably so. Accordingly, I say we jail the members of 2 Live Crew immediately; you wouldn't believe what one of their songs had poor Abraham Lincoln doing!

[DMB]

Article on this issue from The Economist:

http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13416209

[lpetrich]

Overheard at the Human Rights Council, Geneva on 24 March 2009 during a discussion of the resolution "Combating Defamation of Religions"
NGO representative: "You can't defame an object or an idea. You can't defame a dead person, you can't defame the Prophet Mohammed."
Pakistani delegate: "That's precisely why we need this resolution. He's not around to defend himself!"
To which I'd retort: none of the medieval Crusaders are around to defend themselves either.

More seriously, by those sorts of standards, parts of the Koran may count as defamation of religions -- like claiming that pagans are idolators, that Jesus Christ was not as great as Mohammed and that his crucifixion was some kind of fakery, that the Trinity is three gods, etc.

[LukeS]

Isn't Benedict in on it too?

[DMB]

Isn't Benedict in on it too?

To a degree. When the islamists got going on "Islamophobia", the RCC talked up "Christianophobia".