It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The United Nations tries to outlaw criticism of Islam

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   

The United Nations tries to outlaw criticism of Islam


www.nydailynews.com

Almost 500 years ago, on the wall of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses, characterizing as "madness" the notion that papal pardons could absolve individuals for their sins. As viewed from Rome, Luther had maligned, even defamed, the church. Luther was eventually excommunicated. His conduct ultimately led to the creation of a Protestant Church in Germany and a Reformation throughout Europe.

It is difficult to believe that in the 21st century anyone would seriously propose that conduct such as Luther's should be deemed illegal. But a few weeks ago, the General Assembly of the United Nations took a giant step in that direction. It adopted - for the fourth straight year - a resolution prepared by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference calling upon all UN nations to adopt legislation banning the "defamation" of religion. Spurred by the Danish cartoons of 2005, some of which portrayed the Prophet Muhammed in a manner deemed offensive by the OIC, the resolution was opposed by the United States, most European nations, Japan, India and a number of other nations.

Nonetheless, it has now been adopted.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:16 AM
link   
I find it outrageous that one religion, which is known to talk bad about other religions, wants everyone to not be allowed legally to talk # about their religion. I think it is about time to dissolve the UN.

Religious involvement in government affairs is what causes most conflicts/wars. I can only see this as one more step towards a war against Islam. (even though some people believe it is already happening)

www.nydailynews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:23 AM
link   
Since 9/11 we have been conditioned to dislike Muslims, so that if we go to war with them we will support our governments

Honestly, I think the defamation of any religion is good, but passing a UN resolution forbidding it is retarded.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:24 AM
link   
Only a system of natural law and individual sovereignty makes sense to me.

All these governments and false institutions propped up by indoctrinated belief systems, they make no sense.

I am amazed at the number of people willing to let others control their lives from afar with these 'laws' written in 'books' as if it is some eternal moral code that must be followed once written. Morality is simple and natural, but becomes somewhat arbitrarily complex and artificial when taken to extremes such as in this proposal by the UN.

As if these governments and institutions have any credibility left whatsoever? Unfortunately they remain in place due to the millions that indeed give them arbitrary credibility by believing and acting a certain way, controlled to do so by indoctrination systems surrounding them from day one.

Outlaw thought. Outlaw experience. Outlaw feelings.

Outlaw criticism. Outlaw nature. Outlaw everything!



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Anyone who professes to be a follower of religion goes down a notch or two, in my books.

Reason > superstition.

All religion is fair game for criticism.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
I find Islam to be a plague on our governments. First they move into the country, then over time, they just overtake the population by breeding. Its easier, but longer then invading. Once they have a large enough population, they start to force the govt to change their laws. IE having Sharia(sp) law in the UK. Right now it is for civil matters, but expect that to change within 20 years.

Now, they want this is just the next step on the ladder for them.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I'm offended by this UN resolution. Don't ask why, I just am.

When is the UN gonna discuss the fact that I'm offended?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth
Anyone who professes to be a follower of religion goes down a notch or two, in my books.

Reason > superstition.

All religion is fair game for criticism.


wtf? So you're just gonna call me an idiot, just like that? what a spineless cheap shot. One big difference between guys like me and guys like you is that you're blind to YOUR particular faith.

But of course, this is two people discussing religion openly with contrasting opinions, and hey, the world hasn't ended. Maybe free speech is okay after all (sarc).


edit: if it is at all unclear freedom of expression in the form of questioning religion is almost a "goes without saying" type of rule...dock me for clarity.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by heyo]



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:39 AM
link   
The UN? Haha... the UN is the world's most impotent organisation.

Just look how well their "mandatory" ceasefire order is working in Gaza.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:43 AM
link   
If I'm reading this correctly, it is about ALL religions, not just Islam.


From an American perspective, the resolution so plainly violates the First Amendment that it is not a close question. Salman Rushdie's "The Satanic Verses," which offended many Muslims, is protected here. So are movies such as Mel Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ," which offended many Jews, and "The Last Temptation of Christ," which offended many Christians.

source

But as usual the focus is on Islam - and all the knee jerk reactions that go with it.

We should be looking at this as a whole and asking the opinion of ALL religions, not just those that people currently have a hate campaign against.

My own personal opinion is that this is a bad idea as it restricts freedom of speech.

Many countries already have legislation in place against hate crimes - that is enough.

[edit on 15/1/2009 by budski]



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:44 AM
link   
All I have to say to thisis, hahahahahahahahaha! Good Luck with that!


If you are going to make itlaw to do something like that, then you have to make it a law doingthat for EVERY religion. In my view, I think it is nonsense.
When something bad happens in the name of religion, and you are unable to comment on those actions because of religion, then those people will be able to get away with anything that they want.

"For too long the man has been turning us against one another, we have been unable to see the truth, because we have been fighting through 10 solid feet of ground"



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by heyo
wtf? So you're just gonna call me an idiot, just like that?


Are you going to claim evolution doesn't happen?


Originally posted by heyowhat a spineless cheap shot.


What's spineless about coming out with my opinion on a public forum? Surely spinless would be to keep it secret and take snide actions against those I disagree with?


Originally posted by heyoOne big difference between guys like me and guys like you is that you're blind to YOUR particular faith.


I think the biggest difference is that one of us has faith, and the other has evidence.

I don't have a faith, I have nothing I don't want to disbelieve. If someone went to the moon tomorrow and brought back huge lumps of moon cheese, I'd have no problem accepting the moon is made of cheese, but someone claiming that a few thousand years ago, a dusty man came off the deserts having spoken to God? Pure fantasy, I'm afraid.

Even if, and this is a big conditional if, the man HAD spoken to God, the fact that he didn't write it down there and then, combined with the ultimate fallibility of the human memory, leads me to conclude that AT BEST we'd get a fuzzy "er, I fink he said be nice, yeah?" message, and that's it.


Originally posted by heyoBut of course, this is two people discussing religion openly with contrasting opinions, and hey, the world hasn't ended. Maybe free speech is okay after all (sarc).


I don't judge you for your religion, but that you have done nothing to overcome the handicap of being a product of your environment does nothing to raise my opinion of you.

That probably sounds incredibly offensive, but what I mean is, you can listen to the bull and say "yeah, I'm down with that because I don't like to think for myself" or you can climb out of the hole you started in and keep trying for something better than an ancient fairytale.

Look at it objectively; what kind of person would you respect more?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Agent Styx
 


I agree. Not too long ago I had the opportunity to speak with two Iraqi men at the hospital where I was getting an operation done. These guys were very critical of their government, and fundamentalist Islam in general. They told me that a group who calls themselves the "Muslim Brotherhood" is wanting to take Islam back to the Stone Age.
They both assured me that this is not the way of most Muslims, and that the Brotherhood is a lot like the American KKK.

Muslims are not the only ones who take issue when one criticizes their religion, fundamentalist Christians are just as bad. As far as I know, only Wiccans can freely make jokes about their religion.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 08:53 AM
link   
wow it just occured to me how devastating a rule like this could be if somewhere downt he line a "state endorsed" religion came into effect. I mean, it's not that much of a leap from nationalism. The media can almost work miracles these days. This law reeks of control and "manipulation potential"....glad north america generally sees the un for what it is...doesn't it?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Another totally useless law slots into place. Makes you wonder if the UN is actively trying to get itself dissolved for being utterly rubbish. It's almost like they're laughing us. While failing to uphold everything else, they throw another law onto the "sort later" pile.

And this isn't to prevent criticism of Islam. Have you seen any global criticism of Islam in the last week?



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Last Man on Earth

Originally posted by heyo
wtf? So you're just gonna call me an idiot, just like that?


Are you going to claim evolution doesn't happen?


Originally posted by heyowhat a spineless cheap shot.


What's spineless about coming out with my opinion on a public forum? Surely spinless would be to keep it secret and take snide actions against those I disagree with?


Originally posted by heyoOne big difference between guys like me and guys like you is that you're blind to YOUR particular faith.


I think the biggest difference is that one of us has faith, and the other has evidence.

I don't have a faith, I have nothing I don't want to disbelieve. If someone went to the moon tomorrow and brought back huge lumps of moon cheese, I'd have no problem accepting the moon is made of cheese, but someone claiming that a few thousand years ago, a dusty man came off the deserts having spoken to God? Pure fantasy, I'm afraid.

Even if, and this is a big conditional if, the man HAD spoken to God, the fact that he didn't write it down there and then, combined with the ultimate fallibility of the human memory, leads me to conclude that AT BEST we'd get a fuzzy "er, I fink he said be nice, yeah?" message, and that's it.


Originally posted by heyoBut of course, this is two people discussing religion openly with contrasting opinions, and hey, the world hasn't ended. Maybe free speech is okay after all (sarc).


I don't judge you for your religion, but that you have done nothing to overcome the handicap of being a product of your environment does nothing to raise my opinion of you.

That probably sounds incredibly offensive, but what I mean is, you can listen to the bull and say "yeah, I'm down with that because I don't like to think for myself" or you can climb out of the hole you started in and keep trying for something better than an ancient fairytale.

Look at it objectively; what kind of person would you respect more?


the spinelessness of your post is similiar to that of talking behind someone' back. I've always thought that making fun of people on the internet was akin to threatening them. Your declaration was extremely personal and said more than just "i don't agree with religion" it said "religious people are stupid". This of course must be because it has been proven that you're smarter than me right?

Lol "the biggest difference is i have faith, you have evidence." I love how the evidence available today is somehow absolute. Scientists a hundred years ago thought the same. The evolution of science is just one incorrect conclusion after another until the correct one is reached. Evolution is kind of irrelevant to me, it is more abiogenesis that i have a problem with (but that's beside my point.) So what proof do i have, as a layman, that correct conclusions are all at this point unarguable, and therefore 100% true? After teh debacle of man-made global warming, during which scientists the world over denied even the possibility they were wrong, it has come to my attention that science is more about politics than science, just like organized religon is more about politics than the soul. If you can't see the faith in science, i don't really care it is quite evident to me, and that way of thinking has cleared up many aspects of the big picture for me.

An example of faith would be the faith that our senses are able to detect all factors in an experiment, basically, if we can't see it, it's not there.


How can you possible say you don't judge for religion when you said anyone who is religious drops a notch or two in our book? What the hell kind of doublespeak are you selling here? The fact is you do judge religous people, because you think they're stupid. I then called you on it, then defended your right to do it as per the subject of the thread.

I have no intent on a religous debate here, just don't call me and everyone else religious stupid and then brag about how nonjudgemental you are. It's hypocrisy in a very clear manifestation. Hypocrisy is a true mark of an evil man, but blind hypocrisy is just dumb.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:12 AM
link   
As an athiest i'm very offended.

This is like going hunting armed only with a spoon.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:16 AM
link   
They never banned anti semitism after WWII so this is hypocricy at its height. They basically want to keep on causing death and destruction but don't want anyone to get riled up about it and kick their behinds.

Let's ban anti-americanism too. India would like to ban anti Hinduism. While we are at it lets ban all blonde jokes.

[edit on 15-1-2009 by SectionEight]



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 09:23 AM
link   
I think we are at the point when people are afraid to knock Islams, at least the other smaller ones in the UN. Islam is a large religion, I think the largest, and can get their people behind a single cause easily.



posted on Jan, 15 2009 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Agent Styx
 


I'm not. Lets look at islam: Mohammed, may his name be erased, said, HATE your neighbors. KILL all who do not convert to Islam.
Dunno about you, but I would not want to protect criticism of this crap.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join