Always remember to hang/paste/tack/tape 'em high, folks...
UN rights body approves US-Egypt free speech text
By FRANK JORDANS (AP) – 1 day ago
GENEVA — The U.N. Human Rights Council approved a U.S.-backed resolution Friday deploring attacks on religions while insisting that freedom of expression remains a basic right. The inaugural resolution sponsored by the U.S. since it joined the council in June broke a long-running deadlock between Western and Islamic countries in the wake of the publication of cartoons depicting the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.
The resolution has no effect in law but provides Muslim countries with moral ammunition the next time they feel central tenets of Islam are being ridiculed by Western politicians or media through "negative racial and religious stereotyping."
American diplomats say the measure — co-sponsored by Egypt — is part of the Obama administration's effort to reach out to Muslim countries.
"The exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society," the resolution states, urging countries to protect free speech by lifting legal restrictions, ensuring the safety of journalists, promoting literacy and preventing media concentration.
Rights groups cautiously welcomed the resolution as an improvement on earlier drafts, but said Egypt was in no position to lecture other countries about free speech as it has a poor record on the matter.
"Egypt's cosponsorship of the resolution on freedom of expression is not the result of a real commitment to upholding freedom of expression," said Jeremie Smith, Geneva director of the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.
"If this were the case, freedom of expression would not be systematically violated on a daily basis in Egypt," he said.
Others warned that the resolution appears to protect religions rather than believers and encourages journalists to abide by ill-defined codes of conduct.
"Unfortunately, the text talks about negative racial and religious stereotyping, something which most free expression and human rights organizations will oppose," said Agnes Callamard, executive director of London-based group Article 19.
"The equality of all ideas and convictions before the law and the right to debate them freely is the keystone of democracy," she said.
Although the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. Some Asian and African countries had called for stronger condemnation of articles, cartoons and videos they believe defames Islam.
Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.
6 comments:
Revere Rides Again,
Jordans states,
-----------------------------------------------------
The resolution has no effect in law but provides Muslim countries with moral ammunition the next time they feel central tenets of Islam are being ridiculed by Western politicians or media through "negative racial and religious stereotyping."
-----------------------------------------------------
Which is reason enough to oppose this.
Also according to him,
-----------------------------------------------------
"The exercise of the right to freedom of opinion and expression is one of the essential foundations of a democratic society," the resolution states, urging countries to protect free speech by lifting legal restrictions, ensuring the safety of journalists, promoting literacy and preventing media concentration.
-----------------------------------------------------
Which means that like the new Iraqi and Afghan constitutions, when they call for freedom of religion, this thing contradicts itself.
Jeremie Smith is correct, anyone who was truly committed to protecting freedom of speech and took only a few minutes to think about this, would oppose it.
Revere Rides Again,
By the way, speaking of free speech, her are a few websites that knowing you, I think you would like.
Blasphemy Day
As you might guess they are pro free speech. Also check out their politically incorrect poll on the Prophet Muhammad. I think that you will like it.
Also you might enjoy The Darwin Finches' You Tube Channel and their website. They are a small group of skeptics who make fun of creationism and other pseudo sciences as well as religion. I contributed some source material for them once. They had a good time making fun of the expanding Earth video I sent them
Although I'm not an atheist or agnostic, I understand the importance for a free society of people being able to criticize religion. We may disagree on some things, including some important things, but we can agree here. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom to reject religion must be protected! Good people have died, so we could enjoy those rights today, and we should not do something that would make them roll in their graves.
Revere Rides Again,
Sorry, let me rewrite that last paragraph.
"Although I'm not an atheist or agnostic, I respect their right to blaspheme. I have a bigger problem with the state, than I have with blasphemy of any kind. I understand the importance for a free society and its people being able to criticize religion, any religion, including my own. No religion or belief system deserves immunity from criticism, period. We may disagree on some things, including some important things, but we can, and do agree here. Freedom of speech and freedom of religion and freedom to reject religion must be protected! Good people have died, so we could enjoy those rights today, and we should not do something that would make them roll in their graves."
Ooops, I see I missed Blasphemy Day. But knowing me, I'm sure I celebrated it in my own special way.
Thanks for the suggestions, Damien.
The reason why no belief system or religion deserves immunity from criticism is because to confer such immunity on ideas and then act with force to subdue those who "violate" it is itself a fundamental violation of our right to live. We have to think to live. We have to be free to make choices in order to decide how to live. When some gang comes along brandishing scimitars, stakes, nooses, stones or whatever their chosen means of punishment and says, we are going to kill you with these unless you cease criticizing our beliefs, that is the same as if they said stop thinking, become robots, or we will kill you.
"I'm offended by that!" should never be allowed as an argument in any debate over ideas. If someone mocks or challenges your beliefs, respond with your own arguments but don't resort to "you hurt my feelings!" as a way to dodge an argument.
We have to wade into the Muslims with everything we have and our lives and futures are going to depend on how successful we are at hurting a lot more than just their feelings.
Revere Rides Again,
Nice to hear from you. I'm glad you liked the site.
Revere Rides Again,
While violating one's rights to free speech may not technically be the same as violating one's right to live (after all, one can live as a slave in state that does not allow him to criticize it), it is still a fundamental right and a fundamental western value.
Post a Comment