The UN Human Rights Council has voted to adopt a text proposed by Pakistan that makes defamation of religion a human rights violation. Apparently the term "human rights" does not translate well into Arabic, as this resolution does not protect the rights of human beings, just religious ideas. The measure was pushed through by Muslim nations who seek to leverage the rule against those who would criticize their religion, and by extension their theocracy.
"Defamation of religious [sic] is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence." Actually, reacting to criticism everyone else endures by moving to prevent people from ever questioning you is "restriction of freedom." As for "incitement to religious violence," that's a problem originating with the religious, not the critics.
This is largely a reaction to the Mohammed cartoons and the controversy they caused. Apparently the Muslim world is upset that they can't kill people who criticize Islam if they do it from free land. This measure seeks to put religion above reproach, outside of the realm of what can be discussed critically.
I doubt these measures will lead to any action, but they are an indicator of one major flaw of fundamentalism: the inability to take a joke.
"Defamation of religious [sic] is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence." Actually, reacting to criticism everyone else endures by moving to prevent people from ever questioning you is "restriction of freedom." As for "incitement to religious violence," that's a problem originating with the religious, not the critics.
This is largely a reaction to the Mohammed cartoons and the controversy they caused. Apparently the Muslim world is upset that they can't kill people who criticize Islam if they do it from free land. This measure seeks to put religion above reproach, outside of the realm of what can be discussed critically.
I doubt these measures will lead to any action, but they are an indicator of one major flaw of fundamentalism: the inability to take a joke.
Hey Ginx,
ReplyDeleteI love your blog and your fiance's blog. We have a lot in common, the least of which is our number of pets. We have a dog, two ferrets, two cats, and a tarantula--sort of reminds me of your three cats and dog. Anyways, in addition to religious skepticism, my wife and I also share congruent views about Israel-Palestine. Though raised Protestant, I converted, or nearly converted, to Orthodox Judaism a few years back and learned a lot about Jewish observance and culture.
I have been absent from the blogging world for the last month or so and will be likewise absent for at least another month due to school commitments. Hope to talk to you in the coming months.
Ginx: I agree that this UN measure is an indication of a skewed perspective. Human rights are not violated by giving an opinion or even by pointing out truths which are contradictory to a religious idea.
ReplyDeleteScript: Hey man! I'll be glad when you and Philo have time to start blogging again. I know how it is though. I'm struggling to blog and read blogs, too. Hard to keep up.
Be nice if we could somehow get paid for this, huh? That would sweeten the deal, eh?