The anti-democratic Defamation of Religions Resolution in the United Nations

[DionDublin]

Guys,
this is really worrying and potentially a huge kick in the teeth for freedom, and more importantly religious and political freedom for antiests and people of religions.

Once again the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which links 57 countries with majority or significant Muslim populations has re-introduce the Defamation of Religions Resolution in the United Nations.

It allows governments the power to determine which religious views can and can't be expressed in their country, and it gives the state the right to punish those who express 'unacceptable' religious views as they see fit. So, in effect, it makes persecution legal.

It aims to criminalise words or actions deemed to be against a particular religion, especially Islam. It has the effect of providing international legitimacy for national laws that punish blasphemy or otherwise ban criticism of a religion. It is due to be voted on in the UN General Assembly at the end of this year.


What is worrying is many countrys have backed this resolution in the past when it had been previously put forward.
But the encouraging news is as the bill is close to being voted on, some countrys are realising how HORRIFIC, ILLBERAL and ANTI-DEMOCRATIC the whole notion and argument is.

Again, its another example of a failed religion which responds to criticism and critique with violence, oppresion and now quite possibly international law.
If any religion or ideology cannot and more importantly refuses to stand up to questioning, then it is clearly illogical and false.


Please, write to your MPs to block this bill, even thou they cannot vote on it, theire is motion in parliament which they can support.


I have pasted a back ground from liberty


The resolution has been introduced and voted on in various forms and under various titles since 1999. It is expected to be voted on again in the UN General Assembly in December. The OIC's original Defamation of Religions campaign had targeted the 'defamation of Islam', but later it was reframed as the 'defamation of religions' to broaden support. Until this year, Islam was the only faith specifically mentioned in the resolutions the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly have passed. In March 2010, a new version was introduced at the Human Rights Council (view the resolution). Once again it referred to Islamophobia, but it also included mention of anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and was passed by a narrow majority

All religions, ideology and governments should be open to criticism and critique without any threat of reprival.

 

[RFUS]

Guys,
this is really worrying and potentially a huge kick in the teeth for freedom, and more importantly religious and political freedom for antiests and people of religions.

Once again the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which links 57 countries with majority or significant Muslim populations has re-introduce the Defamation of Religions Resolution in the United Nations.

It allows governments the power to determine which religious views can and can't be expressed in their country, and it gives the state the right to punish those who express 'unacceptable' religious views as they see fit. So, in effect, it makes persecution legal.

It aims to criminalise words or actions deemed to be against a particular religion, especially Islam. It has the effect of providing international legitimacy for national laws that punish blasphemy or otherwise ban criticism of a religion. It is due to be voted on in the UN General Assembly at the end of this year.


What is worrying is many countrys have backed this resolution in the past when it had been previously put forward.
But the encouraging news is as the bill is close to being voted on, some countrys are realising how HORRIFIC, ILLBERAL and ANTI-DEMOCRATIC the whole notion and argument is.

Again, its another example of a failed religion which responds to criticism and critique with violence, oppresion and now quite possibly international law.
If any religion or ideology cannot and more importantly refuses to stand up to questioning, then it is clearly illogical and false.


Please, write to your MPs to block this bill, even thou they cannot vote on it, theire is motion in parliament which they can support.


I have pasted a back ground from liberty


The resolution has been introduced and voted on in various forms and under various titles since 1999. It is expected to be voted on again in the UN General Assembly in December. The OIC's original Defamation of Religions campaign had targeted the 'defamation of Islam', but later it was reframed as the 'defamation of religions' to broaden support. Until this year, Islam was the only faith specifically mentioned in the resolutions the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly have passed. In March 2010, a new version was introduced at the Human Rights Council (view the resolution). Once again it referred to Islamophobia, but it also included mention of anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and was passed by a narrow majority

All religions, ideology and governments should be open to criticism and critique without any threat of reprival.

I can't think of a single religion that can stand up to questioning.
And that's coming from someone who does believe in God.


That said, this all sounds potentially quite worrying.

 

[Tubey]

You have to be careful how much you read into UN resolutions - some of them are downright frightening but never fully implemented.

If you want the prime example, Google "Codex Alimentarius" to read up on a conspiracy stating the UN are planning to control food, vitamins and minerals all over the world.

The reality? There isn't a grain of truth in it really... it's a lot of theorycrafting and not much else.

I suspect that this new resolution is just to stop mass suicide cults, rather than mainstream religions - or even religions that are a bit "whacky" but are generally harmless.

That's developed countries obviously. Others may use it to impose absolute law, but quite frankly they already do that anyway. Try passionately kissing in Dubai and see where that gets you!

It'll probably be voted down anyway, but even if it's not, I'm not overly fussed.

Got to admit, your entire post has more than an element of Islamaphobia about it!

 

[DionDublin]

Got to admit, your entire post has more than an element of Islamaphobia about it!

but thats just not true.

I have based it upon the history of the resolution and the history of the resolution comes from islamic groups to protect their interest.

Whats 'phobic' about the facts?

I find your comment another attempt to stifle the real debate.

As for its not being serious, it is serious, it will justify torture and oppression and silence the voices of those oppresed (that includes muslims by the way).
When a country is protected/justified by international law, the people suffering under it have no voice, legal right, no justice.

Freedom first.

 

[Seamus Colemole]

It says its not binding.

Does that mean that any country that does not wish to enforce it doesn't have to?

 

[DionDublin]

but those who do can have the perfect excuse for human rights violation.

 

[Tubey]

but thats just not true.

I have based it upon the history of the resolution and the history of the resolution comes from islamic groups to protect their interest.

Whats 'phobic' about the facts?

I find your comment another attempt to stifle the real debate.

As for its not being serious, it is serious, it will justify torture and oppression and silence the voices of those oppresed (that includes muslims by the way).
When a country is protected/justified by international law, the people suffering under it have no voice, legal right, no justice.

Freedom first.

Again, its another example of a failed religion which responds to criticism and critique with violence, oppresion and now quite possibly international law.

Generalisation much? Obviously you have a blind hatred of Islam, but each to their own.

I don't quite understand how you can call a religion a "failure" when it's absolutely massive!

The way you've put it, you'd have people believe the resolution will ensure anyone who criticises Islam will be locked in a concentration camp and exterminated. The fact is this will in all probability never pass through the UN anyway and, like most things the UN do, it will be completely disregarded by the major nations (as deathbyropeandglass says, it's not binding).

All it is is an attempt by Islamic countries to legally keep a stranglehold on their own current states without interference from the west, via a rule governed by the UN.

It'll be veto'd, stop worrying. Why do you think they've been trying since 1999 for this? Because it keeps getting knocked back! Britain and the USA alone vetoing it alone puts it dead in the water.

but those who do can have the perfect excuse for human rights violation.

Exactly. Any idiot can see that, which is why the idiots at the UN will see it too. It won't go through.

 

[Jamo Martinez]

Generalisation much? Obviously you have a blind hatred of Islam, but each to their own.

I don't quite understand how you can call a religion a "failure" when it's absolutely massive!

The way you've put it, you'd have people believe the resolution will ensure anyone who criticises Islam will be locked in a concentration camp and exterminated. The fact is this will in all probability never pass through the UN anyway and, like most things the UN do, it will be completely disregarded by the major nations (as deathbyropeandglass says, it's not binding).

All it is is an attempt by Islamic countries to legally keep a stranglehold on their own current states without interference from the west, via a rule governed by the UN.

It'll be veto'd, stop worrying. Why do you think they've been trying since 1999 for this? Because it keeps getting knocked back! Britain and the USA alone vetoing it alone puts it dead in the water.



Exactly. Any idiot can see that, which is why the idiots at the UN will see it too. It won't go through.

Exactly. The five permanent members of the security council have the power of veto on UN resolutions. No Islamic countries amongst that lot

 

[Bundy]

Why are islamists so defensive.

 

[Deleted member 28206]

Can someone please dumb this thread down please.

 

[Muggins]

Errr, Get Jo on??

 

[Bundy]

 

[Matt Damon]

Guys,
this is really worrying and potentially a huge kick in the teeth for freedom, and more importantly religious and political freedom for antiests and people of religions.

Once again the Organisation of the Islamic Conference which links 57 countries with majority or significant Muslim populations has re-introduce the Defamation of Religions Resolution in the United Nations.

It allows governments the power to determine which religious views can and can't be expressed in their country, and it gives the state the right to punish those who express 'unacceptable' religious views as they see fit. So, in effect, it makes persecution legal.

It aims to criminalise words or actions deemed to be against a particular religion, especially Islam. It has the effect of providing international legitimacy for national laws that punish blasphemy or otherwise ban criticism of a religion. It is due to be voted on in the UN General Assembly at the end of this year.


What is worrying is many countrys have backed this resolution in the past when it had been previously put forward.
But the encouraging news is as the bill is close to being voted on, some countrys are realising how HORRIFIC, ILLBERAL and ANTI-DEMOCRATIC the whole notion and argument is.

Again, its another example of a failed religion which responds to criticism and critique with violence, oppresion and now quite possibly international law.
If any religion or ideology cannot and more importantly refuses to stand up to questioning, then it is clearly illogical and false.


Please, write to your MPs to block this bill, even thou they cannot vote on it, theire is motion in parliament which they can support.


I have pasted a back ground from liberty


The resolution has been introduced and voted on in various forms and under various titles since 1999. It is expected to be voted on again in the UN General Assembly in December. The OIC's original Defamation of Religions campaign had targeted the 'defamation of Islam', but later it was reframed as the 'defamation of religions' to broaden support. Until this year, Islam was the only faith specifically mentioned in the resolutions the UN Human Rights Council and General Assembly have passed. In March 2010, a new version was introduced at the Human Rights Council (view the resolution). Once again it referred to Islamophobia, but it also included mention of anti-Semitism and Christianophobia and was passed by a narrow majority

All religions, ideology and governments should be open to criticism and critique without any threat of reprival.

Agree.

This is the theocracy's / theocratic dictatorships trying to impose their way of life on us.

That and to try and create a two tier state.

Similar to the wish to impose sharia law.


ONE law. not dual legal systems.