Yet again, an institution revered by the American Left, has voted to restrict free speech and further erode the human rights that liberal (small “l”) democracies are supposed to cherish and protect.
GENEVA (AP) – Islamic countries pushed through a resolution at the U.N. Human Rights Council on Friday urging a global prohibition on the public defamation of religion—a response largely to the furor last year over caricatures published in a Danish newspaper of the Muslim Prophet Muhammad.
The statement proposed by the Organization of Islamic Conference addressed what it called a “campaign” against Muslim minorities and the Islamic religion around the world since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States.
The resolution, which was opposed by a number of other non-Muslim countries, “expresses deep concern at attempts to identify Islam with terrorism, violence and human rights violations.”
It makes no mention of any other religion besides Islam, but urges countries “to take resolute action to prohibit the dissemination of racist and xenophobic ideas and material aimed at any religion or its followers that constitute incitement and religious hatred, hostility, or violence.”
I’m sure there will be no demonstrations in the streets over this UN mandate by those who use their First Amendment to denegrate our President and our Armed Forces at the drop of a hat.
Will you be upset when the Leftist Thought Police on knocking on YOUR door to take more of your freedoms away?
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
Wait a minute … This is from the same religion that wishes to eliminate any but theirs? That wants to erase Israel? That calls others “infidels?” The U.S. “The Great Satan?” That calls for a jihad against anyone or anything or any place they disagree with?
Actually, if it would shut them the f’k up, I’m for it. And it would shut liberals up from campaigning against Christianity.
What was the downside again?
Only approved speech is allowed.
Offensive speech, anything that people don’t like or hurts their feelings, is not allowed.
Any speech that reflects the hostility people feel must be suppressed. This doesn’t make the hostility go away, but it helps people pretend.
Get with the program people!
A meaningless resolution from a toothless organization. Let’s see them try and enforce it.
oh good. now when some deluded christian starts proselytizing. i can tell him to stfu.
What sort of person would even think about defaming The Religion of Peace? Off with their heads I say.
oh good. now when some deluded christian starts proselytizing. i can tell him to stfu.
Does this also mean that when libs start felching the Islamo-fascists, as is their wont, we can tell them to shove it?
#5 no markie, it means the opposite. Calling Christians “deluded” is an obvious insult to their religion. It might make them feel attacked or violent.
don’t forget bruce, it’s the GOP that hates privacy…you know, they want to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies, they want to tell people who they can and cannot marry, they want to tell people how and when they can die and they have no problem with warrantless spying on each other.
the gop – the anti-privacy party. goldwater’s rolling in his grave.
you know, they want to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies
When it involves killing another human being because having it around would inconvenience the mother, you bet.
they want to tell people who they can and cannot marry
Yup, those laws against polygamy, incest, and child marriage really cramp your style, don’t they?
they want to tell people how and when they can die
Hey, if you want to commit suicide, that’s your problem. Just don’t expect us to support it or pay for it.
and they have no problem with warrantless spying on each other
Especially when it involves known terrorists calling other terrorists outside the country.
And as far as Goldwater goes, what makes you think he’d support your policy of surrender to and protection of terrorists?
rotf, ndt, where do your get your ability to critically think???
The words “markie” and “critically think” don’t exactly jibe well together either, honey.
Checkmate.
Regards,
Peter H.
NDT: abortion is not murder. our courts have determined that. keeping same-sex people from marrying defies our bill of rights. death-with-dignity, twice approved by voters in oregon, was heavily contested by bushco. the nsa eavesdropping program is illegal and far broader than these criminals in charge admit.
face it, the gop, within their platform, argues against privacy at every turn. were you duped into thinking the gop is for people’s privacy? or are you stupid? or are you, like a lemming, blindly following this filthy political party thinking you won’t have to pay your fair share of taxes?
NDT; bzzzt. wrong again.
abortion is not murder. our courts have decided that.
disallowing same-sex marriage is against our bill of rights.
death-with-dignity, twice approved by oregon voters, was fought by the gop and bushco at every turn.
the nsa warrantless eavesdropping program has shown to be far broader than what they want you to believe….just ask the fbi.
face it, the gop is a filthy political party that scapegoats people not in their “mold.” the gop wants to control every aspect of our citizens’ rights. if you can’t see that, then it’s your fault. wake up before it’s too late.
Leaving snark aside. I don’t see the Democrats as particularly supportive of privacy either. (The “list” that NDT responded to aren’t the areas where Republicans do badly with privacy, consequently they are not the areas where the Democrats do *well*.) The “nanny state” intrudes domestically with hardly a peep from anyone. The defining element seems to be “a good cause”. Conservatives (not necessarily Republicans) and libertarians are on a constant push-back on government intrusion into our lives. Anything regulated has to be enforced and that means yet another demand for personal information. Parents in most states have the burden of proving they are raising their children properly, guilty until proven innocent, and people seem to think this is a good thing because it’s “for a good cause” even though the “cause” can’t be shown to be served as children still “fall through the cracks” and suffer abuse and worse and the infringement on privacy for the “cause” can’t even be shown to impact it.
Yeah, the Republicans suck on this, but the Democrats are even worse. Pointing to abortion (better a dead baby than an abused one) or marriage (Dems may talk nice but vote nearly identically to Reps) or listening to foreign originated phone calls or tracking international financial transactions (most done for years under Dem presidents but suddenly the cause of righteous outrage) misses entirely the outright philosophical preference of Democrats for involving government in our private lives. When the state is presented as the answer to the problems in our private lives, solutions to parenting, to medicine, to drugs and crime (every bit as much as Republicans) it is going to involve… involvement.
It’s handy to be able to point to abortion (privacy!) and marriage (privacy!) and anonymous and limited spying (privacy!) and use those to present Democrats as “good on privacy” but someone who believes that is practicing willful self-delusion.
And we will notice, again, that something that should be a point of agreement between the right and left, that freedom of speech is important and should be defended and does, yes, include the freedom to say things that others will find offensive, is not a point of agreement at all.
In fact, because *in this case* people on the right, conservatives, are supporting freedom of speech and insisting that it’s important. The “left” is forced to find a contrary position to hold. (Still, the divisiveness of politics is all the fault of the “right”.)
So rather than agree, to find a place of commonality, the “left” must find a way to disagree. Here we see it’s by accusing the “right” of some other infraction against privacy.
It hurts you guys doesn’t it. Each time you’re forced to take positions against your liberal beliefs. The right forces you to support dictators and to ignore assaults on free speech. It must really burn.
LOL….you’re assuming, Synova, that they actually DO support free speech and oppose dictators.
Remember, this was the group that tried to convince us for years how wonderful the Soviet style of government was — the apotheosis of modern liberal thought. People should all be forced to be equal by law, no one should be allowed to succeed more than anyone else, the government should control everything, and religion and any criticism of leftist leaders should be overwhelmingly suppressed.
I try to think the best of people. 🙂
Does free speech matter? Does the treatment of women matter? Does the treatment of anyone matter? Does liberty and respect for human rights matter?
Well, it ought to. And those ought to be *unifying* principles. Ya know… our Western ideals. Liberty and Justice for all.
To an extent that’s been perverted by multi-culturalsim. And that’s a shame. But I think it’s also a bit under the radar for people. Respecting other cultures seems like a good thing and they don’t realize that what is happening is that they’ve entirely given up the very foundations of liberal thought. They’ve given up believing in equality. Instead of individuals being equal and having equal claim to freedom and the pursuit of happiness, cultures are seen as equal no matter how their members are abused.
If a liberal had to actually *say* they supported a dictator, would they?
Oh, nevermind Castro. Nevermind Chevez. Nevermind just about anyone who gets a pass these days, not to mention those that get praises. Most liberals aren’t *actually* socialists and very few are *actually* communists.
They’re just more interested in praising anyone who isn’t the United States since that multi-cultural thing makes the rules that we can only criticize ourselves and never anyone else.
But really, that’s a slightly different thing than this reflexive disagreement with the Right. Conservatives could say that the sky was blue and liberals would find a way to explain how they are wrong.
Free Speech should be an easy one. Can I have a witness? Amen! But oh no. Look at the thread? Is it a happy pile on of agreement that this assault on free speech and the very notion of free speech is a horrible thing? Nah. It’s a “but you aren’t perfect” response in the interest of being divisive at all times about all things.
We *can’t* agree. And if the “right” takes up the causes of the “left” (and what is “conservative” other than conserving past values?) it *forces* the left to change it’s tune. Band together in the cause of free speech? Heck no! We’d rather talk about cultural sensitivity. What’s free speech good for? Do something about a part of the world where women are property and rape victims are guilty of adultery and gay men are hanged and our military sees enough of the result of private religious court rulings to have an acronymn for EJK? Can the “left” support doing something about that? No. It can’t. Because the “right” did it and not them, and the “right” must be opposed at all costs.
The Soviet Union was actually better at this than the American left (or Europeans) as was Eastern Europe. And if they got the economics totally screwed up, they at least *did* have and enforce a ethnically blind system. Soviets wouldn’t have stood for allowing different rules for different ethnicities or, for that matter, even conceived of giving up the right to make moral judgments about other groups of people.
Well, not quite, Syn….there was a considerable degree of discrimination against ethnic minorities (basically, anyone who wasn’t Russian) in the old Soviet Union. But they at least paid lip service to the idea of nondiscrimination, unlike the US, in which Dems and liberals demand that people be treated differently based on their minority-group status.
People like rightiswrong have clearly never attempted to listen during a honest conversation based on ideas with any real or mainstream conservative. Responding to such crass generalizations and all-out misstatements, while noble and necessary, is largely futile in my experience; and I’ve had plenty, living on a college campus. Typically when I address somebody in rightiswrong’s vein, it seems that their brain shuts down temporarily whenever I cite facts or data that are inconvenient to “reality”. Rather than rectify their world-view to facts, they prefer to rectify the facts to their world-view.
As for the UN, how about we submit our own resolution, which calls for proper treatment of women and gays around the world (especially in so many Islamic countries). After we deal with those stonings and hangings, then maybe we can work on their hurt feelings.
I don’t mind the shortening of my nick but I wanted to mention that there’s another poster who goes by “syn” and while I usually agree with her, she’s not me.
[Comment deleted for violating community terms of conduct.]
North Dallas Forty So I guess you’re all for gays not being allowed to marry? It appears to me that the Republicans don’t want to gays to get married. What’s up with that?
I would like to tell Republicans to lay off over abortion. I want control over my body, you and nobody else should have control over it. I am a woman and I want choices, not chains.
Don’t be ridiculous, abortion is not murder and never will be. Otherwise you would be advocating women be thrown in for murder or attempted murder for seeking an abortion. Until Christianists and Republicans are willing to jail women, their claims that abortion is murder are worthless. None of this pantywaist weaseling out by laying all the punishment on the doctors.
I see you’re naive enough to believe that the US Government will only spy on terrorists. Not on fine upstanding, pure individuals like you. But what’s to stop them from spying on you? Tell me. What’s stopping the US Government from spying on you?
Republicans are for free speech? HAHAHAHAHA! Sure, they are all for HATE speech. If I called Romney an Islamofascist, that would be all right with you? If I said that Bush and Cheney should be water-boarded, you would stand up and cheer my freedom of speech? If I made an racist comment against Condi Rice you would pat me on the back and say Hell Yeah?
Don’t forget, RIW, it’s the left that wishes to dictate how we travel, what kind of vehicles we use, what type of fuel we use in them, what type of lightbulbs we use etc. and they’re willing to grow governement and increase taxes to make it happen.
As far as free speech, the left deomonizes anybody who disagrees with their global B.S. religion, calls them “holocaust deniers”, suppresses their “dissent” and declares the debate “over”. Where was the support of free speech in the letter from Rockefeller & Snowe to ExxonMobile?
they want to tell people who they can and cannot marry,
Don’t forget that Kerry-Edwards oppose gay marriage, as do several other libs. In fact, if you had the balls to be honest, you could say that they hold the same position Bush does in that they OPPOSE gay marriage, but support civil unions. But we’re not supposed to know that. We’re all supposed to ASSume that only Republicans are racist, sexist, bigot homophobes. You pathetic, ignorant wretch.
keeping same-sex people from marrying defies our bill of rights.
And you tell that to the libs who oppose gay marriage, right?
the nsa eavesdropping program is illegal and far broader than these criminals in charge admit.
FISA Court of Review approved it. The libs who were aware of it, who tried to pretend they weren’t, didn’t have a problem with it. Why was it not illegal when your sweet lord BJ used it?
Furthermore, did you happen to notice that while the libs in congress were bashing Bush over it, NOT A SINGLE ONE demanded that it should end?
were you duped into thinking the gop is for people’s privacy? or are you stupid?
Clearly, you’ve been duped into believing the DNC gives a rotten fcuk about you or your privacy AND you’re stupid. Prove me wrong.
the gop wants to control every aspect of our citizens’ rights.
Who’s leading a global effort to take control of everybody’s rights? The liberal left.
We know that if the GOP wanted to control every aspect of citizen’s rights, as you put it, the liberals would love him. Considering their love affair for Chavez, Castro “Uncle Joe” Stalin, Morales, Noriega, etc. You can take “The GOP wants to blahblahblah” and stick it. Nobody’s buying it.
No, I would not applaud you or agree with you on any of those things. That would not only be foolish of me, but also a blatant lie on my part. Of course we would prefer that you remain civil. I think I can speak for everyone when I say that we should all be civil to each other. However, civility, tolerance, and free speech are a long way off from agreement or applause.
Tolerance means exactly what it says, no more. Tolerance mandates that I tolerate your opinion, and respect your right to hold that opinion. Tolerance does not mean that I have to agree with your or even cede that your opinion is as true or valid as mine. If I thought that was the case, I wouldn’t bother to argue with you.
Just because I disagree with what you say, and think that you should not make racist, vulgar, mindlessly violent, or false statements, does not mean that I think you should be prohibited from doing so. Now, it’s true that in a society where we are given rights, we are also then burdened with the responsibility to use them, well, responsibly, but that responsibility lies with you, and there is no way that I can (or should try to) exercise it for you.
There is a huge difference between thinking a behavior wrong or improper and saying something to the effect and taking action to stop that behavior.
don’t forget bruce, it’s the GOP that hates privacy
Don’t forget, RIW, it’s the liberals who are leading a global campaign to dictate how companies do business, what kind of cars we drive, what kind of fuel we use and even what kind of lightbulbs we use. Worse still, they’re willing to grossly expand government and increase taxes across the board to do so. All the while they’re flying around in their G-4s telling us how to live.
Here’s a tip: If you own 5 jets, it’s best to keep your frickin’ mouth shut lest you look like a complete a$$.
you know, they want to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies,
Well if you just kill them off, you don’t have that problem right?
they want to tell people who they can and cannot marry,
Let’s see. Kerry-Edwards, as well as many of your liberal heroes, oppose gay marriage but support civil unions just like George W. Bush. If you had an HONEST bone in your body, you’d have to say that those libs are racist, sexist, bigot homophobes as well. Problem is that you’re a complete tool of the liberal left devoid of honesty and only capable of vomitting the usual lying points. Yes, you’re a sorry pathetic liar and I’m calling you out as such. Prove me wrong.
they want to tell people how and when they can die
Well with abortion and the Schiavo case, we know that libs have no problem knocking off people of inconvenience. Wouldn’t want a child or a incapacitated wife crimping our style, now would we? Scott Peterson literally killed two birds with one stone. It’s all good, right?
and they have no problem with warrantless spying on each other.
Each other? Anyway, it was approved by the FISA Court of Review. Not only that, but the libs in congress who needed to know were aware of it, even if they pretended not to for a few days. Not only that, but how many in congress demanded that the program end? If it was good for your sweet lord BJ, why is it now illegal?
were you duped into thinking the gop is for people’s privacy? or are you stupid?
Can you show me where liberals give a rotten damn about privacy? Or are you just stupid? Prove me wrong.
Do NOT doubt me.
don’t forget bruce, it’s the GOP that hates privacy
Don’t forget, RIW, it’s the liberals who are leading a global campaign to dictate how companies do business, what kind of cars we drive, what kind of fuel we use and even what kind of lightbulbs we use. Worse still, they’re willing to grossly expand government and increase taxes across the board to do so. All the while they’re flying around in their G-4s telling us how to live.
Here’s a tip: If you own 5 jets, it’s best to keep your frickin’ mouth shut lest you look like a complete a$$.
you know, they want to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies,
Well if you just kill them off, you don’t have that problem right?
they want to tell people who they can and cannot marry,
Let’s see. Kerry-Edwards, as well as many of your liberal heroes, oppose gay marriage but support civil unions just like George W. Bush. If you had an HONEST bone in your body, you’d have to say that those libs are racist, sexist, bigot homophobes as well. Problem is that you’re a complete tool of the liberal left devoid of honesty and only capable of vomitting the usual lying points. Yes, you’re a sorry pathetic liar and I’m calling you out as such. Prove me wrong.
they want to tell people how and when they can die
Well with abortion and the Schiavo case, we know that libs have no problem knocking off people of inconvenience. Wouldn’t want a child or a incapacitated wife crimping our style, now would we? Scott Peterson literally killed two birds with one stone. It’s all good, right?
and they have no problem with warrantless spying on each other.
Each other? Anyway, it was approved by the FISA Court of Review. Not only that, but the libs in congress who needed to know were aware of it, even if they pretended not to for a few days. Not only that, but how many in congress demanded that the program end? If it was good for your sweet lord BJ, why is it now illegal?
were you duped into thinking the gop is for people’s privacy? or are you stupid?
Can you show me where liberals give a rotten d*mn about privacy? Or are you just stupid? Prove me wrong.
Do NOT doubt me.
I see markie is off his meds again.
Regards,
Peter H.
I think TGC has nicely covered the topic, but again….
For gay marriage, explain why gay leftists and Democrats support candidates like Harold Ford, who supported the FMA, John Kerry, who bragged about having the “same position” as President Bush, and Howard Dean, who clearly stated in front of Pat Robertson and The 700 Club that the Democrat platform specifically says marriage should only be between a man and a woman……when they call all of these being against gay marriage if Republicans do them.
As for abortion, abortion in 95% of cases is the result of choosing to have unprotected sex. And I have no problem with jailing women who consent to having unprotected sex and then demand the right to abort the human being their irresponsible actions created. This is both on moral and public policy grounds — especially since the populations most likely to have abortions (black females under the age of 24) are directly linked to the populations for which HIV/AIDS is the leading cause of death.
What’s stopping the US Government from spying on you?
Very little. But do you think I particularly care?
If I called Romney an Islamofascist, that would be all right with you? If I said that Bush and Cheney should be water-boarded, you would stand up and cheer my freedom of speech?
(shrug) You can say what you want. It’s a free country.
But with your Condi Rice example, does that mean that, since you leftists think racial epithets against her are justified, that they can be made against any person of color?
bzzzt. wrong again, tgc: bushco was slapped down by scotus yesterday for failing to make the epa fight emissions. and bzzt, wrong again, ndt: only the republican platform has discrimination written in it.
face it, the gop wants to control your lives. and apparently the right is all for it.
OK, RIW, for you to go, “bzzzt. wrong again,” there needs to be something that TGC said that was actually fallacious. He said nothing postitive or negative about the President’s environmental policies. He merely said that the left wants to exercise government control over us to enforce environmental policies.
I’d remind you (as TGC said) that it’s the left, not the GOP that tries to tell people what light bulbs they have to use. That it’s the left, not the GOP that attempts to dictate what kind of cars people are allowed to drive. That it’s the left, not the GOP that desires the government enforced redistrobution of wealth from top to bottom. All of these things are clear examples of the left’s attempted or successful lessening of freedom.
However, pointing to the other side’s wrongs does not blot out your side’s wrongs. I’ll admit that there are some issues where the GOP has failed to live up to it’s ideals of greater individual liberty. Can you at least do the same for your side? Or are you blind to any and all failures of The Party?
Ack! I mistyped “its” as “it’s” there. My shame is immense.
bzzt, wrong again, ndt: only the republican platform has discrimination written in it.
Too bad; Howard Dean already told us the real truth.
He added, “The Democratic Party platform from 2004 says that marriage is between a man and a woman. That’s what it says.”
And of course, rightiswrong can’t even answer when confronted with evidence that Dems like Kerry, Clinton, Ford, and others support bans on gay marriage.
bzzzt. wrong again, tgc: bushco was slapped down by scotus yesterday for failing to make the epa fight emissions.
It wasn’t Bush’s job to “make” the EPA include CO2. That belongs to congress.
and bzzt, wrong again, ndt: only the republican platform has discrimination written in it.
No it doesn’t. And John FelchMe Kerry said it was a mistake to have antything about gay marriage in the DNC platform. Not only that, but he also backed a MA ban on gay marriage. Therefore, by your logic, Kerry and those with similar beliefs are racist, sexist, bigot homophobes.
I am ready to accept your apologies for doubting me. Do NOT doubt me.
rightiswrong… A word to the wise…
It’s dumb for you to try to use “Bzzzt – wrong again”, honey. First of all, it’s somebody else’s thing here on GP. (Mine.) You’re copying someone else’s tic or catchphrase. How jejune. Second, you don’t have enough content (i.e. brains) to pull it off.
Keep using it if you insist, but know in your heart it makes you look even dumber.
I find it interesting that we (centre-right) can point out our disagreements with the ‘right’ and flaws. but the more left sided people hide from their own problems.
Oh, and you forgot, the left also wants to protect us from any potentially self destructive behaviour. Heck, they made the entire gorram state of Ohio smoke free, when it’s something a business should be allowed to determine for themselves. *sigh*
When did tolerance change into a ‘right’ to avoid being offended?