FREE TAPATALK APP

RandFan · 27th January 2009, 11:06 PM

Quote:

Why should I respect these oppressive religions?

Whenever a religious belief is criticized, its adherents say they're victims of 'prejudice'

The right to criticize religion is being slowly doused in acid. Across the world, the small, incremental gains made by secularism – giving us the space to doubt and question and make up our own minds – are being beaten back by belligerent demands that we "respect" religion. A historic marker has just been passed, showing how far we have been shoved. The UN rapporteur who is supposed to be the global guardian of free speech has had his job rewritten – to put him on the side of the religious censors.

...

All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do. I don't respect the idea that a man was born of a virgin, walked on water and rose from the dead. I don't respect the idea that we should follow a "Prophet" who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't follow him.

I don't respect the idea that the West Bank was handed to Jews by God and the Palestinians should be bombed or bullied into surrendering it. I don't respect the idea that we may have lived before as goats, and could live again as woodlice. This is not because of "prejudice" or "ignorance", but because there is no evidence for these claims. They belong to the childhood of our species, and will in time look as preposterous as believing in Zeus or Thor or Baal.

...

But a free society cannot be structured to soothe the hardcore faithful. It is based on a deal. You have an absolute right to voice your beliefs – but the price is that I too have a right to respond as I wish. Neither of us can set aside the rules and demand to be protected from offence.

Let me state one more time. I have no ethnic bias. I want all people to have basic human rights. I want gays to be able to marry and I want women to have the right not to marry at the age of 10 or not to be stoned and the right to freedom of thought and conscience.

There is nothing about religion that should exempt it from criticism. The shallow claim that it is only certain individuals or certain groups that are the cause of the problem don't obviate the religious underpinning of these matters.

We are giving away something precious and important in the name of political correctness. We are giving away our right to criticize.

Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them. This includes Judaism, Christianity and yes Islam. That there are some examples of freedom to be found in religion is not enough.

fishbob · 27th January 2009, 11:10 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them.

Choir here.

Preacher, sign me up.

FlamingMoe · 27th January 2009, 11:15 PM

I don't know that, on this forum anyway, there's anything to be said about the OP.

RandFan · 27th January 2009, 11:34 PM

Originally Posted by FlamingMoe

I don't know that, on this forum anyway, there's anything to be said about the OP.

Oh ye of little faith.

I kid but in all sincerity I'm not trying to be provacative. However, if there isn't a discussion on this particular subject in this forum it will be a first. I'd be happy for people to simply agree though.

Policenaut · 27th January 2009, 11:43 PM

I don't see much to disagree about.

gumboot · 28th January 2009, 01:58 AM

Amen times infinity. Or whatever.

ddt · 28th January 2009, 02:55 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'd be happy for people to simply agree though.

Where can I sign? Great piece, I agree 100%. This one line (which you already quoted) sums it up quite succinctly:

Quote:

All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do.

Gord_in_Toronto · 28th January 2009, 09:44 AM

Well let's get after those Moslem's for denying the Christ is the Son of God and that he just some common prophet. That' some disrespect-and-a-half.

Idiots all.

Madalch · 28th January 2009, 10:44 AM

Clearly, if it becomes illegal to criticise a religion, then all religions must be banned. There are no religions which do not claim that the other religions are completely wrong and misguided, with their members condemned to an undesirable afterlife.

RandFan · 28th January 2009, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by Madalch

Clearly, if it becomes illegal to criticise a religion, then all religions must be banned. There are no religions which do not claim that the other religions are completely wrong and misguided, with their members condemned to an undesirable afterlife.

Which calls up my favorite video. It's a must see. Hitchens on free speech.

bigred · 28th January 2009, 01:10 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Let me state one more time. I have no ethnic bias. I want all people to have basic human rights. I want gays to be able to marry and I want women to have the right not to marry at the age of 10 or not to be stoned and the right to freedom of thought and conscience.

There is nothing about religion that should exempt it from criticism. The shallow claim that it is only certain individuals or certain groups that are the cause of the problem don't obviate the religious underpinning of these matters.

We are giving away something precious and important in the name of political correctness. We are giving away our right to criticize.

Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them. This includes Judaism, Christianity and yes Islam. That there are some examples of freedom to be found in religion is not enough.

where to start....

First, congrats on not putting this where it belongs, ie in the Religion forum. What's the matter, did people there finally tire of the theist/Christian-hate and move on? Nobody left to sneer at? ie some "fresh meat" trolling thing?

Second, speaking for Christianity at least, Christians on the whole by far do not condemn anyone for simply questioning or criticizing. Jesus Christ and Christianity have experienced plenty of both from Day 1. (PS references to the middle ages is blatantly idiotic and more than a bit worn; welcome to today) Near as I can tell, Christians aren't "forbidding" criticism, stoning people, blowing up buildings etc. In fact many Christians themselves have questions and doubts and yes criticisms.

As for "Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them," I won't even bother. That'd be like shooting fish in a barrel.

dudalb · 28th January 2009, 01:15 PM

We have to make a distinction between having respect for religious beliefs and having respect for the right on an individual to hold religious beliefs.
The first, no way, the second, yes.

Tricky · 28th January 2009, 01:17 PM

Originally Posted by bigred

...where it belongs, ie in the Religion forum.

Agreed.

Posted By:Tricky

DC · 28th January 2009, 01:24 PM

i changed my oppinion in this regard alot, especially since i am posting on JREF.
meanwhile i agree with Randfan with it.

Toke · 28th January 2009, 01:35 PM

I don´t see anything to discuss in the OP.
Nicely put RandFan.

I respect several religius people, but not their beliefs.

RandFan · 28th January 2009, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by bigred

where to start....

First, congrats on not putting this where it belongs, ie in the Religion forum. What's the matter, did people there finally tire of the theist/Christian-hate and move on? Nobody left to sneer at? ie some "fresh meat" trolling thing?

Second, speaking for Christianity at least, Christians on the whole by far do not condemn anyone for simply questioning or criticizing. Jesus Christ and Christianity have experienced plenty of both from Day 1. (PS references to the middle ages is blatantly idiotic and more than a bit worn; welcome to today) Near as I can tell, Christians aren't "forbidding" criticism, stoning people, blowing up buildings etc. In fact many Christians themselves have questions and doubts and yes criticisms.

As for "Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them," I won't even bother. That'd be like shooting fish in a barrel.

Where to start...

There are at this moment serious social issues as a result of religion.

The UN has turned protection of free speech into censorship.
People are at this moment trying to insert religion into the classrooms (see Texas).
Gays and lesbians are denied rights because of religious sentiment (see prop 8).
Girls are being forced to marry at the age of 10.
The death in Palestine is based on religion.
You've got folks like Bill Donahue and O'Reilly claiming that there is hate speech against religion.

I could go on but this is one of our most serious problems and your belittlement of it is rather disappointing.

bokonon · 28th January 2009, 01:40 PM

Um, where was it before?

I don't think this is really a problem, except maybe in the UK. In the US, I don't see secular criticism being beaten back at all. You get some pushback ("War on Christmas" and "You wouldn't have the GUTS to say that about ISLAM!" mostly), but nobody's passing laws that muzzle free speech.

RandFan · 28th January 2009, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by bokonon

Um, where was it before?

The point of the OP was the social issues of rights of minorities and individuals and current events so I put it in Social Issues and Current Events. I know, odd, huh?

Quote:

I don't think this is really a problem, except maybe in the UK. In the US, I don't see secular criticism being beaten back at all. You get some pushback ("War on Christmas" and "You wouldn't have the GUTS to say that about ISLAM!" mostly), but nobody's passing laws that muzzle free speech.

The UN has demonstrably turned the right of free speech into censorship. The UN isn't a religious organization and the effects of what the UN has done is a social one and involves current events but that's fine. See no evil hear no evil.

bokonon · 28th January 2009, 01:54 PM

Okay, I'll grant that within the UN free speech is being censored, at least in open debate. I'm of the view that this simply serves to make the open debate occurring in the UN increasingly irrelevant. It's empty PR, like an old Pravda editorial, or a Kim Jung Il photo op.

Safe-Keeper · 28th January 2009, 02:19 PM

As long as there is discussion in the UN and in the governments of nations on banning offensive statements on religion, or even criticism of certain religions - this belongs very much in Politics or Social Issues, not R&P. Norway is currently considering a law that will prohibit strongly offensive statements on religion. The UN, as RandFan has pointed out, has apparently prohibited criticism of human rights violations backed by Sharia law (I say 'apparently' because I am on the whole ignorant of this development). Only two examples, but they illustrate the case well, I feel.

Darth Rotor · 28th January 2009, 03:22 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Oh ye of little faith.

I kid but in all sincerity I'm not trying to be provacative. However, if there isn't a discussion on this particular subject in this forum it will be a first. I'd be happy for people to simply agree though.

Rand, the West Bank wasn't handed to the Israelis by God, they took it by blood and iron in 1967. That isn't religion, that's politics.

As to respecting oppressive religion, define one please. Your OP was a bit sloppy.

DR

NoZed Avenger · 28th January 2009, 03:37 PM

Originally Posted by bokonon

Okay, I'll grant that within the UN free speech is being censored, at least in open debate. I'm of the view that this simply serves to make the open debate occurring in the UN increasingly irrelevant. It's empty PR, like an old Pravda editorial, or a Kim Jung Il photo op.

The UNs problems, if not increasing, are at least coming into sharper focus recently. Countries should not have to agree with each other, and certainly not all of the time, but the power being wielded by dictatorships (and religious theocracies) within that organization is a mockery of the goals it supposedly espouses. Meanwhile, the vast money it is spreading around is being used on graft, the shutting down of free expression, and officially-ignored sexual assaults from the armed forces it deploys as peace-keepers.

Darth Rotor · 28th January 2009, 03:39 PM

Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger

The UNs problems, if not increasing, are at least coming into sharper focus recently. Countries should not have to agree with each other, and certainly not all of the time, but the power being wielded by dictatorships (and religious theocracies) within that organization is a mockery of the goals it supposedly espouses. Meanwhile, the vast money it is spreading around is being used on graft, the shutting down of free expression, and officially-ignored sexual assaults from the armed forces it deploys as peace-keepers.

IMO, the problem was that they let just anyone join. NATO is trying to make that same stupid mistake, and thank goodness the Russians are calling them on it. Not trying to do any favors, but doing a favor nonetheless.

DR

RandFan · 28th January 2009, 04:04 PM

Originally Posted by Darth Rotor

As to respecting oppressive religion, define one please. Your OP was a bit sloppy.

In what way was it sloppy? Others seemed to think it was very clear.

Killing of homosexuals, fear of death for apostasy, subjugation of women throughout the world from all religions. Lies and pseudo science regarding AIDs and other illness and disease.

Human rights organizations are trying to address many of these issues but they are not now allowed to bring them to the one organization that exists to protect rights of all on the grounds that to do so is offensive to religion.

I honestly don't know how to make it anymore clear.

Tricky · 28th January 2009, 05:04 PM

The case made by RandFan et. al. convinced me that I was too hasty in moving this thread. It is returned to its original location with my apologies.

Posted By:Tricky

Gord_in_Toronto · 28th January 2009, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by Tricky

The case made by RandFan et. al. convinced me that I was too hasty in moving this thread. It is returned to its original location with my apologies.

Posted By:Tricky

Please stop. I can't keep up.

bokonon · 28th January 2009, 05:45 PM

I see your plan: dangle the bait, wait for me to nibble, then yank me into SI&CE (or do you folks call it "SINCE"?). Well, it won't work. I NEVER visit this wing.

Tricky · 28th January 2009, 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto

Please stop. I can't keep up.

It goes into "Sports" next.

Originally Posted by bokonon

I see your plan: dangle the bait, wait for me to nibble, then yank me into SI&CE (or do you folks call it "SINCE"?). Well, it won't work. I NEVER visit this wing.

You're already tainted. Might as well hang around.

gdnp · 28th January 2009, 06:16 PM

As examples of oppressive religious practices, I would include the subjugation of women, female circumcision, the claim of the right to beat children, just for a start.

RandFan · 28th January 2009, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by Tricky

It goes into "Sports" next.

TragicMonkey · 28th January 2009, 06:24 PM

Respect must be earned.

Anybody who insists on respect being paid to their beliefs ought to be able to demonstrate the worthiness of those beliefs. If you can't do that, the question isn't why I don't respect your beliefs, the question is why do you?

rwguinn · 28th January 2009, 09:03 PM

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey

Respect must be earned.

Anybody who insists on respect being paid to their beliefs ought to be able to demonstrate the worthiness of those beliefs. If you can't do that, the question isn't why I don't respect your beliefs, the question is why do you?

:c lap:

27th January 2009, 11:06 PM	#1
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Should opression be respected when it's religious? Quote: Why should I respect these oppressive religions? Whenever a religious belief is criticized, its adherents say they're victims of 'prejudice' The right to criticize religion is being slowly doused in acid. Across the world, the small, incremental gains made by secularism – giving us the space to doubt and question and make up our own minds – are being beaten back by belligerent demands that we "respect" religion. A historic marker has just been passed, showing how far we have been shoved. The UN rapporteur who is supposed to be the global guardian of free speech has had his job rewritten – to put him on the side of the religious censors. ... All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do. I don't respect the idea that a man was born of a virgin, walked on water and rose from the dead. I don't respect the idea that we should follow a "Prophet" who at the age of 53 had sex with a nine-year old girl, and ordered the murder of whole villages of Jews because they wouldn't follow him. I don't respect the idea that the West Bank was handed to Jews by God and the Palestinians should be bombed or bullied into surrendering it. I don't respect the idea that we may have lived before as goats, and could live again as woodlice. This is not because of "prejudice" or "ignorance", but because there is no evidence for these claims. They belong to the childhood of our species, and will in time look as preposterous as believing in Zeus or Thor or Baal. ... But a free society cannot be structured to soothe the hardcore faithful. It is based on a deal. You have an absolute right to voice your beliefs – but the price is that I too have a right to respond as I wish. Neither of us can set aside the rules and demand to be protected from offence. Let me state one more time. I have no ethnic bias. I want all people to have basic human rights. I want gays to be able to marry and I want women to have the right not to marry at the age of 10 or not to be stoned and the right to freedom of thought and conscience. There is nothing about religion that should exempt it from criticism. The shallow claim that it is only certain individuals or certain groups that are the cause of the problem don't obviate the religious underpinning of these matters. We are giving away something precious and important in the name of political correctness. We are giving away our right to criticize. Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them. This includes Judaism, Christianity and yes Islam. That there are some examples of freedom to be found in religion is not enough.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

27th January 2009, 11:10 PM	#2
fishbob Seasonally Disaffected Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Chilly Undieville Posts: 5,670	Originally Posted by RandFan Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them. Choir here. Preacher, sign me up.
	__________________ When you believe in things you don't understand, then you suffer . . . " - Stevie Wonder "Stupidity - a callow indifference to facts or data" - Stuart Firestein -neuroscientist. I hate bigots.

27th January 2009, 11:34 PM	#4
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by FlamingMoe I don't know that, on this forum anyway, there's anything to be said about the OP. Oh ye of little faith. I kid but in all sincerity I'm not trying to be provacative. However, if there isn't a discussion on this particular subject in this forum it will be a first. I'd be happy for people to simply agree though.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 01:58 AM	#6
gumboot lorcutus.tolere Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: New Zealand Posts: 23,194	Amen times infinity. Or whatever.
	__________________ O xein', angellein Lakedaimoniois hoti têde keimetha tois keinon rhémasi peithomenoi. A fan of fantasy? Check out Project Dreamforge.

28th January 2009, 02:55 AM	#7
ddt Mafia Penguin Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Netherlands Posts: 10,406	Originally Posted by RandFan I'd be happy for people to simply agree though. Where can I sign? Great piece, I agree 100%. This one line (which you already quoted) sums it up quite succinctly: Quote: All people deserve respect, but not all ideas do.
	__________________ Proud member of the Solipsistic Autosycophant's Group

27th January 2009, 11:15 PM	#3
FlamingMoe Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Your mom's house. Posts: 853	I don't know that, on this forum anyway, there's anything to be said about the OP.

27th January 2009, 11:43 PM	#5
Policenaut Infidel Defiler Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Shadow Moses Island Posts: 2,193	I don't see much to disagree about.

28th January 2009, 09:44 AM	#8
Gord_in_Toronto Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 13,424	Well let's get after those Moslem's for denying the Christ is the Son of God and that he just some common prophet. That' some disrespect-and-a-half. Idiots all.
	__________________ "Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick

28th January 2009, 10:44 AM	#9
Madalch The Jester Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: The wet coast. Posts: 8,750	Clearly, if it becomes illegal to criticise a religion, then all religions must be banned. There are no religions which do not claim that the other religions are completely wrong and misguided, with their members condemned to an undesirable afterlife.
	__________________ As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker

28th January 2009, 01:05 PM	#10
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Madalch Clearly, if it becomes illegal to criticise a religion, then all religions must be banned. There are no religions which do not claim that the other religions are completely wrong and misguided, with their members condemned to an undesirable afterlife. Which calls up my favorite video. It's a must see. Hitchens on free speech.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 01:10 PM	#11
bigred Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: USA Posts: 12,574	Originally Posted by RandFan Let me state one more time. I have no ethnic bias. I want all people to have basic human rights. I want gays to be able to marry and I want women to have the right not to marry at the age of 10 or not to be stoned and the right to freedom of thought and conscience. There is nothing about religion that should exempt it from criticism. The shallow claim that it is only certain individuals or certain groups that are the cause of the problem don't obviate the religious underpinning of these matters. We are giving away something precious and important in the name of political correctness. We are giving away our right to criticize. Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them. This includes Judaism, Christianity and yes Islam. That there are some examples of freedom to be found in religion is not enough. where to start.... First, congrats on not putting this where it belongs, ie in the Religion forum. What's the matter, did people there finally tire of the theist/Christian-hate and move on? Nobody left to sneer at? ie some "fresh meat" trolling thing? Second, speaking for Christianity at least, Christians on the whole by far do not condemn anyone for simply questioning or criticizing. Jesus Christ and Christianity have experienced plenty of both from Day 1. (PS references to the middle ages is blatantly idiotic and more than a bit worn; welcome to today) Near as I can tell, Christians aren't "forbidding" criticism, stoning people, blowing up buildings etc. In fact many Christians themselves have questions and doubts and yes criticisms. As for "Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them," I won't even bother. That'd be like shooting fish in a barrel.
	Last edited by bigred; 28th January 2009 at 01:11 PM.

28th January 2009, 01:15 PM	#12
dudalb Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 23,023	We have to make a distinction between having respect for religious beliefs and having respect for the right on an individual to hold religious beliefs. The first, no way, the second, yes.

28th January 2009, 01:24 PM	#14
DC dedicated aphilatelist Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Switzerland Posts: 21,708	i changed my oppinion in this regard alot, especially since i am posting on JREF. meanwhile i agree with Randfan with it.
	__________________ AGW is a fact, including the A, face it

28th January 2009, 01:35 PM	#15
Toke Godless Socialist Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Denmark Posts: 7,619	I don´t see anything to discuss in the OP. Nicely put RandFan. I respect several religius people, but not their beliefs.
	__________________ From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. -K. Marx.

28th January 2009, 01:37 PM	#16
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by bigred where to start.... First, congrats on not putting this where it belongs, ie in the Religion forum. What's the matter, did people there finally tire of the theist/Christian-hate and move on? Nobody left to sneer at? ie some "fresh meat" trolling thing? Second, speaking for Christianity at least, Christians on the whole by far do not condemn anyone for simply questioning or criticizing. Jesus Christ and Christianity have experienced plenty of both from Day 1. (PS references to the middle ages is blatantly idiotic and more than a bit worn; welcome to today) Near as I can tell, Christians aren't "forbidding" criticism, stoning people, blowing up buildings etc. In fact many Christians themselves have questions and doubts and yes criticisms. As for "Until religions place as a priority the protection of rights and freedom of conscience they deserve criticism and scorn and I think it is our responsibility to condemn them," I won't even bother. That'd be like shooting fish in a barrel. Where to start... There are at this moment serious social issues as a result of religion. The UN has turned protection of free speech into censorship. People are at this moment trying to insert religion into the classrooms (see Texas). Gays and lesbians are denied rights because of religious sentiment (see prop 8). Girls are being forced to marry at the age of 10. The death in Palestine is based on religion. You've got folks like Bill Donahue and O'Reilly claiming that there is hate speech against religion. I could go on but this is one of our most serious problems and your belittlement of it is rather disappointing.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 01:40 PM	#17
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444	Um, where was it before? I don't think this is really a problem, except maybe in the UK. In the US, I don't see secular criticism being beaten back at all. You get some pushback ("War on Christmas" and "You wouldn't have the GUTS to say that about ISLAM!" mostly), but nobody's passing laws that muzzle free speech.
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444

28th January 2009, 01:46 PM	#18
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by bokonon Um, where was it before? The point of the OP was the social issues of rights of minorities and individuals and current events so I put it in Social Issues and Current Events. I know, odd, huh? Quote: I don't think this is really a problem, except maybe in the UK. In the US, I don't see secular criticism being beaten back at all. You get some pushback ("War on Christmas" and "You wouldn't have the GUTS to say that about ISLAM!" mostly), but nobody's passing laws that muzzle free speech. The UN has demonstrably turned the right of free speech into censorship. The UN isn't a religious organization and the effects of what the UN has done is a social one and involves current events but that's fine. See no evil hear no evil.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 01:54 PM	#19
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444	Okay, I'll grant that within the UN free speech is being censored, at least in open debate. I'm of the view that this simply serves to make the open debate occurring in the UN increasingly irrelevant. It's empty PR, like an old Pravda editorial, or a Kim Jung Il photo op.
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444

28th January 2009, 02:19 PM	#20
Safe-Keeper Philosopher Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sogndal, Norway Posts: 7,177	As long as there is discussion in the UN and in the governments of nations on banning offensive statements on religion, or even criticism of certain religions - this belongs very much in Politics or Social Issues, not R&P. Norway is currently considering a law that will prohibit strongly offensive statements on religion. The UN, as RandFan has pointed out, has apparently prohibited criticism of human rights violations backed by Sharia law (I say 'apparently' because I am on the whole ignorant of this development). Only two examples, but they illustrate the case well, I feel.

28th January 2009, 03:22 PM	#21
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,378	Originally Posted by RandFan Oh ye of little faith. I kid but in all sincerity I'm not trying to be provacative. However, if there isn't a discussion on this particular subject in this forum it will be a first. I'd be happy for people to simply agree though. Rand, the West Bank wasn't handed to the Israelis by God, they took it by blood and iron in 1967. That isn't religion, that's politics. As to respecting oppressive religion, define one please. Your OP was a bit sloppy. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

28th January 2009, 03:37 PM	#22
NoZed Avenger Bitter Whiner Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 11,313	Originally Posted by bokonon Okay, I'll grant that within the UN free speech is being censored, at least in open debate. I'm of the view that this simply serves to make the open debate occurring in the UN increasingly irrelevant. It's empty PR, like an old Pravda editorial, or a Kim Jung Il photo op. The UNs problems, if not increasing, are at least coming into sharper focus recently. Countries should not have to agree with each other, and certainly not all of the time, but the power being wielded by dictatorships (and religious theocracies) within that organization is a mockery of the goals it supposedly espouses. Meanwhile, the vast money it is spreading around is being used on graft, the shutting down of free expression, and officially-ignored sexual assaults from the armed forces it deploys as peace-keepers.

28th January 2009, 03:39 PM	#23
Darth Rotor Salted Sith Cynic Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Rat cheer Posts: 34,378	Originally Posted by NoZed Avenger The UNs problems, if not increasing, are at least coming into sharper focus recently. Countries should not have to agree with each other, and certainly not all of the time, but the power being wielded by dictatorships (and religious theocracies) within that organization is a mockery of the goals it supposedly espouses. Meanwhile, the vast money it is spreading around is being used on graft, the shutting down of free expression, and officially-ignored sexual assaults from the armed forces it deploys as peace-keepers. IMO, the problem was that they let just anyone join. NATO is trying to make that same stupid mistake, and thank goodness the Russians are calling them on it. Not trying to do any favors, but doing a favor nonetheless. DR
	__________________ Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission. "Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

28th January 2009, 04:04 PM	#24
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Darth Rotor As to respecting oppressive religion, define one please. Your OP was a bit sloppy. In what way was it sloppy? Others seemed to think it was very clear. Killing of homosexuals, fear of death for apostasy, subjugation of women throughout the world from all religions. Lies and pseudo science regarding AIDs and other illness and disease. Human rights organizations are trying to address many of these issues but they are not now allowed to bring them to the one organization that exists to protect rights of all on the grounds that to do so is offensive to religion. I honestly don't know how to make it anymore clear.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 05:45 PM	#27
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444	I see your plan: dangle the bait, wait for me to nibble, then yank me into SI&CE (or do you folks call it "SINCE"?). Well, it won't work. I NEVER visit this wing.
bokonon Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,444

28th January 2009, 06:04 PM	#28
Tricky Briefly immortal Moderator Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: The Group W bench Posts: 42,405	Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto Please stop. I can't keep up. It goes into "Sports" next. Originally Posted by bokonon I see your plan: dangle the bait, wait for me to nibble, then yank me into SI&CE (or do you folks call it "SINCE"?). Well, it won't work. I NEVER visit this wing. You're already tainted. Might as well hang around.

28th January 2009, 06:16 PM	#29
gdnp useless idiot Join Date: May 2008 Location: New Jersey-You gotta problem wit dat? Posts: 4,999	As examples of oppressive religious practices, I would include the subjugation of women, female circumcision, the claim of the right to beat children, just for a start.

28th January 2009, 06:18 PM	#30
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Tricky It goes into "Sports" next.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

28th January 2009, 06:24 PM	#31
TragicMonkey Poisoned Waffles Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Monkey Posts: 30,298	Respect must be earned. Anybody who insists on respect being paid to their beliefs ought to be able to demonstrate the worthiness of those beliefs. If you can't do that, the question isn't why I don't respect your beliefs, the question is why do you?
	__________________ One cannot expect wisdom to flow from a pumpkin.

28th January 2009, 09:03 PM	#32
rwguinn Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: 16 miles from 7 lakes Posts: 8,505	Originally Posted by TragicMonkey Respect must be earned. Anybody who insists on respect being paid to their beliefs ought to be able to demonstrate the worthiness of those beliefs. If you can't do that, the question isn't why I don't respect your beliefs, the question is why do you? :c lap:
	__________________ "Political correctness is a doctrine,...,which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end." "I pointed out that his argument was wrong in every particular, but he rightfully took me to task for attacking only the weak points." Myriad http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=6853275#post6853275