United Nations Adopts Anti-Free Speech Resolution

LINK:

United Nations Adopts Anti-Free Speech Resolution

Today, the United Nations Human Rights Council voted to adopt a resolution to encourage member states to create laws that would punish speech critical of religion.
In case you didn’t catch that, the Human Rights Council is encouraging its members to *punish speech *critical of religion.

A host of countries around the world already imprison bloggers, and others, for such speech. The most high-profile example is Abdul Kareem Nabeel Suleiman, or Kareem Amer, the Egyptian blogger sentenced to four years in prison for criticizing Islam. Perhaps the fact that it took the UN two years to condemn that sentence but two weeks to approve this measure is not coincidental.

The measure “Deplores the use of the print, audio-visual and electronic media, including the Internet, and any other means to incite acts of violence, xenophobia or related intolerance and discrimination towards any religion, as well as targeting of religious symbols and venerated persons.”
Kareem was just the start. The UN is now giving his abusers legal cover and making a mockery of Article XIX.

Free speech is fantastically unpopular around the world. Although countries like Egypt, Iran, Burma and China may be the most egregious and flamboyant punishers of unfettered speech, it is nearly as unpopular in “Western” countries. That is, it is praised right up to the point where it offends someone, as though offense taken could be a sensible benchmark for allowing freedom of expression.

What earthly good does the UN serve? Why do we still belong to it?

This totally contradicts The First Amendment.

This is so nonsensical that it is scary!!!

Especially for the human rights stuff. In other words, it is only a right to some, but not to others. What are they going to do with all of the terrorists and anti Christian media all over the world? Do they claim to arrest all of them?

Are Obama and Clinton still gungho about getting deeper involved with the UN?

Probably the main reason is that it’s a useful foreign policy tool. We can get cover for some of our actions, and we can browbeat countries with a slightly bigger stick than the bully pulpit of Washington.

It is not inevitable that the world adopts the humans rights model as developed in the Judeo-Christian West. It is very possible that the world adopt the Islamic model of human rights, which has nothing to do with free speech, or even religious freedom really.

As it stands now, the United States and Europe are funding the United Nations, which is on the fast track to adopting the Islamic model of social structuring.

As long as liberals and leftists remain okay with this, it is going to be very difficult t oturn back this trend.

It is the Islamic model that is being proagated.

Especially for the human rights stuff. In other words, it is only a right to some, but not to others. What are they going to do with all of the terrorists and anti Christian media all over the world? Do they claim to arrest all of them?

Islam is a supremacist religion. This is not about religious freedom. It is about protecting Islam.

Are Obama and Clinton still gungho about getting deeper involved with the UN?
They are liberals and leftists of the Saul Alinsky school. Their target is the middle class.
As long as they share a common enemy with the Islamists, they will be as gungho as it is politically possible.

I truly believe we are living in the End Times as described in the Bible. And if we aren’t…and I am no prideful about it…then I certainly wish God would rush the job. This whole world is becoming scary…with nowhere to hide from the evil being forced down our throats. And many will say that it isn’t being forced down the throats of Americans…but wait just a little while. It is gonna happen. It is inevitable.

In my case I would never say the UN had an earthly use or a Godly use. I find it truly evil.

For the resolution to pass, it must pass a vote in the UN General Assembly. This has not yet happened so it is inaccurate to say that it has been adopted.

I do feel that the UN has outlived it usefulness. Founded after WWII, it was originally intended to be a place where critical issues could be discussed to avoid war, it has now morphed into a dangerous organization that responds to the whim of loudest complainers. It is a clear an imminent threat to the sovereignty of ALL nations as it seeks to try to enforce some least common denominator.

It is a corrupt organization and America should not participate or even acknowledge it.

So I wonder how the U.N. intends to enforce this? They don’t have an army.

Various degrees of economic sanctions and pressure in the news media. And if you do not think the media is not in the pocket of the UN, let me remind you about this 1997 incident.

Ted Turner donates $1 billion to ‘U.N. causes’ edition.cnn.com/US/9709/18/turner.gift/

Ted Turner is the founder and owner of CNN.

Criticise Islam, get thrown in prison.

Criticise Christianity, get praised.

The left’s standards of bigotry are so clear.

None and I have no idea.

Gary

Sad, but exactly correct.

This is old news…one U. S. soldier was court-martialed for refusing to wear the blue cap of the U. N.

For at least three years in the Balkans and elsewhere, the U.S. Army has been quietly pursuing the practice of requiring American soldiers to wear these UN uniforms.

eagleforum.org/psr/1995/psrnov95.html

Interesting times we live in…

Its not meant to be enforced. Its a non-binding resolution encouraging governments to adopt a policy. And despite the misleading headline, it was not passed by the UN. It was passed by a council within the UN and there is a big difference.

In other words, the resolution has little significance.

I should hope that if it does pass that this be one of those times when good people everywhere (regardless of religion) see fit to disobey a fundamentally unjust “resolution” (it may not be a ‘law’, but I don’t think we’d hear the end of it if it were adopted). Let them pass all the resolutions they want so long as we remember that our first loyalty is to Christ and His Church, not to kowtow to Islam or pathetic, spineless pesudo-secularism.

The problem is that there really are people who think the UN represents the cumulative wisdom of the human race. They truly believe that if the UN says so, then it must be right. Some countries, especially those in Europe, have actually tied their laws to UN resolutions. Thus passing such a resolution by the UN General Assembly would truly have a chilling effect around the globe.

For example, many countries would be forced to filter out sites such as this one. We would see some of out European members, perhaps even our Australian members, simply disappear. As there are a number of these members who are my friends, I see this as a personal affront.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.