By Lauren Green
FOX News Religion Contributor
It probably slipped most people’s notice. It wasn’t a “big” story. It was a little routine vote at the United Nations on a resolution called “Combating Defamation of Religion”. It passed — for the ninth year in a row. The resolution, on the surface, seems almost a no-brainer for the General Assembly. Of course, people should be respectful of other religions. But that’s not exactly what this resolution says.
Many member nations, including the United States, as well as several non-profit groups like the Becket Fund and the Washington-based American Center for Law and Justice, see the resolution as the proverbial “wolf in sheep’s clothing.”
The Combating Defamation of Religion resolution was introduced and promoted by the 57-member nations of the Organization of the
Islamic Conference (OIC). The OIC has lobbied since 1999 for the plan. According to the American Center for Law and Justice, the resolution is based on the Cairo Declaration of Human Rights in Islam, “which states that all rights are subject to Shariah law, and makes Shariah law the only source of reference for human rights.”
However the resolution was amended to appeal to a more diverse group. Drafts of the resolution in early October would have made it a criminal act and violation of international law to “defame another religion.” Although the drafts were amended to say all religions, only Islam is mentioned by name. And the U.S. lobbied specifically to remove any reference to it being a “criminal” act.
One U.S. Ambassador commented a few weeks ago how divisive this issue is: “The resolution could criminalize free speech,” and that “it’s a cover for criminalizing domestic free speech.”
The point is: if a resolution by the world body criminalizes speech even speech that defames and is in bad taste, then International Law could potentially brow beat and trample on the U.S. Constitution. That’s why the U.S. voted “no.”
The resolution is non-binding. There’s no international body to enforce it. But it does set a tone of what is and is not acceptable. The U.S. official said, it would give countries the ability to pass anti-free speech laws if it criticizes a religion, it would make it difficult to proselytize or share your faith unless you practice a State approved faith, or could make you fear changing your religion.
But you say, “That can’t happen”, or “that would be ludicrous”. The fact is, it’s already happening. Christians and other minority religions in predominantly Islamic areas or countries are being persecuted to barbaric levels. Reports from Nairobi, Kenya say that one aid worker was beheaded in September for converting from Islam to Christianity; the Iranian government has already passed a bill calling for execution on the basis of apostasy (anyone converting from Islam to another religion), and of course we’ve seen the violence that erupted over the Danish cartoon of the prophet Mohammed.
The European Center for Law and Justice did a legal analysis of the resolution and concluded that “the OIC uses the religious defamation concept as both a shield and a sword. In Islamic countries, blasphemy laws are used as a shield to protect the dominant religion, but even more dangerously, they are used to silence minority religious believers and prevent Muslims from converting to other faiths, which is still a capital crime in many Islamic countries.”
As stated in the beginning, the resolution passed. But support may be waning. There were fewer ‘yes’ votes than last year, as more members call attention to what they see are the resolution’s defects. Meanwhile the European Union has introduced its own version focusing on Religious Tolerance.
In the end, the Combating the Defamation of Religion resolution is one more brewing pot that may contribute to the violent eruptions boiling up all over the world. Not paying attention to them will often leave of us in the position of cleaning up the mess afterwards. A good piece of cooking advice applies here… that is, “A watched pot, never boils.”
HJS Comments: Where, pray tell, is the outrage of the American Press, the Mainstream Media, to such an abrogation of the very concept of Freedom of Speech? Freedom of Speech is one of the great ideas we stand for! Where is the outrage of the American Ambassador to the United Nations, making it perfectly clear to all that the United States will continue to fight for Freedom of Speech wherever people of good will congregate? As some of us say in song, “Where is Randolph Scott?” I say, “Where is John Bolton?” The champion of the people of the United States was so hated by liberals (because he is not a whining apologist a la Jimmy Carter) that just seeing him stand straight and tall, telling UN delegates in no uncertain terms that the United States will not bend to the will of dumb nabobs of political correctness, was enough to give the wimps apoplexy. Do we want to keep ourselves free of some of these un-American foreign Maelstroms? Get rid of the sissies, the wimps, and the leftist lunatics and put real people in government. It is not too late; already the Demagogue Party is preparing to purchase the next election. Now is the time for all good people to come to the aid of their country.
HJS
No comments:
Post a Comment