Religious defamation

Why does religion occupy a special ground, free of the restraints of critical thinking and reason? If you believe in astrology, I can tell you that it's a load of crap. If you place your faith in chinese herbal supplements, I can criticize you for ignoring scientific fact. If you believe in an invisible man in the sky, however, I'm compelled to take you seriously, no matter how wacky your claims_

A United Nations forum on Thursday passed a resolution condemning "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation, despite wide concerns that it could be used to justify curbs on free speech in Muslim countries.

Despite the colossal stupidity of this resolution, a small body of mostly Islamic nations banded together to pass it today. I guess that makes what I'm about to do pretty serious_

Religion is bunk, and there is probably no god. Get over it.

Hrmmmm. I always expected my first human-rights violation to be more... I don't know... violent?

The really funny thing about all this, is that in most jurisdictions, defamation charges can only be brought if the statement you make is demonstratively false. I'm aware of no valid proofs for the existence of a supreme being, so I suppose my statements aren't defamatory after all.


Written by Ben B - "defamation - def⋅a⋅ma⋅tion    /ˌdɛfəˈmeɪʃən/ Show Spelled Pronunciation [def-uh-mey-shuhn] Show IPA –noun the act of defaming; false or unjustified injury of the good reputation of another, as by slander or libel; calumny_ She sued the magazine for defamation of character." As you pointed out, clearly we have a solution. Showing religion to be false isn't unjustified, nor is it slander or libel :D

Written by Ben B -

Nor does religion have a good reputation to begin with, for that matter :)

Written by Kimberly -

Sorry to just randomly drop a post...I accidently clicked on your name from a page I was reading over at the Sciguy blog, and that UN/religious defamation resolution caught my eye. I'm just totally aghast by what I read, since members of my religion are still sitting in an Armenian prison right now, -where they've been for the past 2+ you can see here_ http_// ...but apparently the UN is too preoccupied with 'more important' human rights violations to do anything about it. I'm sorry...but I just had to vent.

Written by Chris -

I'm a little confused as to what you're saying Kimberly. If you're saying that the UN should be focusing on oppressive regimes and the freedom to practice any religion, then I agree completely. If you're being sarcastic, and claiming that your colleagues being jailed has anything to do with this resolution, then you're confused. What this resolution does is makes it a crime against humanity to speak badly of another religion. This makes it *easier* for oppressive regimes to silence critics and throw people like your Armenian colleagues in jail. After all, if they dared to question the one true religion (whichever one that may happen to be), then they've committed a human rights violation. Surely, that puts them in the same class of people as genocidal warlords... To reiterate_ No one should ever be imprisoned for their religious beliefs, but this resolution tries to make criticizing another religion a crime. That's not freedom at all.

Written by Kimberly -

You said it perfectly_ "the UN should be focusing on oppressive regimes and the freedom to practice any religion" I realize these are two unrelated matters, (since the 'human rights violation' issue in regard to my own religion is related to conscientious objection of military service, and how some member nations are not adhearing to previous UN resolutions already passed) this clip shows just one example of the persecution going on in Korea for so long, -which continues despite their obligation to the UN... http_// -Since the entire premise of the UN is to peacefully unite nations, it doesn't seem reasonable to keep innocent people imprisoned and waiting for justice (who are members of a religion that is peaceful and refuses to go to war, or kill others), while giving priority to a rather frivolous resolution, instead of enforcing established resolutions which are not being upheld.

comments powered by Disqus