By continuing your visit to this site, you accept the use of cookies. These ensure the smooth running of our services. Learn more.

15 March 2009

Proposal at U.N. to criminalize 'defamation of Islam'

354872.jpg A new U.N. resolution circulated today by Islamic states would define any questioning of Islamic dogma as a human rights violation, intimidate dissenting voices, and encourage the forced imposition of Sharia law

UN Watch obtained a copy of the Pakistani-authored proposal after it was distributed today among Geneva diplomats attending the current session of the UN Human Rights Council. Entitled "Combating defamation of religions," it mentions only Islam.


While non-binding, the resolution constitutes a dangerous threat to free speech everywhere. It would ban any perceived offense to Islamic sensitivities as a "serious affront to human dignity" and a violation of religious freedom, and would pressure U.N. member states -- at the "local, national, regional and international levels" -- to erode free speech guarantees in their "legal and constitutional systems."


It's an Orwellian text that distorts the meaning of human rights, free speech, and religious freedom, and marks a giant step backwards for liberty and democracy worldwide.


The first to suffer will be moderate Muslims in the countries that are behind this resolution, like Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan, who seek international legitimacy for state-sanctioned blasphemy laws that stifle religious freedom and outlaw conversions from Islam to other faiths.


Next to suffer from this U.N.-sanctioned McCarthyism will be writers and journalists in the democratic West, with the resolution targeting the media for the "deliberate stereotyping of religions, their adherents and sacred persons."


Ultimately, it is the very notion of individual human rights at stake, because the sponsors of this resolution seek not to protect individuals from harm, but rather to shield a specific set of beliefs from any question, debate, or critical inquiry.

The resolution's core premise -- that "defamation of religion" exists as legal concept -- is a distortion. The law on defamation protects the reputations of individuals, not beliefs. It also requires an examination of the truth or falsity of the challenged remarks -- a determination that no one, especially not the UN, is capable of undertaking concerning any religion.


Tragically, given that Islamic states completely dominate the Human Rights Council, with the support of non-democratic members like Russia, China, and Cuba, adoption of the regressive resolution is a forgone conclusion. E.U. diplomats hope at best to win over a handful of wavering Latin American states to the dissenting side.






Following is a copy of the draft U.N. Human Rights Council resolution obtained by UN Watch. Prepared by Pakistan on behalf of the Islamic group, the text was circulated today to Geneva diplomats in advance of a council vote scheduled for the end of March. Emphasis added. 



POSTED BY /  http://www.unwatch.org

16:11 Posted in UN | Permalink | Comments (5) |  Facebook |


Dear Friends,
We should rejoice when we read news like that as it shows clearly the extreme weakness of the false religion called islam. They failed miserably in answering all those who shows the perversity of islam and its false teachings so they hope to get a law that will criminalize any honest representation of the darkness of islam because they don't have any answers to give about a religion full of hatred, killing and sex. They don't know that by doing that they destroy the credibility of their religion that lacks any credibility from the beginning in front of the international community. In fact they have already started to prepare the coffin for that dead religion that is a shame on the human conscience.

Posted by: Hany | 16 March 2009

It refers to jewish ritual murders. During history jews were many times accused of killing children to drain their blood. The catholic church used to support the accusations by making some of the children saints(its no longer the case).

Posted by: Myscarf | 26 February 2011

TY. "its a phrase which during our time refers to un-justified accusations of the worst kind." good point.

Posted by: Myscarf | 26 February 2011

say yes (if you would say yes if it were a "real" proposal...and see what happens. Perhaps he was testing the waters. Maybe he was joking. Call it and see where it goes from there.

Posted by: Web Design | 26 February 2011

Maybe he wanted to see what you would say, and he wants to ask you to marry you. good luck.

Posted by: Web Design | 26 February 2011

The comments are closed.