Free Speech Dies at the UN

[Albion 69]

The war against free speech is advancing rapidly: Associated Press reported Thursday that “Muslim countries have won a battle to prevent Islam from being criticised during debates by the UN Human Rights Council.” Council President Doru-Romulus Costea explained that religious issues can be “very complex, very sensitive and very intense…This council is not prepared to discuss religious matters in depth, consequently we should not do it.” Henceforth only religious scholars would be permitted to broach them.
“While Costea’s ban applies to all religions,” AP explained, “it was prompted by Muslim countries complaining about references to Islam.” The ban came after a heated session on Monday, when the representative of the Association for World Education (AWE), in a joint statement with the International Humanist and Ethical Union, denounced female genital mutilation, the penalty of stoning for adultery and child marriage as sanctioned by Islamic law. Egypt, Pakistan and Iran angrily protested, interrupting the AWE speaker, David Littman, with no less than 16 points of order, and succeeding in getting the Council’s proceedings suspended for over half an hour. In the course of this contentious discussion, the representatives from the Islamic countries made numerous revealing statements – statements that are well worth examining as Islamic nations and organizations call with increasing insistence for restrictions on free speech in the West.

FrontPage Magazine (http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=79F671A7-DE83-4F6C-A219-B12076BA3AD3)

The link makes interesting reading, basically female genital mutilation, the penalty of stoning for adultery and child marriage as sanctioned by Islamic law should not be discussed in a religious context by the UN Council for Human Rights for fear of causing offence to certain religions !! :eek:

[Trouble43]

I think this is one for the 'you couldn't make it up' file.

Personally I think the UN's like an old toothless sick dog. You love it but you know it's kinder to put it out of it's suffering.

I think we should disband the UN; like it's predecessor the League of Nations, it is a gummy, toothless beast. It postures, it wrings its hands, it pleads for understanding, but that's all. It's about as much use as a chocolate teapot.......time for a change methinks.

[Albion 69]

I think this is one for the 'you couldn't make it up' file.

Personally I think the UN's like an old toothless sick dog. You love it but you know it's kinder to put it out of it's suffering.

I think we should disband the UN; like it's predecessor the League of Nations, it is a gummy, toothless beast. It postures, it wrings its hands, it pleads for understanding, but that's all. It's about as much use as a chocolate teapot.......time for a change methinks.

I know what you mean , it appears we live in alternate realities ... is there no one prepared to stand up for freedom of speech , they are meant to be the bloody UN Human Rights Council !!... sheesh :mad:

You are right the UN should be reformed with a slightly higher membership threshold .... no dictators , mass murderes , despots ... etc etc

[Tete123]

You are right the UN should be reformed with a slightly higher membership threshold .... no dictators , mass murderes , despots ... etc etc

I think you'd struggle to find a match to the above criteria Albion.;)

[Albion 69]

I think you'd struggle to find a match to the above criteria Albion.;)

Lol , yes but i would have fun trying .... 192 current members down to about 50 :D

[Tete123]

Show me once where i have used inappropriate language as a personal insult directed at you( to me innapropriate would equal profane)Did i once directly call you anything?and yet then you troll back months to find all my posts in order to report them as you dont like my opinions,yet all the personal insults that you and CS and T43 have thrown at me are acceptable,yet i am a man and can take it,you cry when people disagree with you,what does that say about you?
Oh must apologise if i have misspelt anything or things dont make sense to you,i aint a MR smartypants like some elitists on this forum!!!

Language does not have to be profane to be offensive Pauli. To be labeled a Communist in the same sentence as Stalin indicates a motive to use it as a derogative term, akin to Fascist (which isn't acceptable either) and you directed that accusation at me on many occasions.
I did not cry Pauli, I used the report facility when your insinuations and accusations got too much to even bother debating. I would like you to highlight the times I have personally insulted you? You ask what it says about me, well taking out the accusation of crying, it says I have never at any point reported you for a opinion of a view, I have not labeled you or your opinions, I have always argued my corner, understanding that people disagree with each other in debate, but seeing as I have never been warned I would hazard a guess that I have always remained within the rules.
I ask you the same question Pauli, what does it say about you, that you harbor so many preconceived ideas based on your personal experiences that you cannot look on anything subjectively anymore. That you feel everybody here and I guess in the real world, owes you a debt of gratitude, for what I have no idea. That your constant self loathing and insinuation that people believe themselves better than you makes debating with you difficult, I have never acted elitist, and you constant referral to your lack of education and working class status just highlights that you have labeled me as such based on your opinion rather than any fact. I could go on Pauli, but there is little point, you are a close minded individual and nothing I say will change that.

[Spades]

Language does not have to be profane to be offensive Pauli. To be labeled a Communist in the same sentence as Stalin indicates a motive to use it as a derogative term, akin to Fascist (which isn't acceptable either) and you directed that accusation at me on many occasions.

I agree. But in another section Citzen_smith (Hopefully accidentally) implied that all right wingers were racist. Do you feel that is a justified comment? Our in one of my classes how our teacher went on a rant of how there is no such thing as a compassionate conservative. I try to avoid labeling but I also find it hard to see sympathy in the left when I feel as if thats all they do to me.

[Tete123]

I agree. But in another section Citzen_smith (Hopefully accidentally) implied that all right wingers were racist. Do you feel that is a justified comment? Our in one of my classes how our teacher went on a rant of how there is no such thing as a compassionate conservative. I try to avoid labeling but I also find it hard to see sympathy in the left when I feel as if thats all they do to me.

I agree with you completely Spades, the rule applies to all. If more care and attention was paid to what people wrote/said than what ideology they stood for (self proclaimed or otherwise) then more debate and discussion would result in better understanding. Instead we debate whether we are fascists and communist, both of which are pretty defunct ideas in British and I dare say American politics. Labeling is just a way of compartmentalizing people into easier to manage groups, but not helpful in the long term.

[Trouble43]

Paulie, I am not willing to get into an argument with you. I've honestly had enough of slanging matches. So Im just going to walk away from this one, alright.

[stevectaylor]

I have closed this thread after reading more off topic debates.

A new rule will be introduced to give infractions to members whom appear to argue and not participate in a meaningful debate in threads.