Date: 13/12/2012 22:40:21
From: Bubblecar
ID: 240539
Subject: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Hussein Ibish takes the stand:

Blasphemy is an indispensable human right. Without the right to engage in blasphemy, there can be no freedom of inquiry, expression, conscience or religion.

As I predicted last week, the Organization of Islamic Conference has seized on the controversies regarding an anti-Islam video clip on YouTube and satirical cartoons about Mohammed in a French magazine to renew its call for a global ban on “blasphemy.” The OIC is, in effect, not only announcing that Muslim states in general have no intention of allowing real freedom of conscience and speech, but they want to bully the West into eliminating those freedoms as well.

OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu called on countries that respect free speech to “come out of hiding from behind the excuse of freedom of expression.” OIC governments apparently cannot resist the populist appeal of perversely posing as “defenders of Islam” by attacking free thought and free speech.

Who, after all, will be authorized to define “blasphemy”? Does anything that offends any religious sensibilities qualify as “blasphemy”? Will a critical mass of objections be seen as legitimate grounds for silencing critics of religious doctrine, scholarly inquiry into their origins, skeptical analysis of superstition and faith, iconoclasm, or mockery of religious claims, symbols, assertions, and shibboleths?

Iran is a member state of the OIC. It has just raised the bounty, issued decades ago, against Salman Rushdie, author of The Satanic Verses. The novel, which is a fine one, is not, in fact, blasphemous by any reasonable definition. It probably would’ve been an even more interesting book if it had been. But it offended people, most of whom had not read it, was declared and widely considered “blasphemous,” and therefore presumably would be banned under the OIC’s proposals.

Pakistan says it’s going to press the issue of a global “blasphemy” ban at the UN and other multilateral institutions. This is the same country that is persecuting a teenage Christian girl for alleged blasphemy in a most horrifying and indefensible manner. Along with a number of other Muslim-majority states, Pakistan allows for the death penalty, at least theoretically, for “blasphemy” criminal offenses.

Several Arab states, including Egypt and Kuwait, have recently been toying with new criminal definitions of “blasphemy” that specifically ban insulting the wives and companions of the Prophet Mohammed, which is barely concealed code for the suppression of Shiite doctrinal criticism of Sunni Islam. The OIC is based in Saudi Arabia, a country that does not allow freedom of worship for any non-Muslims. The examples of the hypocrisy behind these calls are simply endless.

If freedom of religion, conscience and speech are to mean anything, religious doctrines, symbols and assertions must be open to inquiry, criticism and, indeed, ridicule. Otherwise, the human thought process will be shut down by force of law in order to protect the sensibilities of the superstitious, and free inquiry into the most central issues facing humanity since the birth of the species will be effectively foreclosed.

These calls reflect a paranoid worldview that is widespread among Muslims that their religion is under some kind of global assault. If so—because Islam is spreading faster than almost any other religion, with the possible exception of Mormonism—it’s an odd kind of siege. In reality, Islam is thriving in its countries of origin and spreading quickly into the West.

What this idea really bespeaks is a terror that most faiths contain at their core: that serious, skeptical, dispassionate evaluations of their specific claims will reveal them to be indefensible, hollow and easily debunked. Embracing modernity requires tolerating such fears without demanding the enforcement of religious orthodoxy, even of an ecumenical variety, through the power of the state.

In fact, and unfortunately, the devout of the world have little to fear. Sigmund Freud was right in his seminal 1927 tract on religion, “The Future of an Illusion,” that as long as people fear death and yearn, in an Oedipal manner, for an all-powerful supernatural father-figure to “exorcise the terrors of nature” and “reconcile men to the cruelty of Fate, particularly as it is shown in death,” we are likely to be stuck with metaphysical superstitions and religion. There is little chance, in short, that human society at large will ever be free of its grip.

Reason and skepticism, for good or ill, are not poised to overthrow faith. Islam is thriving in the modern world, both in its traditional lands and in its new adopted homes. Its politicized devotees are acquiring increasing power in post-dictatorship Arab societies. And on top of all of this, the OIC wants to globally shut down freedom of thought, conscience and speech to further “protect” Islam from perceived slights.

There is only one appropriate response to this, in language the devout should be able to easily understand: to hell with you.

https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/commentaryanalysis/blasphemy_an_indispensable_human_right

Reply Quote

Date: 13/12/2012 22:44:25
From: wookiemeister
ID: 240542
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

never try to reason with religious fanatics

a religious fanatic can only be held at bay with a gun not with words or reason

the other course of action is to never live where they are – wherever they are found disaster follows

Reply Quote

Date: 13/12/2012 22:48:05
From: Bubblecar
ID: 240543
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

>There is little chance, in short, that human society at large will ever be free of its grip.

Can’t help thinking he’s being unduly pessimistic. Religion is already very much on the way out in the West, a trend that is unlikely to level out until believers are a minority.

And religious belief is already rare amongst the most intelligent 10% of the population. Science may one day find the right genes and the right bio-engineering techniques to ensure that most people of future generations fall into what is now an intellectual elite category.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 10:29:13
From: Skeptic Pete
ID: 240584
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Bubblecar said:

Science may one day find the right genes and the right bio-engineering techniques to ensure that most people of future generations fall into what is now an intellectual elite category.

I’m glad I didn’t say that.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 10:46:17
From: Bubblecar
ID: 240587
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Skeptic Pete said:


Bubblecar said:
Science may one day find the right genes and the right bio-engineering techniques to ensure that most people of future generations fall into what is now an intellectual elite category.

I’m glad I didn’t say that.

I’m glad I did.

:)

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 11:16:56
From: poikilotherm
ID: 240592
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Bubblecar said:


Skeptic Pete said:

Bubblecar said:
Science may one day find the right genes and the right bio-engineering techniques to ensure that most people of future generations fall into what is now an intellectual elite category.

I’m glad I didn’t say that.

I’m glad I did.

:)

Eugenics, without the culling…

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 11:29:06
From: Bubblecar
ID: 240596
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

>Eugenics, without the culling…

Or anything involuntary. If prospective parents were offered the choice of having offspring of average intelligence or very high intelligence, I think we can safely predict what the majority would choose.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 11:30:59
From: poikilotherm
ID: 240601
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Bubblecar said:


>Eugenics, without the culling…

Or anything involuntary. If prospective parents were offered the choice of having offspring of average intelligence or very high intelligence, I think we can safely predict what the majority would choose.

Just hope their is no genetic drift in cell division before birth…

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 11:31:27
From: poikilotherm
ID: 240602
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

poikilotherm said:


Bubblecar said:

>Eugenics, without the culling…

Or anything involuntary. If prospective parents were offered the choice of having offspring of average intelligence or very high intelligence, I think we can safely predict what the majority would choose.

Just hope their is no genetic drift in cell division before birth…

Oh dear.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 11:58:05
From: Divine Angel
ID: 240606
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Bubblecar said:

Or anything involuntary. If prospective parents were offered the choice of having offspring of average intelligence or very high intelligence, I think we can safely predict what the majority would choose.

Although in some parts, high intelligence means spelling your name of Makaylahh correctly.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 21:35:22
From: Aquila
ID: 240745
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

…On the subject of free speech….

ABC chairman Jim Spigelman slams ALP laws that make it illegal to be offensive by: Chris Merritt, Legal affairs editor From: The Australian December 11, 2012 12:00AM

ABC chairman and former top jurist Jim Spigelman has warned that a planned overhaul of discrimination law will impose unprecedented restrictions on free speech, including making it unlawful to offend people, leaving the nation isolated from international norms.
The Gillard government’s planned consolidation of all federal discrimination laws would significantly redraw the line between permissible and unlawful speech and open the way for the banning of publications, said Mr Spigelman, the immediate past chief justice of NSW

from:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/abc-chairman-jim-spigelman-slams-alp-laws-that-make-it-illegal-to-be-offensive/story-e6frg97×-1226534081839

*shakes head at modern government….are we going backward?
.

Reply Quote

Date: 14/12/2012 23:47:19
From: wookiemeister
ID: 240784
Subject: re: Blasphemy: a Basic Human Right

Aquila said:


…On the subject of free speech….

ABC chairman Jim Spigelman slams ALP laws that make it illegal to be offensive by: Chris Merritt, Legal affairs editor From: The Australian December 11, 2012 12:00AM

ABC chairman and former top jurist Jim Spigelman has warned that a planned overhaul of discrimination law will impose unprecedented restrictions on free speech, including making it unlawful to offend people, leaving the nation isolated from international norms.
The Gillard government’s planned consolidation of all federal discrimination laws would significantly redraw the line between permissible and unlawful speech and open the way for the banning of publications, said Mr Spigelman, the immediate past chief justice of NSW

from:
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/legal-affairs/abc-chairman-jim-spigelman-slams-alp-laws-that-make-it-illegal-to-be-offensive/story-e6frg97×-1226534081839

*shakes head at modern government….are we going backward?
.


maybe its necessary

first there is the collapse

then there is the revolution

Reply Quote