As has been pointed out for some time, freedom of speech as we know it, is under attack on a global scale. But, as fellow Examiner, Paul Fidalgo said in his article, Latest take on UN 'anti-blasphemy' resolutions, "[t]here is still not nearly enough noise being made about this subject."
Several groups are trying to do their part to stop this nonsense. The Center for Inquiry (CFI) is speaking out. They have started an online petition as part of their One Law for All Campaign against Sharia law in Britain. (Yes, I signed it. I am number 10,184.) The petition currently has 10,978 "signatures." (Article continues below the video.)
As I previously reported, "[s]ome nations, including Canada, the US, and Israel have decided to boycott the coming UN Geneva meeting that will be held in April concerning this topic because the language of it threatens human rights." But, is this the best course of action for these nations? I once heard it said that "silence is just another form of consent." Shouldn't these nations attend and have their dissenting voices heard?
One group certainly thinks that the US should attend the meeting. Ed Buckner, President of American Atheists (AA), said of the boycott:
This just surrenders the ideological battle field to extremists. Engagement, not boycott, is called for.
Further, Buckner, in a press release issued by the AA, said:
"We urge President Obama and his administration to speak out unequivocally and firmly against any effort to curtail free expression, and provide special treatment against criticism of any and all religions. The main effect of such a policy would be to endanger civil liberties, and, in fact, exacerbate religious differences. And any attempt to make this a binding resolution deserves nothing but contempt and opposition from Americans."
In an effort to make it clear that the US should, in fact, face this issue head on, the AA has planned a demonstration for Saturday, March 28, 2009. According to the press release, they "will demonstrate outside the United Nations against the blasphemy resolution."
AA's Dave Silverman said that Pakistan is the "driving force" behind the resolution. He pointed out that Pakistan "currently has fifty of its citizens in prison for the crime of 'blasphemy.'" It is no wonder that they want this resolution passed. It would legitimize their inhumanity. And the frightening thing is this... were this to pass, and you spoke out against a religion's atrocious activities (burying women up to their necks and stoning them to death, for example), you could be imprisoned, tortured, or even put to death for your opinion.
You may feel safe here on American soil, but, it is not unheard of for people to be hunted down globally and kidnapped and/or killed for their dissenting religious opinions. A resolution could make such actions justifiable.
I urge everyone to do what they can to take a stand against this kind of tyranny and inhumanity and spread the word.
Comments
Excellent piece, and a video clip which should be passed around as much as humanly possible.
Brian Trent
Independent Examiner
I agree, The US and other opposed nations NEED to be there to directly oppose the resolution. If the resolution passes, that's the time to boycott if not withdraw completely from the UN.
I will continue to blaspheme no matter what, it's my right as a human being to hold my own opinion and state my opinion without being chastised or jailed for it! BUG OFF CHRISTIANITY, ISLAM, JUDAISM, AND ANY RELIGION!
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!