Obama: religious tolerance trumps free speech

[The Real Bingo]

Column: Just say no to blasphemy laws - Opinion - USATODAY.com

You Can't Say That

Quote:

The Obama administration has marked its first foray into the UN human rights establishment by backing calls for limits on freedom of expression. The newly-minted American policy was rolled out at the latest session of the UN Human Rights Council, which ended in Geneva on Friday. American diplomats were there for the first time as full Council members and intent on making friends.


President Obama chose to join the Council despite the fact that the Organization of the Islamic Conference holds the balance of power and human rights abusers are among its lead actors, including China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia. Islamic states quickly interpreted the president's penchant for "engagement" as meaning fundamental rights were now up for grabs. Few would have predicted, however, that the shift would begin with America's most treasured freedom.

Of course, we don't have to worry about Christianity being offended...

[Theophylact]

The real situation is somewhat different:

Quote:

U.S. opposes bid to bar religious defamation

Hillary Clinton says move by Islamic nations would restrict free speech

updated9:00 p.m. ET, Mon., Oct . 26, 2009

WASHINGTON - The Obama administration on Monday came out strongly against efforts by Islamic nations to bar the defamation of religions, saying the moves would restrict free speech.

"Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies that would restrict freedom of expression and the freedom of religion," Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told reporters. "I strongly disagree."

Clinton said the United States was opposed to negative depictions of specific faiths and would always fight against belief-based discrimination. But she said a person's ability to practice their religion was entirely unrelated to another person's right to free speech.

"The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faith will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions," Clinton said. "These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse."

Her comments came as the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a 56-nation bloc of Islamic countries, is pressing the U.N. Human Rights Council to adopt a resolution that would broadly condemn the defamation of religion.
The effort is widely seen as a reaction to perceived anti-Islamic incidents, including the publication in Europe of several cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed.

Michael Posner, the assistant U.S. secretary of state for human rights, democracy and labor whose office prepares the religious freedom report, said the resolution "goes too far."

"The notion that a religion can be defamed and that any comments that are negative about that religion can constitute a violation of human rights to us violates the core principle of free speech," he said.

Posner was part of a delegation at the Human Rights Council that successfully negotiated with Egypt a compromise over another similar resolution that had aimed to condemn religion-related harassment or discrimination.

He said the administration wanted to differentiate between such harassment and defamation and would do so both in the Human Rights Council and the U.N. General Assembly.

"There are limits to free expression and there are certainly concerns about people targeting individuals because of their religious belief or their race or their ethnicity," he said.

"But at the same time, we're also clear that a resolution, broadly speaking, that talks about the defamation of a religion is a violation of free speech."

In other words, it's just about the exact opposite of what The Real Bingo says.

[The Real Bingo]

I don't say anything. You got a problem, take it up with USAToday and the Weekly Standard.

[Gomer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Real Bingo

I don't say anything. You got a problem, take it up with USAToday and the Weekly Standard.

Where'd you originally hear about it? I doubt you were browsing TWS and decided, oh,I'll post this at Techimo. Doesn't seem to be your M.O.

[Theophylact]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Real Bingo

I don't say anything. You got a problem, take it up with USAToday and the Weekly Standard.

No point in taking anything up with the Substandard. Bill Kristol is the "editor"; need I say more?

As for USAToday, the Hurley op-ed views with alarm, but nowhere gives any indication of the actual words that he fears would constitute consent to or approval of blasphemy laws. I don't disagree with the thrust of his article -- and neither, according to the article I posted, does the Obama administration.

[Chuckiechan]

Why are you rebutting an Obama initative as reported by Bill Kristol, with a Clinton statement? It's what Obama says that counts.

Hillary is trying to put a smily face on it for domestic consumption, while Obama is saying something entirely different to his buddies.

Obama is suggesting changes to the idea of free speech. He is equating denigrating Islam with yelling "fire" in a crowded theater. Bottom line, is if you denigrate Islam you are "touching forbidden subjects", much like Fox News discussing ACORN and Van Jones.

I'd worry about Obama.

Quote:

President Obama chose to join the Council despite the fact that the Organization of the Islamic Conference holds the balance of power and human rights abusers are among its lead actors, including China, Cuba, and Saudi Arabia. Islamic states quickly interpreted the president's penchant for "engagement" as meaning fundamental rights were now up for grabs. Few would have predicted, however, that the shift would begin with America's most treasured freedom.

Christianity is slammed and slurred regularly, and you can be sure Christianity will find no friends in this crowd.

[Toadman]

And hate crime is now a federal offe.....nvrmnd.

[Theophylact]

This kind of hate crime has been a Federal offense for quite some time. All that's happened is that the list of victims has been expanded to include gay, transgendered, and disabled people.