Hey Look: A drawing of Mohammed

UN adopts anti free speech resolution

The U.N.'s top human rights body has approved a proposal by Muslim nations urging the passage of laws protecting religion from criticism. Members of the Human Rights Council voted 23 in favor of a resolution Thursday to combat "defamation of religion." Eleven nations, mostly from the West, opposed the resolution and 13 countries abstained. The resolution was proposed by Pakistan. Muslim countries have cited the inflammatory effect of cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad as an example of unacceptable free speech. Critics say the resolution, while not binding, will have a chilling effect on free speech and may worsen relations between faiths. ------------------------------------------------------------------- This is bad news for anyone who values free speech. The UN has given cover to extreme fundamentalists (mainly Islamic); cover to torture, imprison and harass those who would dare to dissent.  The irony is that the resolution has very little to do with human rights. Rather than protecting people, the resolution offers protection to religions; a protection which can all to easily translate into protection for a state, a state guilty of violating human rights, the very human rights the UN ostensibly seeks to protect. Ironic, isn't it?

topics:  News and Politics,  Politics,  News,  Religion,  United Nations, Free Speech,  Humanism + add

• unimatrix0
• added this

Atheist outrage in Arkansas

Rep. Richard Carroll has introduced a bill to repeal Article 19, Section 1 of the Arkansas state constitution, which says:

"No person who denies the being of a God shall hold any office in the civil departments of this State, nor be competent to testify as a witness in any court." 

In Arkansas an atheist is not allowed to hold office or testify in court!  And to think, some people deny that atheists are discriminated against.  How is it that such a blatant form of discrimination has been allowed to remain in the Arkansas constitution?  Where is the outrage?

Ceremonial Deism: The National Religion

Ever wonder why, when we pledge allegiance, we say "under God"? Ever wonder why our money says "in God we trust"? Do you ever wonder why these phrases, which seem to endorse and establish some sort of religious belief, i.e. god, are sanctioned by the US government? Even when the constitution explicitly forbids the establishment of religion? You are not alone.

Many people have wondered and complained, some through the courts. The US Supreme Court, in its infinite wisdom, settled on an explanation termed "Ceremonial Deism", a phrase coined by the former dean of Yale Law School, Eugene Rostow. Ceremonial Deism is a legal term used in the United States for nominally religious statements and practices deemed to be merely ritual and non-religious through long customary usage.

Ceremonial deism is offensive to everyone. The non believer is offended for obvious reasons. But the serious believer is also offended. The supreme court is allowing "in God we trust" on our money and "under God" in the pledge of allegiance because these phrases are deemed to be "merely ritual" and "non-religious". Hence the Supreme Court is telling the devout believer that when they say "under God" in the Pledge or read "in God we trust" on our money there is nothing of religious significance going on, merely some meaningless ritual.

Hence the Supreme Court offends everyone while pleasing no one. More than this, by allowing these religious phrases to be sanctioned by the US government, the Supreme Court is violating the first amendment to the constitution. The US Supreme Court, by embracing the explanatory force of Ceremonial Deism, is, in deed and word, establishing a national religion. This defacto national religion is, paradoxically, empty of any true religious faith or conviction; a religion that is shallow, superficial and without consequence.

And that is where we now stand. A little known phrase, Ceremonial Deism, stands as the official national religion, a religion that is by definition, merely empty ritual devoid of any religious depth or significance. Is this what we want for the USA?

Atheists use Obama to promote secularism

The American Humanist Association will be using Obama to promote the virtues of secular family life. The AHA will use Obama's image in a prominent ad to be included in a special inauguration issue of the Washington Post. The ad praises the non-religious upbringing of Barach Obama. Obama's mother was a staunch defender of secular humanism.