It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The truth is, many Muslims holds views that are incompatible with freedom of speech. Why you think being a Muslim gives them immunity from criticism is beyond me.
Originally posted by skalla
well we are disappointed in each other, i'm sure neither of us are surprised by this. i also find this refernce to sources from you somewhat rich considering your heavy use of grubby sources in many threads and posts - unsurprisingly/disappointingly i will of course reference WND and areligionofpeace which you have used ad nauseam
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Let me ask you something ollncasino - do you believe language can cause harm?
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Let me ask you something ollncasino - do you believe language can cause harm?
The language written into Islamic country's laws around the world making criticism of Islam a criminal offense sure can cause harm.
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
They'll eventually work these things out for themselves - same as people everywhere. Not all Muslims see the world the same way - things will change.
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Again, I'll ask you - why are you so concerned with what Harris Zafar has to say?
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
How does Islamic law affect you directly?
Originally posted by gladtobehere
reply to post by ollncasino
ollncasino, have you thought about converting to Islam?
Its all you seem to think about.
Go outside, breathe some fresh air, play a video game.
Th media's got you all worked up. No one's out to get you, it'll be ok.
In important but underreported news, the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has abandoned its push for a global ban on blasphemy at the United Nations, according to the news outlet Reuters. The 57-nation body wanted the General Assembly, which is currently in session, to take up a binding measure criminalizing speech critical of religion. But Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, secretary general of the OIC, claims his outfit was unable to convince the United States or European countries to support such a proposal. "We could not convince them," Ihsanoglu said. "The European countries don't vote with us, the United States doesn't vote with us."
Myth 1: The U.N. resolution opens the door to limiting freedom of speech.
Wrong. The resolution acknowledges the language of article 20 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), notably that “any advocacy of national, racial or religious hatred that constitutes incitement to discrimination, hostility or violence shall be prohibited by law.” It calls on states to take measures “consistent with their obligations under international human rights law, to address and combat such incidents.” The United States has a reservation to that provision, to the extent that it violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, so it is not bound by the obligation. In fact, the U.S. has the highest threshold of free speech in the world, and the U.S. government has expressed no intention of lowering those standards. However, that does not exempt all other states from their legal obligations to fight “incitement, hostility or violence” according to article 20 of the ICCPR. After all, that is what they signed up to, so they have an obligation by law to honor their commitment.
The novelty of this text is that it does not include the harmful concept of “defamation of religions.” Instead, the General Assembly resolution calls on governments to speak out and to condemn hatred, while encouraging open debate, human rights education, and interfaith and intercultural initiatives.
The resolution marks a welcome departure from previous U.N texts. For over a decade, efforts were made in several venues at the U.N. to promote the concept that was intended to prohibit “defamation of religions.” What it did, in fact, was provide cover for abusive national blasphemy laws. Human Rights First has long argued that this concept is inconsistent with universal human rights standards that protect individuals rather than abstract ideas or religions. Indeed, blasphemy laws promote a stifling atmosphere in which governments can restrict freedom of expression, thought and religion and persecute religious minorities. Such resolutions were sponsored by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
here's my favorite part:
Yesterday, in an historic vote, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution on combating religious intolerance
The novelty of this text is that it does not include the harmful concept of “defamation of religions.” Instead, the General Assembly resolution calls on governments to speak out and to condemn hatred, while encouraging open debate, human rights education, and interfaith and intercultural initiatives.
The resolution marks a welcome departure from previous U.N texts. For over a decade, efforts were made in several venues at the U.N. to promote the concept that was intended to prohibit “defamation of religions.” What it did, in fact, was provide cover for abusive national blasphemy laws. Human Rights First has long argued that this concept is inconsistent with universal human rights standards that protect individuals rather than abstract ideas or religions. Indeed, blasphemy laws promote a stifling atmosphere in which governments can restrict freedom of expression, thought and religion and persecute religious minorities. Such resolutions were sponsored by the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC).
...i feel we have made real progress today, thanks again.
Originally posted by mideast
And there is where the old argument between west and Islam begins,
You define new words that cover both good and evil.
Muslims don't say that they should stop some one who is telling the truth , they want themselves to stay out of being insulted.
But you say , "insulting is a part of how we used to define freedom of speech , and we don't wanna give up even if we don't want to insult. We don't listen to you even if we agree"
Insulting is different than arguing and criticizing and questioning
Islam allows the people who are oppressed to raise their voice , but it forbids insulting because it is nothing but irrational and unreasonable way of communication.
What is wrong with that ?
Islam doesn't deny freedom of speech or attempt to censor those who insult Islam
Originally posted by gladtobehere
Go outside, breathe some fresh air, play a video game.
Th media's got you all worked up. No one's out to get you, it'll be ok.
I guess I can go on and on about this but the bottom line is Islam can dish it out but can't take it
Originally posted by Spiramirabilis
Islamic bloc abandons push for blasphemy ban at UN