Too often, Islam presents a disturbing (violent, repressive) face to the world. Islam’s vehement opposition to free speech is one of the symptoms that causes me concern: for example, the absurd over-reaction to the Danish cartoons.
(To be clear, I didn’t approve of the cartoons, which gratuitously mocked Mohammed and stereotyped Islam. Nonetheless, it’s absurd to respond violently to a cartoon. Sticks and stones may break my bones, but cartoons will never hurt me.)
Muslim countries, by virtue of their aggressive campaign against any opposition to Islam, have cowed international institutions like the United Nations. Hence the grossly distorted condemnations of Israel at Durban.
Johann Hari alerts us to the latest development: the UN’s Rapporteur on Human Rights has been mandated to seek out and condemn the “defamation of religions and prophets”.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights stated 60 years ago that “a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief is the highest aspiration of the common people”. It was a Magna Carta for mankind — and loathed by every human rights abuser on earth. […]
Starting in 1999, a coalition of Islamist tyrants, led by Saudi Arabia, demanded the rules be rewritten. The demand for everyone to be able to think and speak freely failed to “respect” the “unique sensitivities” of the religious, they decided — so they issued an alternative Islamic Declaration of Human Rights. It insisted that you can only speak within “the limits set by the shariah [law]. It is not permitted to spread falsehood or disseminate that which involves encouraging abomination or forsaking the Islamic community”.
In other words, you can say anything you like, as long as it precisely [matches? — Hari has left a word out of the sentence] what the reactionary mullahs tell you to say. The declaration makes it clear there is no equality for women, gays, non-Muslims, or apostates. It has been backed by the Vatican and a bevy of Christian fundamentalists.
Incredibly, they are succeeding. The UN’s Rapporteur on Human Rights has always been tasked with exposing and shaming those who prevent free speech — including the religious. But the Pakistani delegate recently demanded that his job description be changed so he can seek out and condemn “abuses of free expression” including “defamation of religions and prophets”. The council agreed — so the job has been turned on its head. Instead of condemning the people who wanted to murder Salman Rushdie, they will be condemning Salman Rushdie himself.
Anything which can be deemed “religious” is no longer allowed to be a subject of discussion at the UN — and almost everything is deemed religious. Roy Brown of the International Humanist and Ethical Union has tried to raise topics like the stoning of women accused of adultery or child marriage. The Egyptian delegate stood up to announce discussion of shariah “will not happen” and “Islam will not be crucified in this council” — and Brown was ordered to be silent. Of course, the first victims of locking down free speech about Islam with the imprimatur of the UN are ordinary Muslims. […]
As the secular campaigner Austin Darcy puts it: “The ultimate aim of this effort is not to protect the feelings of Muslims, but to protect illiberal Islamic states from charges of human rights abuse, and to silence the voices of internal dissidents calling for more secular government and freedom.”
I’m disappointed by the statement, “It has been backed by the Vatican and a bevy of Christian fundamentalists.” Christians should not support a crackdown on freedom of speech.
I’m with Francis Shaeffer, who said that Christians (and people of other faiths) must learn to compete in the “free marketplace of ideas”. In other words, let everyone say their piece. Let everyone muster their most persuasive arguments.
The public can separate truth from falsehood, and distinguish words that build up from words that tear down.
