October 21, 2009

So it wasn't just hyperbole ...

... when I said that Barack Obama is acting more and more like this guy every day:

Around the world, free speech is being sacrificed on the altar of religion. Whether defined as hate speech, discrimination or simple blasphemy, governments are declaring unlimited free speech as the enemy of freedom of religion. This growing movement has reached the United Nations, where religiously conservative countries received a boost in their campaign to pass an international blasphemy law. It came from the most unlikely of places: the United States.

While attracting surprisingly little attention, the Obama administration supported the effort of largely Muslim nations in the U.N. Human Rights Council to recognize exceptions to free speech for any "negative racial and religious stereotyping." The exception was made as part of a resolution supporting free speech that passed this month, but it is the exception, not the rule that worries civil libertarians. Though the resolution was passed unanimously, European and developing countries made it clear that they remain at odds on the issue of protecting religions from criticism. It is viewed as a transparent bid to appeal to the "Muslim street" and our Arab allies, with the administration seeking greater coexistence through the curtailment of objectionable speech. Though it has no direct enforcement (and is weaker than earlier versions), it is still viewed as a victory for those who sought to juxtapose and balance the rights of speech and religion. (Link.)

Good thing about that "no direct enforcement," eh? But for how long will that be the case, though? What if Obama gets to name a couple more Supreme Court justices in the next few years -- especially someone to replace a conservative such as Scalia or Thomas? Will these new leftist justices "discover" a restriction in the First Amendment that provides the basis for the administration's position?

And look at a potential happening here in the States: Conservative Evangelical Christians could sue [leftist] groups which "defame" them. (They criticize them on a regular basis now as it is; with such a "blasphemy" law in place such criticism would be legally actionable!) Is that really what the Left would want? Or, like "hate crimes" laws, would blasphemy laws be selectively enforced, for example in this case being that only "major" and/or "long established" religions are applicable (or some other such nonsense)?

Posted by Hube at October 21, 2009 04:21 PM | TrackBack

Comments  (We reserve the right to edit and/or delete any comments. If your comment is blocked or won't post, e-mail us and we'll post it for you.)