I’d like to build the world a home
And furnish it with love
Grow apple trees and honey bees and snow-white turtle doves

While you were lamenting your shrinking investment portfolio, discussing whether Adam (American Idol) looks better with or without eye liner and fingernail polish, and worrying about Obama’s overexposure on national television, the United Nations was once again making a mockery of themselves. The 47 member Human Rights Council passed a non binding resolution that suggests countries around the world seriously consider promoting tolerance and understanding between cultures, religions and races. OMG.

I’d like to teach the world to sing
In perfect harmony
I’d like to hold it in my arms and keep it company

What’s so horrible about that you ask? Well, nothing on the surface. Beyond the crust however this resolution, first introduced to the Commission on Human Rights in 1999 by Pakistan on behalf of the Organization of Islamic Conference under the agenda item on “racism, is the “Dear John” letter of resolutions. Even pretty deep into it (the working resolution pdf) it all sounds pretty “UN We are The Worldish”. You read along and feel like breaking into a chorus of I’d Like To Teach The World To Sing. You’re saying “yes” inside your head, and then you come across the clincher, the “It’s not you, it’s me, I will always love you, I just can’t be with you”, of the resolution. You realize you’ve been duped. You read the suggestion that “media watch what they say and who they criticize”. Then the most certain, true intent is made clear as they say “even though everyone has the right to hold opinions, and freedom of expression is good, it might be wise to enact laws to shut up those who don’t know how to handle the special duties and responsibilities that come with these rights”.

You might consider this unimportant, the West in general voted against, or abstained from voting, and always has, as did India, and it won’t affect us anyway. Don’t be so sure. Journalists, and some of our fellow bloggers, are getting jailed at an increasingly alarming rate. We have to pay attention to this. In a world where we are responsible in some way for humanity, where in some parts of Afghanistan girls are again being denied education due to…. religion, in a decade in which the United Nations has agreed that women’s rights are human rights, where UNIFEM promotes women’s empowerment, rights, and gender equality globally, and where the Secretary General has specifically pledged to end violence against women, this is giving permission to make laws which suppress and consequently oppress. By suppressing the voices, you suppress the cause, be it liberty, justice, or equality. As stated in some of the UN’s own member nation’s past analysis “defamation of religions,” as opposed to the defamation of persons, forcibly requires the state to determine which ideas are acceptable, as opposed to which facts are true. A fundamental rule of law problem presents itself in the notion of “defamation of religion”. Stifling legitimate criticism or even research on practices and laws appearing to be in violation of human rights.”

Those who vote continually for this resolution feel the rights of the organization, in this case religion, and more specifically Islam, trump the rights of human beings. They see religion as threatened by criticism so they designate free speech the culprit of the violence, hatred, and racism, and in so doing set a pretty unsettling picture of what could come for those living in nations who support this resolution.

In the name of peace, love, and Allah of course.

For the Love of God, as they say.

Peace.

Possibly of interest:

UN body OKs call to curb religious criticism
—

Review of progress and assessment of implementation of the Durban Declaration and Programme of Action by all stakeholders at the national, regional and international levels-pdf
—
UN rights council session ends in controversy
—
UN Watch
—
SHATTERING THE RED LINES: THE DURBAN II DRAFT DECLARATION
—

Share/Bookmark