The group with the United Nations so laughably named the Human Rights Council adopted the non-binding resolution, proposed by Pakistan on behalf of Islamic states – with a vote of 23 states in favor and 11 against, with 13 abstentions – to define the defamation of religion as a human rights violation.
Of course, since Pakistan was fronting for the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC) when they crafted the resolution, the document in question doesn’t mention Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, or any other religion as needing or deserving special protections.
Only Islam is mentioned. From Reuters:
Pakistan, speaking for the 56-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), said a “delicate balance” had to be struck between freedom of expression and respect for religions.
The resolution said Muslim minorities had faced intolerance, discrimination and acts of violence since the September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, including laws and administrative procedures that stigmatize religious followers.
“Defamation of religious is a serious affront to human dignity leading to a restriction on the freedom of their adherents and incitement to religious violence,” the adopted text read, adding that “Islam is frequently and wrongly associated with human rights violations and terrorism.”
You can, if you wish, download the full text of the resolution here (PDF).
Leaving aside the intrinsic wrongness and gross stupidity of trying to declare defamation of any religion as a human rights violation, and also leaving aside the evil intent in evidence in trying to limit freedom of speech in favor of religion, the solely Islamocentric nature of this abomination of a resolution makes nothing more than an effort at using the United Nations to wage a white-collar jihad against the free peoples of the world.
My response is what every right thinking, freedom loving human’s response should be to this sort outrage perpetrated evil vermin masquerading as men: Go to Hell on the camel you rode in on, Abdur-Iblis!
To make the point a little clearer for those with linguistic, cognitive, cultural, or evolutionary deficiencies:
Are the above images grossly offensive? Yes, incredibly so. Are they a violation of anyone’s human rights? No, not in the least – unless you’re willing to claim that you have the basic human right not to be offended. Of course, in that case, your opinion is offensive to me and violates my human rights. ðŸ˜‰
Now please understand, I have nothing in particular against Islam – certainly little or no more than I have with any of the Abrahamic faiths - or Muslims in general, though some of the actions of the more radical sects of Islam and those of certain individual Muslims are of a sort that I would gladly exterminate them unto the last adherent and/or scion.
These quite offensive images were posted in response to the U.N. Human Rights Council’s attempt to criminalize free speech and expression critical of Islam – and theoretically any religion.
As I’ve posted before, I will fight the Islamists’ white collar jihad with my voice, my vote, and – if needs be and the Devil will out - my attorneys. If they want to take it beyond that, I have developed a fondness in recent times for the M24A3 chambered for .338 Lapua Magnum – much more punch than my old .300 Win Mag and lighter and very much more accurate than my old, but still loved to this day, M82A1 – which should solve for most “problems” within 1200m or so.