Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 01/14/2009 8:20:49 AM PST by Sammy67
Almost 500 years ago, on the wall of the Castle Church in Wittenberg, Germany, Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses, characterizing as "madness" the notion that papal pardons could absolve individuals for their sins. As viewed from Rome, Luther had maligned, even defamed, the church. Luther was eventually excommunicated. His conduct ultimately led to the creation of a Protestant Church in Germany and a Reformation throughout Europe.
It is difficult to believe that in the 21st century anyone would seriously propose that conduct such as Luther's should be deemed illegal. But a few weeks ago, the General Assembly of the United Nations took a giant step in that direction. It adopted - for the fourth straight year - a resolution prepared by the 57-nation Organization of the Islamic Conference calling upon all UN nations to adopt legislation banning the "defamation" of religion. Spurred by the Danish cartoons of 2005, some of which portrayed the Prophet Muhammed in a manner deemed offensive by the OIC, the resolution was opposed by the United States, most European nations, Japan, India and a number of other nations.
Nonetheless, it has now been adopted.
From an American perspective, the resolution so plainly violates the First Amendment that it is
(Excerpt) Read more at nydailynews.com ...
The UN? FM!
According to many, Obama's "57 states" (referring to the US) gaffe during the campaign was a Freudian slip, thinking of those 57 Islamic states in the UN.
Congratulations on your “Screw the U. N.” graphic. Let’s put it up on billboards around the country.
>>Congratulations on your “Screw the U. N.” graphic. Let’s put it up on billboards around the country.<<
We need a U.N. replacement - one that is representative by contributions rather than counting Liberia the same as Japan. And without Russia and China being able to veto anything we try to do.
Watch out for what you wish for. We don't need a UN at all. There are enough alliances of nations with common interests to have an international dialogue when need be. What can any formal international body with something like 150 nations - mostly dictatorships - ever accomplish other than rash resolutions and declarations like this one?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.