Religious freedom on the brink

October 15, 2012 | Filed under: Blasphemy,Free Speech,News | Posted by: American Humanist Association

by Roy Speckhardt, executive director American Humanist Association

It’s time to reconsider recent reasons for optimism regarding worldwide religious freedom. In September I wrote about how the Libyan embassy attack taught the world that true religious freedom requires not just that people are able to believe as they so choose, but it also demands the ability to be free from imposed belief and be able to question beliefs as one sees fit. Some leaders like Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon capitalized on the teachable moment to show humanity that while words can hurt, they never justify violence or oppression. But unfortunately, violence in the Middle East and elsewhere continues the long-running tendency to link blood and blasphemy. We haven’t outgrown the outdated attitudes from ancient civilizations where people like Anaxagoras were condemned to death for denying or questioning the existence of gods and a law was adopted that denounced ” those who do not believe in the divine beings or who teach doctrines about things in the sky.”

It seems as though many in the world are far more eager to use religion as a tool for consolidating power than are interested in protecting religious freedom and free speech. Countries such as Pakistan, Greece, and Egypt are imprisoning those who dare to speak their mind about religion and belief in general. This undemocratic crackdown on speech is worrying not only because it threatens the concept of religious freedom, but because real human beings around the world are suffering from the effects of this renewed tyrannical campaign that goes on where the attempts to impose blasphemy laws at the UN left off in 2011.

To read the rest of this Huffington Post article, click here.

3 Responses to Religious freedom on the brink

The Vicar October 15, 2012 - 11:04 am

What does it say about this argument that it is takes as its initial step something which is not true? The Libyan embassy attack was not a riot over that movie. It was a coordinated terrorist attack having nothing to do with any sort of public demonstration, as the U.S. government has admitted. In point of fact, there was a massive demonstration against the killers. There are plenty of reasons to fear Islam. This is not one of them. This isn’t even half of one of them. This is a fabrication, pure and simple, and to continue writing about it now, when the fabrication has been revealed publicly, is an act of intellectual fraud which is unspeakable. I am truly ashamed to share my secularity with anyone still making this claim; they are liars and cowards. But, oh, hey, don’t let a few mere facts get in the way of trying to portray a third of the world’s population as inhuman monsters who must be suppressed in the name of “freedom”. After all, it’s not like most atheists are atheists because they like intellectual rigor and honesty, right?

- Mike Daniels October 15, 2012 - 3:22 pm
  
  Thanks for sharing these links, Vicar! I realize that only the first couple of paragraphs of Mr. Speckhardt’s column are reproduced here, and he does make reference to the attack on the embassy. I agree that it’s disappointing that he didn’t include reference to the information you’ve pointed out, which of course came to light after he wrote the column he referenced in the first sentence of this column (that was published 9/13). It would have been better for him to focus instead on the many, sometimes violent, protests which actually did have something to do with “The Innocence of Muslims”. This column isn’t actually about the attack on the embassy at all; it focuses instead on a series of attacks on religious freedom, including blasphemy laws (and prosecutions) in Egypt, Pakistan, and Greece.
  
  - The Vicar October 15, 2012 - 5:26 pm
    
    The point of the article is to link the supposed outrageous behavior represented by the Libyan embassy attack to religious intolerance of free speech. (Otherwise there would be no point in worrying about that intolerance; it is only bad because it is linked to other things which are less harmless.) And yes, shutting down free speech is, considered entirely by itself, pretty harmless. Take an imaginary example: suppose I successfully petitioned Congress and the President to pass a bill which made it illegal to use the word “kumquat” in print or broadcast media. Just for the heck of it; no plans to build on that success, and the bill is worded in such a way that it can’t be used as a precedent for anything else. It would cause an extremely minor amount of hassle to certain grocers, chefs, and cookbook publishers. But it wouldn’t really be worth fighting. In no time, there would be a generally-accepted euphemism for describing the fruit, and “kumquat” would move from the list of “funny words humorists use” to “funny words humorists use in blue material”. It would have no serious impact on society as a whole. This is generally accepted in principle; there are things you are not allowed to say (within regulated contexts). “Shouting fire in a crowded theater” is, of course, the classic example. It is necessary to fight for continued freedom of speech because of the associated behaviors of those in authority which are not harmless, and tend to strengthen creeping authoritarianism. To trivialize these behaviors by including an example which is known to be false is to encourage any careful reader — or any pundit who wishes to discredit the entire argument — to dismiss the whole thing, or to decide that the issue is considerably less urgent than the author would have us believe.

Discuss

Stan on New AthiestWhy on Earth would you have to "submit your resignation" to the Mormon Church. Why play their game? Just stop. . .
Marvin L. Hasson on Creationism Returns to Tennessee – Part 1It is impossible for me to believe that anyone in their right mind could look at this world and believe. . .
John McCready on Religious Right Author Says Romney's Mormon Faith Makes Him Unfit For OfficeTalk about the "pot calling the kettle black"! In what univerise is CHRIST-insanity, a "true" set of beliefs, not fixated. . .
John McCready on Atheist TeenI wish I had been as smart as this teen has proved herself to be at 15!
sheldon archer on Robert Sapolsky: Are Humans Just Another Primate?Yes but not as developed as the apes

Religious freedom on the brink

3 Responses to Religious freedom on the brink

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Connect

Discuss

Our Latest

Secular Resources

Secular News Daily

secular.org