Are you with UN "global" law prohibition the provocation "mock/insult/lie", about all religions ?

[crossfire]

What a freaking bureaucratic maze the UN is. After much searching, I came up with this recent Public Relations statement, which carries no weight:
President of the 66th Session - General Assembly of the United Nations

And then this International Covenant from last year--
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (12 September 2011)
Excerpt:

48. Prohibitions of displays of lack of respect for a religion or other belief system,
including blasphemy laws, are incompatible with the Covenant, except in the specific
circumstances envisaged in article 20, paragraph 2, of the Covenant. Such prohibitions must
also comply with the strict requirements of article 19, paragraph 3, as well as such articles
as 2, 5, 17, 18 and 26. Thus, for instance, it would be impermissible for any such laws to
discriminate in favour of or against one or certain religions or belief systems, or their
adherents over another, or religious believers over non-believers. Nor would it be
permissible for such prohibitions to be used to prevent or punish criticism of religious
leaders or commentary on religious doctrine and tenets of faith.115
​

I need coffee and some sustenance now before I faint after navigating through that mess! :faint:

 

[Reverend Rick]

I find it ironic how many people posting in this thread champion freedom and then turn around and display the same mentality of intolerance in the same breath.

Here in America we are free to speak our minds, free to worship or not worship as we see fit, raise our children differently and to bear arms.

The OP wants to eliminate our freedom of speech while others want to restrict religious teachings or others want to take away our guns.

Myself, I champion freedom and do not want to be restricted. People who want to tell parents how to raise their children are no different than Godobeyer wanting to control your speech.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

The OP wants to eliminate our freedom of speech while others want to restrict religious teachings or others want to take away our guns.

Um... How is that in any way related?

Actually, nevermind. That's a whole other subject for a whole other time...

 

[Storm]

Um... How is that in any way related?

Actually, nevermind. That's a whole other subject for a whole other time...

Same basic principle: different countries enshrine different rights, and nobody likes outsiders telling them their rights are stupid, pointless, or wrong.

But yeah, let's not get sidetracked with that example.

 

[Photonic]

I find it ironic how many people posting in this thread champion freedom and then turn around and display the same mentality of intolerance in the same breath.

Here in America we are free to speak our minds, free to worship or not worship as we see fit, raise our children differently and to bear arms.

The OP wants to eliminate our freedom of speech while others want to restrict religious teachings or others want to take away our guns.

Myself, I champion freedom and do not want to be restricted. People who want to tell parents how to raise their children are no different than Godobeyer wanting to control your speech.

So you believe all religious teachings are healthy, regardless of what they do to the child?

Also wow, slippery slope much?

 

[Storm]

So you believe all religious teachings are healthy, regardless of what they do to the child?

You can reasonably use this argument AFTER you can show that the theology you want us to acknowledge as "OMG, CHILD ABUSE!" actually has a detrimental effect on a significant percentage of children.

Til then, don't pretend it's anything other than your own biased hyperbole.

Also wow, slippery slope much?

How is pointing out the hypocrisy of your position a slippery slope?

Your entire argument boils down to "My freedom of conscience is inviolate. Your freedom of consciousness is (or should be) criminal."

 

[Photonic]

You can reasonably use this argument AFTER you can show that the theology you want us to acknowledge as "OMG, CHILD ABUSE!" actually has a detrimental effect on a significant percentage of children.

Til then, don't pretend it's anything other than your own biased hyperbole.


How is pointing out the hypocrisy of your position a slippery slope?

Your entire argument boils down to "My freedom of conscience is inviolate. Your freedom of consciousness is (or should be) criminal."

So children are allowed to undergo years of mental abuse under the guise of religion and it's perfectly fine, as long as they don't touch the child.

 

[Storm]

So children are allowed to undergo years of mental abuse under the guise of religion and it's perfectly fine, as long as they don't touch the child.

Do you really want to go there with me? Would you like some examples of the mental abuse *I* endured as a child? Which, by the way, resulted in a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder severe enough to result in a legally recognized psychiatric disability, among other verifiable - for that matter identifiable - effects?

Again, please provide evidence of detrimental effects to justify your use of the term "child abuse." It is, after all, an EXTREMELY sensitive topic, and should not be belittled to score a point in political football.

Or, let me translate that to your level of discourse in this thread: put up or shut up.

 

[Photonic]

Do you really want to go there with me? Would you like some examples of the mental abuse *I* endured as a child? Which, by the way, resulted in a diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder severe enough to result in a legally recognized psychiatric disability, among other verifiable - for that matter identifiable - effects?

Again, please provide evidence of detrimental effects to justify your use of the term "child abuse." It is, after all, an EXTREMELY sensitive topic, and should not be belittled to score a point in political football.

Or, let me translate that to your level of discourse in this thread: put up or shut up.

Political points? What do you think this is a game? I seem to be taking this a lot more seriously than you do.

 

[Kerr]

then why you vote for provocation (insult/lie/mock) ?
do you mean insult personaly is not forcely as insult my religion ?

I mean mocking someone or something doesnt have to be an insult. There is for example this radio program in my country where they make fun of our politicians by having actors play them and let them say and do absurd things. That includes the prime minster and anyone in our parliament. I dont think anyone has taken offense since to my knowledge, no one has tried to shut the program down. And it does make fun of the people who has the power to do so.

On the other hand, an insult is something else. Its not humor, its just meant to be offensive and provocative. You can mock someone in an insulting way. But you can also mock someone without insulting them. I mock myself, so I know .

 

[Storm]

Political points? What do you think this is a game? I seem to be taking this a lot more seriously than you do.

Really? What part of you belittling my very real scars, along with God only knows how many other survivors' and victims' because you want to make someone you disagree with look bad indicates that you take the subject of child abuse more seriously than I?

 

[Kerr]

sorry i miss this ;
sound good that you stop ,when they ask you
if you don't stop , what they will do to you ?

For me, stopping is just a matter of having good manners. Doesnt matter if they respond with force or simply walks away.

In my experience, though, they usually pretends like nothing is wrong and then tell me months later that they hate me through a common friend :areyoucra.

 

[Photonic]

Really? What part of you belittling my very real scars, along with God only knows how many other survivors' and victims' because you want to make someone you disagree with look bad indicates that you take the subject of child abuse more seriously than I?

It's ironic that you think I'm belittling you. Sad and ironic.

*Especially considering that you are possibly a victim of it. It is strange that you would object so much to the statement.

Mental abuse is not a joke, you should know that. I certainly know it.

 

[Storm]

It's ironic that you think I'm belittling you. Sad and ironic.

*Especially considering that you are possibly a victim of it. It is strange that you would object so much to the statement.

Mental abuse is not a joke, you should know that. I certainly know it.

Then justify your use of the term. Or shall I start using personal examples to highlight the contrast?

By the way, wrt your use of "possibly," unless you have good reason to cast aspersions on my honesty, please refrain from doing so.

Finally, I object to exploitation in general, and exploitation of abuse survivors especially. Call me crazy, but *I* happen to think we've been exploited enough, thank you very much.

 

[Photonic]

Then justify your use of the term. Or shall I start using personal examples to highlight the contrast?

By the way, wrt your use of "possibly," unless you have good reason to cast aspersions on my honesty, please refrain from doing so.

Finally, I object to exploitation in general, and exploitation of abuse survivors especially. Call me crazy, but *I* happen to think we've been exploited enough, thank you very much.

As an abuse survivor I find it suspect that you believe it is exploitation to make rational statements regarding the mental health of children.

Take note, we are now far off topic. Leave this as it is. I may start a new post.

 

[Storm]

As an abuse survivor I find it suspect that you believe it is exploitation to make rational statements regarding the mental health of children.

Take note, we are now far off topic. Leave this as it is. I may start a new post.

What have you said that was rational?

"I don't like it" is not equivalent to "this is abusive."

 

[MysticSang'ha]

I find it ironic how many people posting in this thread champion freedom and then turn around and display the same mentality of intolerance in the same breath.

Here in America we are free to speak our minds, free to worship or not worship as we see fit, raise our children differently and to bear arms.

The OP wants to eliminate our freedom of speech while others want to restrict religious teachings or others want to take away our guns.

Myself, I champion freedom and do not want to be restricted. People who want to tell parents how to raise their children are no different than Godobeyer wanting to control your speech.

Hear hear! :clap :yes:

I totally agree, Rick.

 

[McBell]

I seem to be taking this a lot more seriously than you do.

a legend in your own mind?

You have repeated a claim ad naseum with absolutely nothing but your jumping up and down repeating said claim as your 'evidence' said claim is anything other than your own opinion.

And you want everyone to take your claim seriously?

 

[Storm]

a legend in your own mind?

You have repeated a claim ad naseum with absolutely nothing but your jumping up and down repeating said claim as your 'evidence' said claim is anything other than your own opinion.

And you want everyone to take your claim seriously?

Thank you.

 

[idav]

UN can't possibly control peoples bias. Might as well tell people they can't spread the truth about religions either.:sarcastic