By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
FaRmLaNd on 02 August 2010
Edit Thread
sapphi_snake said:
FaRmLaNd said:
sapphi_snake said:

@FaRmLanD

Ideally there would be total religious freedom, however religion would be viewed as a private matter that has no place in the public sphere. A one world government as a secular democracy would be ideal, and I don't think that any ohter type of government could rule the world in the long run (unless the government was despicable like that of Ninteteen Eighty-Four).

True.

But look at the UN, which is passing blasphemy and defemation of religions resolutions (non-binding ones already exist). The concessions made for the Islamic block in the UN is disturbing. I mean criticism is a major cornerstone of the modern world, science, skepticism, non-religion and so many things. To make criticism of religion a crime means that breaking away from religion is many ways will be a crime if these laws become binding. I mean how can one not become an atheist without criticising religion? At least during the initial de-conversion period.

I find it disturbing that so many religious leaders are so offended by criticism that they want to make blasphemy a crime. I doubt that Christopher Hitchens "God is not Great" would get the cut? Surely thats offensive?

My point being is that I think if a world government were to be formed it'd probably have to make tremendous concessions to get everyone on board. Which could potentially set in motion the end of such a government before its barely begun.

Quite true. Freedom of speech guarantees the freedom to criticise religion. It's actually quite shocking that someone would see criticising religion of a human rights issue. There si no such thing as a right to not be insulted, and most of the time the effect of an insult on a person is more the fault of the insulted person's perception, rather than the fault of the person who made the insult. For example I was on another forum and some christian guy was saying that any criticism of his religion is a hate crime (the forum toopic was about some billboards put up by an atheist group which were vandalised by some christians), however he also said that any criticism he made towards atheists or peopel of other religions (like for example "you'll burn in hell!") was not harassment nor a hate crime because his religion taught it.

Thats my biggest fear, the hyporcrisy. I hear all the time that atheists like myself are going to burn in hell, but the moment I open my mouth in response the offense card is played. Its really quite childish. If you're going to dish it out take it, and even if you can't take it, offense is not a proper defense because it means you can't think of any logical argument, hence the offense. It just weakens whatever argument they have in my eyes.

If someone says Hitler was right to kill all the jews for example, yes its an offensive thing to say, but intellectually its far far easier to show how what he was doing was hugely immoral without resulting to the hurt child stance. The same goes for calls for tradition aswell.