The resolution under consideration—Defamation of Religions—aims to enlist the power and prestige of the UN in defense of religion by declaring religions to be immune from the general discourse practiced in non-religious domains.
The aim of the resolution is to impose a gag order on people against breathing a word that religionists may find defaming or offensive. Isn’t that a great idea, folks?
Now, any crackpot, more than ever, can start a scheme and call it a religion. And by so doing, he can be under the protective umbrella of the UN, immune from any criticism and litigation. By contrast, any religious order can take any offender to court for offensive statements.
I can just see the legions of lawsuits that will be launched and financed by the petrodollar rich Islamists in an unrelenting effort to muzzle any and all people who might dare to point out the truth about Islam. The very expenses of litigation, even without convictions, can ruin any individual or organization.
And what happens to the First Amendment, freedom of speech, of inquiry and expression? Freedoms we have come to cherish and celebrate as priceless treasures for free people and societies?
The answer: well, limits are also needed, particularly when the limits serve the interests of those who want to set them: In this case, the recently-empowered incorrigible, un-repenting dark-ages Islamists and their follow travelers.
My response is that gag orders, no matter where they are applied, exact an unacceptably high price for the possible good that they may do. In my ideal world, I would like to see a world where all ideas and beliefs, religious or otherwise, are expressed, even clash, and fend for themselves in a battlefield of ideas.