Opinion
 
    
  
+Login    +Register    +Find Id / Pw Home  l  Archives  l  Learning Times  |  Sitemap  |  Subscription  l  Media Kit  l  PDF
   Home > Newszone > Opinion > Today`s Column > Wednesday, February 10, 2010 | 8:39 a.m. ET
  Nation
  Biz/Finance
  Technology
  Arts & Living
  Sports
  Opinion
    Editorial  
    Thoughts of the Times  
    Today`s Column  
    Desk Column  
    Letter to the Editor  
    The Dawn of Modern Korea  
    Another Korea  
    What`s Your Take?  
    Letter from America  
    Random Walk  
    Sean Hayes  
    Michael Breen  
    Views From Overseas  
    Jon Huer  
    Tom Plate  
    Living Science  
    Pacific Perspective  
    Guest Column  
    Times Forum  
    Readers` Forum  
    Cartoon  
    Great and Simple Things  
    Back Home  
    Ideas & Ideals  
    Jim Hoagland  
    Choi Yearn-hong  
    Today in History  
    Reporter's Notebook  
    Washington Lounge  
    Hyon O'Brien  
  Community
  Special
     
  The Learning Times
     Editorial Listening
     Phone English
     Dear Abby
     Domestic News
     Foreign News
     Screen English
     Live English in Drama
     Discovery Education  >
     Ancient Idiom  
     iBT Writing  
     English Writing I
     English Writing II  
     English Grammar
     Grasping Vocab
     iBT Vocab
     Korean Language  
     
     Junior Writing
     Junior Reading
     Junior Reporter
     
 
   11-23-2009 16:39 여성 음성 듣기 남성 음성 듣기
Suppressing Free Speech in Name of Religion



By Dale McFeatters
Scripps Howard News Service

A group of Islamic nations, led by Algeria and Pakistan, is lobbying to bring before the U.N. General Assembly a proposed treaty banning mockery of religion, according to the Associated Press.

The pact would, in effect, be a global anti-blasphemy treaty and an obvious and alarming threat to freedom of expression.

The move seems to have its roots in the backlash four years ago against a Danish newspaper that printed cartoons of the prophet Muhammad.

The often-violent overreaction at home and abroad shocked many Western European nations, which began to wonder what kind of intolerance had been growing in their midst.

In a letter in support of the campaign for the treaty, Pakistan, writing on behalf of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, said it ``believes that the attack on sacredly held beliefs and the defamation of religions, religious symbols, personalities and dogmas impinge on the enjoyment of human rights by followers of those religions."

The letter writer did not see fit to note that some members of the 56-nation conference are hardly paragons of human rights.

The letter seeks to outlaw utterances that are ``grossly abusive or insulting" to religion without defining precisely what it deemed grossly abusive.

That kind of spongy language leads many to suspect that the treaty would be used against political dissidents as much as it would be used to protect the feelings of the devout.

The United States is said to be working to kill the proposal and hopefully other nations are, too. In the unlikely event the United Nations did vote to propose an anti-blasphemy pact as a global treaty, it technically would be binding only on those nations that ratify it. No nation that believes in free speech would do so.

Dale McFeatters is an editorial writer of Scripps Howard News Service (www.scrippsnews.com).

Reader’s Comments
Notice From KT Website Manager
Bad language will not be tolerated. All comments considered discriminatory against race or sex, or which are considered offensive against certain people, will be eliminated by the manager. Violators will be deprived of their membership.
Please stay on topic.
Managerial regulations
◀ Back ▲Top