Advertisement
Common Ground?: Both Left And Right Oppose ‘Defamation Of Religion’ Laws
"October 27, 2009
Here is an issue that for once we may all agree on.
When it comes to “defamation of religion” policies, civil liberties groups and the Religious Right seem to fall on the same side. And now, the Obama administration has also voiced its opposition.
“Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies…. I strongly disagree,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said as she unveiled the State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom.
“The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faiths will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions,” she continued. “These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse.”"
blog.au.org/2009/10/27/c...eligion-laws/
"October 27, 2009
Here is an issue that for once we may all agree on.
When it comes to “defamation of religion” policies, civil liberties groups and the Religious Right seem to fall on the same side. And now, the Obama administration has also voiced its opposition.
“Some claim that the best way to protect the freedom of religion is to implement so-called anti-defamation policies…. I strongly disagree,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said as she unveiled the State Department’s Annual Report on International Religious Freedom.
“The protection of speech about religion is particularly important since persons of different faiths will inevitably hold divergent views on religious questions,” she continued. “These differences should be met with tolerance, not with the suppression of discourse.”"
blog.au.org/2009/10/27/c...eligion-laws/
posted by:
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Left And Right Oppose ‘Defamation Of Religion’ Laws
Sun, November 1, 2009 - 7:37 AMatheism.about.com/library/d...Wilson.htm
"In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court agreed with the plaintiff's arguments and struck down the New York State law allowing for "sacrilegious" films to be banned from public showings. According to the Court, films are an important medium for communicating ideas in society, something not lessened by the fact that they are also designed to entertain. Expression by means of film thus deserves the same protections of liberty under the First Amendment as those for newspapers, books, magazines, etc.
The idea that some form of expression can be banned because it is deemed "sacrilegious" was rejected for two reasons. First, the standard was too vague......."
This unanimous US Supreme Court Decision still resonates into the 21st century. It means that anything from Maplethorp's "Piss Jesus" picture to the Danish cartoon of Mohammed are considered protected speech under the First Amendment. In other words in America the first Ten Amendments to the Constitution (the Bill of Rights) trumps the 10 Commandments. Religion holds no special place that allows it to be free from satire or ridicule. Just as we can make jokes about Congress or any politican so can we make jokes at the expense of religion or religious symbols or deities.
