In the UN the Secretary General of Organization of Islamic Cooperation called for a resolution to end free speech where it refers to islam but doesn’t suggest the UN should call for an end to violence. This article details some of the positions taken:
“My position is condemning this film and those who produced it …
But the secretary general stopped short of calling for an end to anti-American protests.
Calling the uproar an “issue that needs to be understood,” Ihsanoglu said,
The basic positions presented come down to:
“Freedom of speech is one thing, but usage of your freedom should not be to offend
“If the Western world fails to understand the sensitivity of the Muslim world, then we are in trouble,” he told the AP. He said provocative insults are “a threat to international peace and security and the sanctity of life.”
“a film or caricatures denigrating the prophet are unacceptable by the masses because they revere him. They want him to be revered by others or at least not insulted by others … We have to respect that.”
So freedom of speech can not “offend” (seems like like would be in the eye of beholder so wouldn’t all free speech be offensive to someone) and everyone has to “revere” their imaginary magicman. Therein lies the rub: who decides what offends whom? Can I insult jeebus but not muhammad? Can I offend right wing Americans by denouncing Mittwit but not Iranians by denouncing their ayatollahs?
What is free speech, except but to offend! If everything I said is hunky-dory and has been scrubbed of any content that might “offend” and I’m required by UN resolution to self-censor exactly where do I have any free speech at all?! And, of course, you’re not offending me by denouncing me as an infidel and it’s perfectly OK that I be killed, so “respect” for your beliefs means suicide.
This really comes down to the cultural relativity a portion of the world wants. I have to “revere” their prophet, IOW, they impose their beliefs on me, while I have to simultaneously restrain my speech because that would “respect” their beliefs. What about respecting my belief! In free speech. Where does that fall in your spectrum?
I’m sure xtians are offended by things I’ve said or others I’ve quoted have said, but thus far there have no been any death threats (I know better, while geodashing, than to travel to Missouri rural lands during election time). But mention old blessed be his name with anything but praise and it won’t be rotting in hell, but murdered in this life.
I’ll tell you what, Mr. OIC. You get a ban passed on murdering ambassadors, which should be a crime under any cultural system, and ending fatwas against authors or cartoonists, and then we can talk. My right to free speech (and to offend by exercise thereof) is just as “sensitive” and deserves as much “respect” as your imaginary man.