This week, the UN once again beclowned itself and turned into a global laughing stock as its grotesque Human Rights Council —made up mostly of theocratic countries— voted to punish speech if any believer in deities decides to get offended by said speech, and feels duty bound to punish anyone who dares to attack their crippled god and the myth it represents.
If you suspect the snowflakes who adhere to the religion of special needs are behind this nonsense, you would be right! And it gets worse:
The resolution was strongly opposed by the US, EU and other western countries, which argued that it conflicted with laws on free speech. On Wednesday, the resolution was passed, with 28 countries voting in favour, 12 voting against and seven abstaining.
Last month, an Iraqi-born protester caused outrage across the Muslim world after tearing pages from the Qur’an, wiping his shoes with some of them and burning others outside a mosque in Stockholm during the Eid al-Adha holiday.
[…]
While strongly condemning the burnings, however, western countries defended free speech. The German envoy called them a “dreadful provocation” but said free speech also meant “hearing opinions that may seem almost unbearable”. The French envoy said human rights were about protecting people, not religions and symbols.
Of course, in civilized countries people understand that rights and respect are for people, not ideas; and that beliefs —both, one’s own and others’— can be subjected to all kinds of attack, ridicule, mockery, and criticism.
The topic is not without a certain poetic injustice; after all, the UN was born partly in response to the Holocaust, and now its body whose task is to ensure that the minimum conditions are maintained so that nothing like it can ever happen again, has been hijacked by anti-Semitic troglodytes who cannot control their impulses when someone else challenges the ridiculous ideas to which they have tied their national identity and emotional dependence.
And here I was thinking that a community of countries with a Human Rights Council is there so the cultural heirs of the Enlightenment can help Third World countries out of penury, rather than for the latter to take the reins and blow up the democratic safeguards of the former.
And this isn’t a very hard issue after all: the burning of a book —of any book, be it the Bible, the Quran, Harry Potter, or the gay Kama Sutra— is in quite bad taste, and yet anyone can do whatever they so please with their private property. And those who don’t like it can go cry themselves a river. It is indeed a clown world, where there are so many actual injustices to be tackled (such as heat waves, shameful wage disparities across all industries, the rollback of women’s rights, famine, and corruption), but countries waste time, money, energy, and bureaucracy tending to the temper tantrums of those who lack the mental capacity to own their emotions and understand that their superstition does not dictate the limits of what the rest of us can do and say.
The icing on the cake is that all this whining against imaginary hate speech seeks to protect a pamphlet that regards women as little less than furniture, condones slavery, and incites anti-Semitism.
