Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-17-2012, 01:53 PM
 
5,787 posts, read 4,723,363 times
Reputation: 853

Advertisements

Last December the Obama Administration pushed a UN resolution that banned criticism of Islam.

Of course the UN resolution acted like it was protecting ALL religion, but the only people who complain are Muslims so we KNOW that it was directed towards the anti-blasphemy Sharia type laws that protect against insults to Islam.

This UN Resolution is actually contradictory to the US Constitution!

The Obama Administration helped the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) push through their resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on religion.


Funny, they NEVER care when it's a Christian being insulted or Christianity in general?



Team Obama led the way for the resolution to pass through the General Assembly back in December 2011.

CNS News reported:
Quote:
The U.N. General Assembly on Monday adopted a resolution condemning the stereotyping, negative profiling and stigmatization of people based on their religion, and urging countries to take effective steps “to address and combat such incidents.”


No member state called for a recorded vote on the text, which was as a result adopted “by consensus.”

The resolution, an initiative of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), is based on one passed by the U.N.’s Human Rights Council in Geneva last spring. The State Department last week hosted a meeting to discuss ways of “implementing” it.


Every year since 1999 the OIC has steered through the U.N.’s human rights apparatus a resolution condemning the “defamation of religion,” which for the bloc of 56 Muslim states covered incidents ranging from satirizing Mohammed in a newspaper cartoon to criticism of shari’a and post-9/11 security check profiling.


Critics regard the measure as an attempt to outlaw valid and critical scrutiny of Islamic teachings, as some OIC states do through controversial blasphemy laws at home.

And, just think, it only took them nine months to start interrogating filmmakers.

Makes you look forward to another four years of this administration, huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-17-2012, 05:37 PM
 
47,010 posts, read 26,062,966 times
Reputation: 29484
Quote:
Originally Posted by jt800 View Post
the only people who complain are Muslims
Bwahahahahh! Good one!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-17-2012, 08:06 PM
 
Location: On the border of off the grid
3,179 posts, read 3,170,460 times
Reputation: 863
Quote:
This UN Resolution is actually contradictory to the US Constitution!
Everything the UN promotes is contrary to, and seeks to undermine our U.S. Constitution. Look at the UDHR, being shoved down the throats of our youngest school children. Agenda 21, taking over our bodies of water. Got an ICLEI in your town? Watch out!

The U.S. must withdraw all support from the UN ......... NOW!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 08:13 AM
 
5,787 posts, read 4,723,363 times
Reputation: 853
The statement out of Washington about them condemning the anti-Muslim film while saying they support free speech is actually a direct contradiction to the UN Resolution they pushed for.

It further shows how confused (being polite) this administration truly is.

It also makes you wonder why on Earth Obama had his UN diplomat on the Sunday news programs answering questions about the Libyan attack...that's not her job....where was Hillary who should have been the person going on TV?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:43 PM
 
5,787 posts, read 4,723,363 times
Reputation: 853
STILL no Liberals to touch this one, eh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:46 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,052 posts, read 84,576,981 times
Reputation: 27720
LOL..I like how there's "no recorded votes". No one wants to stand up and be counted with a name attached.
What do they fear..a fatwah against them ???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:47 PM
 
Location: OCEAN BREEZES AND VIEWS SAN CLEMENTE
19,893 posts, read 18,464,731 times
Reputation: 6465
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
LOL..I like how there's "no recorded votes". No one wants to stand up and be counted with a name attached.
What do they fear..a fatwah against them ???


"Hey with those people ya just never know"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-18-2012, 04:50 PM
 
5,787 posts, read 4,723,363 times
Reputation: 853
This story basically confirms all out fears that the Constitutionally protected Freedom of Speech is not secure under an Obama Presidency:

DoJ Civil Rights Division chief can’t commit to protecting free speech
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 06:22 AM
 
Location: South East
4,209 posts, read 3,594,192 times
Reputation: 1465
Not surprised by this at all....Obama has very deep Muslim ties.

Sadly, the main stream media chooses to focus on non issues with Romney and protecting Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2012, 07:31 AM
 
5,787 posts, read 4,723,363 times
Reputation: 853
Freedom of Speech is a topic Liberals obviously don't care much about and don;t seem to care if we lose.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top