uh oh!!!

[newatheist]

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-37100620081218

being specific to one religion(islam) and then classing it as race. hmmm... are they F***ing nuts.

"Islamic states say such resolutions do not aim to limit free speech but to stop publications like the Danish cartoons showing the Prophet Mohammed that sparked bloody protests by Muslims around the world in 2005."
so because muslims can't hanndle having the piss taken out of them, they are going to ban it?
WTF
seriouly WTF
WTF

[Ryoden]

free speech has been very slowly eroded over the years so this sort of thing is no surprise.

[lost thought]

Publishing houses are starting to self censor anything that could upset muslims as the fear of being murdered, business torched or family put in danger. This of course does not apply to reasonable western beliefs as they can print whatever rubish they want in complete safety. >:-)

[MischiefMonkey]

One positive is that this non-binding resolution seems to be loosing support.

Last year 108 supported it, this year only 86.

[Tim the Mage]

I blow you up if you are rude about me so you pass laws saying it's wrong to be rude about me (just in case I mean what I say). And I blow you up anyway. Hey Ho!

Understand my friends that certain religions own special privilege because of their power - and their willingness to use force to enfore that power.

[newatheist]

so what do we do? it seems to me that the average person can no longer be heard in the UN, to me it seems like the heads of the EU and UN have been making a lot of decisions without really much public input.

[lost thought]

so what do we do? it seems to me that the average person can no longer be heard in the UN, to me it seems like the heads of the EU and UN have been making a lot of decisions without really much public input.

We could always blow then up, No seriously that seems to be what they are taking notice of perhaps a bit more forcefulness is needed E-MAIL in caps or write in red ink caps. :-X

[newatheist]

We could always blow then up, No seriously that seems to be what they are taking notice of perhaps a bit more forcefulness is needed E-MAIL in caps or write in red ink caps. :-X

maybe a threat to probe their expenses? >:D

[Jack of Kent]

One positive is that this non-binding resolution seems to be loosing support.

Last year 108 supported it, this year only 86.


Bingo. First, it is non-binding. In fact, its legal significance for the UK is minimal.

Second, it is more of a counter of the outlooks of the governments that vote, almost an annual index of censorship.

And do remember, until earlier this year, England had its very own blasphemy laws.

[Tim the Mage]

so what do we do? it seems to me that the average person can no longer be heard in the UN, to me it seems like the heads of the EU and UN have been making a lot of decisions without really much public input.

There are other routes to power. Every time someone blows others up in the name of religion another crack appears in the edifice of organised religion. Our human instinct is that it is wrong.

The other approach is to use two other powers we have...

1. To reject - religious people are pretty good a mobilising their supporters behind sympathetic or supportive politicians. Try refusing to vote for god-botherers.
2. To organise - (as my leftie friends would put it) religion is organised and that organisation has purchase (look at the numbers of publicly funded faith forums and such like in the UK). You cannot compete with it as a disorganised rabble.

I'm off to church now...

[newatheist]

There are other routes to power. Every time someone blows others up in the name of religion another crack appears in the edifice of organised religion. Our human instinct is that it is wrong.

The other approach is to use two other powers we have...

1. To reject - religious people are pretty good a mobilising their supporters behind sympathetic or supportive politicians. Try refusing to vote for god-botherers.
2. To organise - (as my leftie friends would put it) religion is organised and that organisation has purchase (look at the numbers of publicly funded faith forums and such like in the UK). You cannot compete with it as a disorganised rabble.

I'm off to church now...
firstly, how do you tell the god botherers from the rest? (i didn't even know david milliband was atheist untill quite recently)
secondly, most non-theists don't like to organise, and even if you manage to organise them, you'll never get any money from them.

maybe all we can do is advertise on buses.:sad:

[Tim the Mage]

firstly, how do you tell the god botherers from the rest?


The simplest way is to ask them this question:

"Do you believe in God"

If the answer's yes (unequivocally) you ask them:

"Do you regularly attend prayers or religious occasions out of conviction" (this can be checked which believing in God can't)

And don't say your an atheist -they'll change their answers if you do.



secondly, most non-theists don't like to organise, and even if you manage to organise them, you'll never get any money from them.



All it requires is for someone to take it upon themsleves that something should be done - organising isn't about mass rallys but about a load of other things such as information, communication and argument. Also learn the gradualist lesson - rather than pressing the big button start with something seemingly innocuous like (and this is topical and has support) the disestablishment of the Church of England.