You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Olde Tyme Religion
No freedom of religion without tolerance: Asma
2006-11-01
Asma Jahangir, UN Special Rapporteur and chairperson of the Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, said on Monday that there can be no freedom of religion without religious tolerance.
Ummm... I might even phrase it the other way around, that religious tolerance is impossible without freedom of religion.
She was speaking at a special event held by the US State Department to celebrate the 25th anniversary of the UN Declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion and belief. She pointed out that while religious freedom should be viewed as a basic right, there was no single recipe that could it all world regions, given their different cultural mores, history, traditions and levels of development.
Yasss... Such a dilemma, to define "religious freedom" in such a manner as to allow, even encourage, Islam to flourish, but then to allow it to suppress all other religions in the name of quaint local cutoms and mores.
Each society had its own norms and peculiarities. Education, she said, could be part of the solution but it would have to be the right kind of education.
Uhuh. Very tightly controlled education.
She said even highly educated societies were sometimes seen practising religious intolerance.
Depending on how it's defined, of course. And who's doing the defining.
The exclusion of women from religious dialogue amounted to denying 50 percent of the population a role in this important area, she stated. According to her, the root cause of religious conflict and intolerance is not poverty but political and economic disempowerment.
I'd say lust for power has a lot to do with it. And I'd call intolerance one of the causes, not one of the effects.
Ms Jahangir said freedom of religion should not be the preserve of the worldÂ’s major established religions but of its non-traditional religions as well. She expressed alarm at the sectarian divide in some parts of the world, pointing out that it was always those in a minority who suffered the most. She was critical of the French law on headscarves for Muslim women, which she said stigmatised them, leaving them out of the mainstream.
Unlike Pakistan's enlightened blasphemy and hudood laws.
She said not it is not religion as such, but those who follow it, who have the right and need to be protected. She also expressed concern at the “hyper-sensitivity” to religion witnessed recently in all parts of the world.
Oh, she noticed the worldwide Islamic hissy fits, did she?
She found it regrettable that governments were often reluctant to take action against groups that spread such hate and disaffection. She also spoke disparagingly about Guantanamo where the religious beliefs of the inmates had been abused in several instances through insult to their faith, such as desecrating the Holy Quran. It was a form of torture and it was unacceptable, she added.
Beating them with the Holy Koran would be torture. If the "desecration" has been disproved, then it's not much of a torture, is it?
Ms Jahangir answered a large number of questions from the audience on her work for the United Nations and on several aspects of religious freedom and human rights. She said the Muslims living in America had experienced a backlash in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.
Of course, it wasn't much in comparison to the frontlash the rest of America had felt from religiously-motivated krazed killers.
She said she feels “disappointed” at this turn of events because she expects the United States to maintain its traditionally high standards of religious tolerance.
You can always find something to bitch about if you look hard enough.
She said the US government had used the war on terror as a cover to persecute certain individuals.
That's right. The war on terror is a mere pretext to persecute... ummm... terrorists.
Integration, she stressed, should be two-sided. Not only should those who came here from other countries and cultures integrate with the societies where they live and respect their laws and traditions, but those societies too must make an effort to respect those who come from other cultures and religious backgrounds.
But not to bend over backward. Muslims have no more claim on our indulgence than do Buddhists, Shintoists, or animists.
Above all, she said, the Rule of Law must prevail and be respected by all.
Just like it is in Pakistan.
She said America should abide by its great traditions for its own sake. She deplored the attitude where Muslims were treated “at best as suspects.” She said extremism should be “marginalised” because it does not represent the larger body of Muslims or for that matter followers of other religions.
There aren't any followers of other religions who're killing members of other religions in the name of that religion. Period. Buddhists aren't doing it. Hindoos aren't doing it. Rosicrucians aren't doing it. Only Muslims, and they're doing it in large numbers.
She also answered questions about the controversy over Muslim women’s head coverings. “Women’s heads should be left alone,” she said, causing a good deal of laughter. She told the gathering that on a visit to the Maldives, she found that most women were wearing the hijab. When she asked why so many had adopted the practice, she learnt that after the tsunami, some Muslim clerics had issued edicts that the tsunami had hit the Maldives because women went about dressed immodestly.
It's my opinion that God struck that particular area of the world because of the large concentration of Muslims. If they were Lutherans that stuff wouldn't happen.
Asked about the persecution of Christians in certain Muslim countries, she replied that religious tolerance should be for everyone, regardless of what faith they follow. People should be viewed as human beings, not Muslims, Christians, Jews or Hindus, she added. The meeting was also addressed by US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who said freedom of religion applies to the practice of religion. It does not give religion freedom from criticism.
Posted by:Fred

#3  Perhaps because she's a Pak?

Naw. That couldn't be it.
Posted by: Fred   2006-11-01 07:30  

#2  Funny how she has not mentioned that the most intolerant nations are muslim eg Saudi,Pakistan and Iran.
Posted by: Cheregum Crelet7867   2006-11-01 05:36  

#1  there can be no freedom of religion without religious tolerance.

Life is so much more fun when viewed in a fun house mirror.

She pointed out that while religious freedom should be viewed as a basic right, there was no single recipe that could it all world regions, given their different cultural mores, history, traditions and levels of development.

Horseshit. Freedom of religion, period. No cultural mores, no traditions or history. Freedom of religion. What part of those three simple words does she not understand?

This woman is a hopeless tranzi multiculti wanker. Fisking her shit could take hours. Besides, Fred already did a swell job. Time for bed.

Posted by: Zenster   2006-11-01 03:56  

00:00