I believe this is what the incomparable Mr Condell has held forth about previously. Full, and somewhat dry, text here:
Now, this strikes me as the usual wishy-washy UN BS (that's another argument entirely). My interest is in the fact incitement of hatred against religion is now being equated with racism, 'at the behest of Middle Eastern countries'.
I haven't had the ttime or brain power to go through the document with a fine-tooth comb but, as far as I can see, what 'incitement to hatred against religion' is never really pinned down. And this worries me, if I'm right. The devil here is not so much in the detail as in the interpretation. Is it fair to say that just saying 'I am opposed to the concept of organised religion' could be construed, with a certain amount of twisting, as inciting hatred?
If that's the case - the UN is out to get us, as of this being ratified.
Just seen that the whole thing went a bit belly up when Ahmejadin got up to speak anyway...
I'm a little hesitant about posting this one, and not just because it's a little tangential. Before I start, just so I am not misuderstood, I shall state outright that I really don't care what consenting adults get up to to get their kicks (as long as it doesn't involve children and animals). Hey, we only get one shot at this, after all, whatever makes you happy. couldn't give a simian's posterior.
As I understand it, Miss California outed herself - if you'll pardon the pun - in the Miss US (?) competition as being anti-same sex marriage and lost a huge amount of support.
Her words, as far as I recall went along the lines of 'In this country we have a great deal of options. I personally believe that yada yada yada'.
I'll steer away from the obvious cracks about 'who the hell cares what a beauty queen things anyway'. I know nothing about her so cannot make that judgement. I assume from the fact that she ascribes this belief to 'how she was raised' that she was probably raised in a 'God-fearing' (peculiar phrase that) household.
She lost a lot of support. Commentary from both sides suggest it lost her the crown. As far as I can tell, she stated what she personally believes without saying she thought having the choice is a bad thing, or saying that she thought same-sex marriage should be banned across the world etc - as far as has been reported by the BBC that is.
It's a beauty pageant, not that important. But it does raise a question or two.
On one side - yes, absolutely, it's hurtful when someone tells you they think you're wrong/immoral etc.
She shouldn't have said it in such a public forum. It could influence others and validate some (though some of the Fundie Churches probably wouldn't want validation from a 'painted harlot'.
The sexual/marital mores of others are none of her business.
It's possible that what she said was a cynical attempt to win votes that backfired horrendously.
On the other side - She expressed a personal opinion, honestly, when asked a question. I don't agree with her, but at least she was purportedly honest.
As far as I've heard, she merely expressed her opinion without demanding it be enforced on others (though that could very well be her trying to walk a very fine line). She acknowledged the freedom of choice without overtly criticising it.
So when do we start policing other people's opinions and their right to state them (opinions, not statements of intent or desire)? I guess this has a bearing on my points about Durban II above, but coming from the other side so to speak.
My, I got a lot of ramble out of a beauty pageant. Been a long day.
ETA - Should have said - I don't care that much one way or another about the above; I merely pose them as potential arguments.