From the Pharyngula blog, we’ve got the U.N. passing another step towards an enforceable anti-blasphemy law, backed primarily by the the Organization of Islamic Countries.

It’s not just UN involved in the restriction of freedom of speech but attempts are made in Canada and in other democracies to suppress points of view in the name of ‘religious tolerance‘.

Here’s a quote from Christopher Hitchens (full clip below) in which he explains how restrictions on freedom of speech affect everyone in a society.

“It’s not just the right of the person who speaks to be heard. It is the right of everyone in audience to listen and to hear. And everytime you silence somebody you make yourself a prisoner of your own action because you deny yourself the right to hear something.”

Yes, they can.  But what happens when they do, can be to the detriment of secular societies.

The Vatican and Muslim leaders can get together but they do so to: “act together in defending and promoting the moral values which are part of our common heritage.”  and Proposition 8 passing is such an example of such promotion of moral values.

As well as pushing for censorship over free speech in the Danish Cartoon controversy:

“The Al-Azhar-Vatican committee issued a final communique… Members of the committee called on the media not to misuse the freedom of expression to insult religious beliefs and symbols, MENA said.”

It’s always nice to see people get together, except when their idea of the world isn’t good for you.

King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand

Having lived in Canada and the United States, my trip to Thailand was an interesting experience.

Thailand’s a relatively free country.  A democracy and Constitutional monarchy.  With a delightful king who loves Jazz, Sailing and even holds a patent for a type of waste water aerator.

And Thai’s love the king:

• “He’s brought the country into the modern age.”
• “The king has made Thailand a free country”
• “The king is a great man”  

are some of the things you’ll hear.

Expect for one problem. Criticizing the King of Thailand is a punishable offense that carries a minimum prison sentence of 3 years.

Recently an Australian writer was sentenced to prison for insulting the King. Sentenced for mere words, that he wrote.

For a monarch who loves his country, couldn’t he do even more “wonderful work” with a little constructive criticism from the people?

And doesn’t it undermine the complements the king gets if the people giving them are under a constant threat of prison time?

Criticizing, commenting and even insulting the powerful are a cornerstone of any true democracy. 

Just as Arab countries will never be “free” until they learn that Islam can (and should be) criticized,  the Thai people and the King himself will never be free until they shed the childish fear of accountability and face reality.

I was fortunate enough to spend 3 months in the People’s Republic of China. It was my first time living in an officially Atheist country.

However, it by no means, is the atheism advocated by people like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens.

For atheism or secularism to have any meaning it must be backed up by a support of freedom of expression, opening questioning, and respecting one’s right to dissent.

The Chinese government of course will say it’s for all these things but in true doublespeak it also restricts the Internet, imprisons dissentients, and attempts to ban beliefs.

The backbone of atheism is science and science needs a free society to succeed. Although truths are not something one can vote on, the process of  science must be free and unfettered or else it will fail to uncover those truths.

Without freedom, there is no science. Without science there can be no atheism.

Take the example of cartoonists Trey Parker and Matt Stone, who had death threats leveled against them for depicting the Islamic prophet Mohammed in South Park (in a bear suit no less).

The Prophet Mohammed

When asked to comment, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)—a moderate religious group—said nothing about the cartoon.

Oh, of course they said death threats were wrong but they also declined to say the cartoonists had a right to free speech and declined to say that although they may disagree with Parker and Stone’s views they support their right to say them.

Want more examples?

• With the Danish Cartoons the Catholic Church said that free speech “does not imply the right to offend the religious” and former President Bill Clinton compared the cartoons to anti-semitism.
• And on Salman Rushdie, Western “moderate” religious figures could only say that blasphemy was the problem, not the murder for hire fatwa.

Next time a cartoonist is in trouble, don’t be a moderate.  Speak up for free speech.

“To sin by silence, when we should protest,
 makes cowards out of men.”  – Ella Wheeler Wilcox

Update: Hooray! I’m probably wrong!

Given the comments on this post, I decided to take a closer look.  I found an earlier post on Skepchick in which they did actually show the cartoon.

It is more comforting to think that Skepchick wouldn’t actually censor or refuse to show images that may offend the religious and the recent post was probably more an attempt at satire.

Although I do have to offer up my own version of satirical censorship.

——–Original Post Below——–

Skepchick is a great skeptic site, but I was deeply saddened by their recent choice of self-censorship.

In a post about cartoonist Kurt Westergaard’s withdraw from an Atheist conference due to fears of safety, Skepchick blogger Rebecca Watson posted his controversial Mohammed cartoon, but chose to have it “slightly edited”.

By continuing to censor these cartoons in a free society, it only makes legitimate criticism of religion more taboo and our society less free.

Skepchick may have self-censored “for protection of Skepchick writers”, but it comes at the cost of protection for artists and cartoonists like myself, who choose to express their views not through words, but images.

As posted on Pharyngula, Swedish Cartoonist Lars Vilks was attacked during a University lecture. After this event, his website was hacked and firebombs were planted in his house.

David Frum points out that the crowd of spectators who outnumbered the protesters 10 to 1 remained passive during the protest, while the police were slow to respond to protect the speaker. This silence and lack of enforment from authorities is despressing.

Daily life in Sweden and other European countries is increasingly governed by an unwritten set of rules very different from the country’s formal law.

The formal law forbids assault and upholds free speech rights. The actual rules of the game, however, concede that certain assaults and certain violations of free speech rights may proceed with impunity. Police arrested two men for disrupting the Vilks event; both were released without charge.

I do think silence is what allows these kind of pre-enlightenment mentality to continue.

It’s a good thing May 20^th is Draw Muhammad Day.  Time to flex those free speech muscles.