Muslim Ideology and Western Freedom of Speech

John McLaughlin
Worried Muslim leaders have begun setting up a confrontation with the western world, and America in particular, involving modern human rights.  As Reuters reports:

Muslim leaders were in unison at the United Nations this week arguing that the West was hiding behind its defense of freedom of speech and ignoring cultural sensitivities in the aftermath of anti-Islam slurs that have raised fears of a widening East-West cultural divide.

Because Islam is an ideology bent on world domination while masquerading as a religion, it's easy to see how the leaders of that ideology, which severely restricts the liberty and freedom of any subjects under its domination, would not tolerate freedom of expression threatening that tight control.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said it was time to put an end to the protection of Islamophobia masquerading as the freedom to speak freely.

"Unfortunately, Islamophobia has also become a new form of racism like anti-Semitism. It can no longer be tolerated under the guise of freedom of expression. Freedom does not mean anarchy," he told the 193-nation U.N. General Assembly on Friday.

However, Egypt's newly elected Islamist president, Mohamed Mursi, revealed the true agenda at work here.

"Egypt respects freedom of expression, freedom of expression that is not used to incite hatred against anyone," he said. "We expect from others, as they expect from us, that they respect our cultural specifics and religious references, and not impose concepts or cultures that are unacceptable to us."

Speaking to the fundamental differences between Islam and modernity hardly means anarchy or imposition of cultures -- except to the extent Mr. Davutoghu, Mr. Mursi, and others worry that their subjects might begin to reject Islam's rigid controls.  Instead they now seek U.N. action calling for criminal sanctions against any expression they alone feel offends Muslim sensibility in order to head off any further uprisings seeking less rigid Islamic or government control.

Western states that backed the uprisings have urged these countries to quickly foster democratic reforms and adhere stringently to human rights principles and basic freedoms.

They fear a more austere version of Islam could hijack the protest movements. Most Western speakers at the United Nation defended freedom of speech, but shied away from calls by Muslim leaders for an international ban on blasphemy.

Americans have yet to come to grips with the inherent conflict between the Constitution's First Amendment enshrining personal freedoms and the coming demands of an ideology governed by Sharia law claiming privileges reserved for true religions.  Make no mistake, that's where this latest rhetoric is headed.

Worried Muslim leaders have begun setting up a confrontation with the western world, and America in particular, involving modern human rights.  As Reuters reports:

Muslim leaders were in unison at the United Nations this week arguing that the West was hiding behind its defense of freedom of speech and ignoring cultural sensitivities in the aftermath of anti-Islam slurs that have raised fears of a widening East-West cultural divide.

Because Islam is an ideology bent on world domination while masquerading as a religion, it's easy to see how the leaders of that ideology, which severely restricts the liberty and freedom of any subjects under its domination, would not tolerate freedom of expression threatening that tight control.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said it was time to put an end to the protection of Islamophobia masquerading as the freedom to speak freely.

"Unfortunately, Islamophobia has also become a new form of racism like anti-Semitism. It can no longer be tolerated under the guise of freedom of expression. Freedom does not mean anarchy," he told the 193-nation U.N. General Assembly on Friday.

However, Egypt's newly elected Islamist president, Mohamed Mursi, revealed the true agenda at work here.

"Egypt respects freedom of expression, freedom of expression that is not used to incite hatred against anyone," he said. "We expect from others, as they expect from us, that they respect our cultural specifics and religious references, and not impose concepts or cultures that are unacceptable to us."

Speaking to the fundamental differences between Islam and modernity hardly means anarchy or imposition of cultures -- except to the extent Mr. Davutoghu, Mr. Mursi, and others worry that their subjects might begin to reject Islam's rigid controls.  Instead they now seek U.N. action calling for criminal sanctions against any expression they alone feel offends Muslim sensibility in order to head off any further uprisings seeking less rigid Islamic or government control.

Western states that backed the uprisings have urged these countries to quickly foster democratic reforms and adhere stringently to human rights principles and basic freedoms.

They fear a more austere version of Islam could hijack the protest movements. Most Western speakers at the United Nation defended freedom of speech, but shied away from calls by Muslim leaders for an international ban on blasphemy.

Americans have yet to come to grips with the inherent conflict between the Constitution's First Amendment enshrining personal freedoms and the coming demands of an ideology governed by Sharia law claiming privileges reserved for true religions.  Make no mistake, that's where this latest rhetoric is headed.