28
   

United Nations to ban religion?

 
 
Reply Tue 3 May, 2005 03:35 am
This was a proposal submitted to the UN last year. The formulism site is now off line, but the formulism movement seems quite alive.

Source is PRweb.Com

Quote:
The resolution is being proposed by Antony Last, founder of formulism.org, a site which claims that freedom FROM religion would be of far greater benefit to mankind than freedom OF religion.

Freedom from Religion | Proposed UN Resolution / Charter Amendment | Version 1.1

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS HEREBY VOW
* to save succeeding generations from the scourge of organized religion, a folly which has brought untold sorrow to mankind through the division, hatred and conflict it engenders, and
* to reaffirm an individual's right to freedom of belief, freedom of conscience and freedom of prayer, and
* to establish conditions under which these freedoms can be privately exercised.
AND FOR THESE ENDS WE UNDERTAKE
1. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the public expression of religious beliefs, including the use of symbols, clothing or markings which are synonymous with any currently or previously existing religions.
2. To outlaw, with immediate effect, public acts of worship or religious declaration.
3. To outlaw, with immediate effect, private gatherings of three or more people for the purposes of engaging in acts of worship or religious services.
4. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the publication of books, literature or articles which seek to promote religious beliefs or encourage adherence to religious doctrine.
5. To outlaw, after a period of amnesty, the personal ownership of books or materials which seek to promote religious beliefs or encourage adherence to religious doctrine. (Books of academic or social interest will be made freely available to schools, universities and public libraries).
6. To outlaw, with immediate effect, the celebration of religiously significant dates.
7. To begin, with immediate effect, the destruction or reassignment of predominantly religious buildings, such as churches, mosques and temples.


See Revelation Chapters 17 & 18
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Tue 3 May, 2005 04:48 am
The fact it went nowhere ought to tell you something.
0 Replies
 
CodeBorg
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 May, 2005 05:20 am
When the undertaker finishes his job,
then you will be free from religion.

Patience. Life has a way of resolving all issues, soon enough.
0 Replies
 
fredjones
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 02:12 am
Intolerance and censorship are generally bad no matter what the reason.
0 Replies
 
agrote
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 06:55 am
fredjones wrote:
Intolerance and censorship are generally bad no matter what the reason.


Very true. I hate religion, really. But banning it isn't theright way to go about it. I'd rather convince people to agree with me than force them to.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 06:58 am
United Nations to ban religion

Ah, a consumation devoutly to be desired.

Alas, they lack the power to implement such a salutary measure . . .
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 09:07 am
edgarblythe wrote:
The fact it went nowhere ought to tell you something.

As well as does the fact that there are those who seriously consider it
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 09:09 am
Setanta wrote:
United Nations to ban religion

Ah, a consumation devoutly to be desired.

Alas, they lack the power to implement such a salutary measure . . .

It's interesting that you and I agree, at least in part.
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 09:15 am
You sure you've got a good source for this information, neologist?
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 09:58 am
What's the big deal?

Assuming the initial post was correct, this dubious proposal was "submitted to the UN". So what.

This is not a very shocking claim. I just submitted my proposal to the UN that accordian music and bad haircuts should be banned.

Horrors. <<yawn>>
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 10:00 am
roger wrote:
You sure you've got a good source for this information, neologist?


I must admit; I received the info in an email and was able to check the source at the time. I'm convinced it was legit. However, I cannot find it in PRweb archives and the formulism site is off line. A search of the term 'formulism' will take you to several sites, including THIS
My reason for posting is my observation that organized religion has, to one degree or another, been the driving force behind every war and social abomination in human history. I believe it is only a matter of time before the clergy are called to account for their bloodguilt. And I believe the bible predicts it.
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 May, 2005 10:04 am
ebrown_p wrote:
What's the big deal?

Assuming the initial post was correct, this dubious proposal was "submitted to the UN". So what.

This is not a very shocking claim. I just submitted my proposal to the UN that accordian music and bad haircuts should be banned.

Horrors. <<yawn>>


Well, I'll have to agree with you on the bad haircuts. One can't travel far without being traumatized by troglodytic tresses.

But, as a Weird Al fan, I must say I will fight to the death to preserve the accordion!!!
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 02:14 pm
no religion should be banned.

but missionaries / those who try to hardsell their religion - of all religions should be punishable by law.

if someone has to convert, he/she will - on his own.

in today's information age, the bull-crap of "the missionaries need to take the religion to the unsaved - how else will he/she know how ignorant he/she is" - dont hold.



the un does so much to protect the heritage of the world - declare the pyramids and the machu pichu and the taj mahal as world heritage monuments and stuff - just so that the heritage of the world is not washed away - so why the hell does it allow the conversion of the last remaining members of any society, like for example the Hopi indians or the Maoris of New Zealand ???


dont we have enough social genocide already, to go with an equal ammount of physical genocide.

why does the uno just sit back and watch from a distance as entire cultures (mind you not the people) and religions are wiped off the face of the earth (social genocide), diminishing the religio - socio - cultural heritage of the earth significantly and irrparably??????????????????
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 02:43 pm
Turn the Vatican into a time share :wink:
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 03:26 pm
build a "great wall of china(vatican)" around it better - if you know what i mean.


all the vaticans on earth, again if you know what i mean.
0 Replies
 
ebrown p
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 04:16 pm
Religion (at last Conservative American Christianity) has certainly been making an attempt to ban the United Nations.

This presents more of a danger...
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 04:30 pm
omg - its become a "get him b4 he gets you" senario.


would i be wrong here in assuming that the C.A.C. is mainly popular amongst the redneck "bible belters" of the boondocks, in the american flyover country? you know the S.T.W.B.s and S.T.W.G.s ??
0 Replies
 
neologist
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 May, 2005 04:58 pm
brahmin wrote:
no religion should be banned.

but missionaries / those who try to hardsell their religion - of all religions should be punishable by law.
That was pretty much the tone of the resolution.
0 Replies
 
Proteinn
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 May, 2005 11:58 pm
I admit I would love to see the effects of a worldwide ban on religion (which has 0% chance of happening, ever), however to force people to give up their beliefs by force seems unreasonable.
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 May, 2005 12:09 am
Besides the fact that the UN can't "ban" any religion at all, that all members of the UN are aware of this, that no state would be so stupid to start such a question there, that there are no "people of the United Nations" at all ...

... besides that, it was quite funny.
 

Related Topics

Abbas At the UN - Discussion by Advocate
military action against Libya - Discussion by ossobuco
UN vs the Vatican - Question by Calamity Dal
U.S. v. U.N. - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
More corruption at the UN! - Discussion by Baldimo
Another UN crime! - Discussion by Baldimo
The UN v. Israel - Discussion by Advocate
 
  1. Forums
  2. » United Nations to ban religion?
Copyright © 2014 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 07/28/2014 at 10:37:00