Two E-mails, Two Views and Questions

I recieved an e-mail from a long time friend, that I don't hear from that often. She and I were best friends back in the 70's. She now is a citizen of Namibia and is married to a foreign service officier.

Her e-mail was a request for a signature on a petition against an organization that wants to take Christian broadcasting off the air. The hearing will be done under the FCC in D.C. I will investigate, as I believe that there should be religious freedom. While I value religious freedom, the times are such that religion has become the "enemy" to some. As I have stated before, the Somalian woman at the American Enterprise Institute is sure that Islam will take advantage of our religious freedom, minority rights, and tolerance to gain ground for power in our political world. She is opposed to any religion in schools because of this conviction. What do we do as a free society, that desires to continue to have its freedom, while protecting itself from those who do not value freedom?

Another e-mail came this same day from the Center for Inquiry that stated that there were four centers established in India promoting humanism and scientific inquiry. These rationalists value the individual, so they are standing against the caste system and for humanism. They desire to promote freedom of scientific inquiry and stand against superstition of all kinds. I do adhere to some of these values, as well.

Two e-mails that represent two different values, both of which I understand and appreciate. I am partial to the CFI's goals and values, but I do not want to deny others the right to religious expression. I recognize that many academians may not value some of the names that were mentioned in the e-mail that desired religious freedom, but does education mean that we must limit individual choices? (Paul Kurtz, was at Columbia U. with John Dewey. ) I can understand that the educated feels a need to make sure that those who have limited education are not furthered in their ignorance. I agree! But, at the same time, we must not limit the difference of opinion that upholds the free discourse and exchange of ideas in the public arena. Otherwise, we are headed down a road to propaganda, and an elite class that maintains the reigns of the information structures. We must resist this stance at all costs! So, religious education is also of value in a free society.

So, what is the FCC's concern with the freedom of religious broadcasts? And why are they even considering limiting this freedom in our country? I don't know, but I will check it out. Are you concerned about the freedom of our airways?

Human Rights, Freedom of Speech and Religion

Our country's Founders were committed to freedom of religion and freedom of speech. Just last week, the Center for Inquiry petitioned the Unitied Nations Human Rights Council to uphold the 1948 Universal Human Rights. In their petition they wanted freedom of expression, the right to speak against religion.
Their conviction is understood with all of the human rights abuses. The Unitied Nations has allowed other "articles" to be sanctioned for Islamic states. The recent arrest and trial without representation and conviction of death in Afghanastan of a man convicted of blaphemy, as well as many more. This should make anyone who loves freedom and human rights squeezy. What do you think should be universalized? Religion? or human rights? Shouldn't religion protect human rights? What boundaries are necessary to represent proper understanding of community and the individual without compromising the integrity of either?