In his ‘Opening Argument‘ piece, Stuart Taylor describes how three weeks ago the US State Department quietly and subtly, albeit arguably, traded away our right to free speech. Apparently, in his masterful conciliation to Islamic states, Obama partnered with Egypt to draft a UN resolution that admonishes what the UN determines to be religious and racial stereotyping and mandates to all nations “that relevant national legislation complies with … international human rights obligations.”

According to Steve Groves of the Heritage Foundation, the resolution is nothing more than a crackdown on criticizing Muslims.

The U.S. government has spoken out strongly against the “defamation of religions” effort at the United Nations. The next U.S. Administration should oppose the further promulgation of “defamation of religions” at the U.N. and must resist any attempt to legitimize the concept within the United States. Given the penchant of some federal judges—including jus­tices on the U.S. Supreme Court—to rely on the deci­sions and opinions of international courts and organizations, the “defamation of religions” effort at the United Nations must be confronted.

From National Journal

It was nice to hear Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton say on October 26, “I strongly disagree” with Islamic countries seeking to censor free speech worldwide by making defamation of religion a crime under international law.

But watch what the Obama administration does, not just what it says. I’m not talking about its attacks on Fox News. I’m talking about a little-publicized October 2 resolution in which Clinton’s own State Department joined Islamic nations in adopting language all-too-friendly to censoring speech that some religions and races find offensive.

The ambiguously worded United Nations Human Rights Council resolution could plausibly be read as encouraging or even obliging the U.S. to make it a crime to engage in hate speech, or, perhaps, in mere “negative racial and religious stereotyping.” This despite decades of First Amendment case law protecting such speech.

H/T: Clarice Feldman