CNS: State Department Purges Religious Freedom Section from Its Human Rights Reports

The US State Department is run by the surrogates of The First Gay President, Mr. Obama, and they take his order.

Maybe religious liberty is not a human right after all?

From CNS:

State Department Purges Religious Freedom Section from Its Human Rights Reports
By Pete Winn
June 7, 2012

(CNSNews.com) – The U.S. State Department removed the sections covering religious freedom from the Country Reports on Human Rights that it released on May 24, three months past the statutory deadline Congress set for the release of these reports. [Hey!  If they don't report on it, I guess it isn't happening, right?]

The new human rights reports–purged of the sections that discuss the status of religious freedom in each of the countries covered–are also the human rights reports that include the period that covered the Arab Spring and its aftermath.

Thus, the reports do not provide in-depth coverage of what has happened to Christians and other religious minorities in predominantly Muslim countries in the Middle East that saw the rise of revolutionary movements in 2011 in which Islamist forces played an instrumental role.

For the first time ever, the State Department simply eliminated the section of religious freedom in its reports covering 2011 and instead referred the public to the 2010 International Religious Freedom Report – a full two years behind the times – or to the annual report of the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF), which was released last September and covers events in 2010 but not 2011.

[...]

Read the rest there.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , ,

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Our Catholic Identity, The Drill, The future and our choices, The Last Acceptable Prejudice and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to CNS: State Department Purges Religious Freedom Section from Its Human Rights Reports

  1. ContraMundum says:

    Not surprising, both from the trajectory of this administration, and from the identities of some of the most noteworthy violators.

  2. yatzer says:

    Yes, both aspects are important.

  3. Joseph-Mary says:

    Yep, we are in trouble!

    May we remain always faithful.

  4. This is truly chilling. It proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the current administration knows exactly what it’s doing in restricting religious liberty. This is very clearly a political and philosophical axe the administration is grinding, rather than any other less sinister but still terrible agenda. May God help us.

    Psalmus David. Iudica me Deus, et discerne causam meam de gente non sancta, ab homine iniquo, et doloso erue me.
    Quia tu es Deus fortitudo mea: quare me repulisti? et quare tristis incedo, dum affligit me inimicus?
    Emitte lucem tuam et veritatem tuam: ipsa me deduxerunt, et adduxerunt in montem sanctum tuum, et in tabernacula tua.
    Et introibo ad altare Dei: ad Deum, qui lætificat iuventutem meam. Confitebor tibi in cithara Deus Deus meus:
    quare tristis es anima mea? et quare conturbas me? Spera in Deo, quoniam adhuc confitebor illi: salutare vultus mei, et Deus meus.

  5. pm125 says:

    Sworn in to serve their country. The whole truth and nothing but the truth. The bleeding of wasted effort and money needs austerity triage.

  6. Johnno says:

    You all know what’s coming next!

    Can we consecrate Russia now?

  7. PA mom says:

    I am a bit surprised that Hilary appears to be so in line with this as to have committed her own voice and department. As Mrs President and a person who is still quite popular in her own right, it seems like she should have enough personal clout to buck this unless she agrees. How did this anti-Christianity catch on so quickly? I did not notice signs of it during the Clinton presidency.

  8. ContraMundum says:

    I did not notice signs of it during the Clinton presidency.

    I attribute that to two facts. (1) Society has been drifting in directions very contrary to any recognizable form of Christianity for decades. This has a cumulative effect, both in the attitudes over time of any given individual and especially in the changes from one generation to the next. (2) For all his flaws, Bill Clinton was certainly better at politics than either his wife or Obama. His “aw-shucks” good ’0l boy act put many people at ease, and he had a better feel for what was possible and what was impossible than most.

  9. NoTambourines says:

    There is an unspoken “state”/mainstream media “Christianity” that is taking hold, before whose “orthodoxy” all are supposed to bow, and nothing else is up for discussion. Among other things, I see it in the HHS assault on religious liberty, and I see it in, for example, CNN’s increasingly giving a preaching platform on its website to various people whose views it approves of. They are trying to direct the discussion as they see fit.

    It’s almost a WikiChristianity, which anyone can edit and make their edits stick if they’re persistent and aggressive enough and can play the system to their advantage.

  10. ContraMundum says:

    The only thing I would question is whether that “state”/mainstream media “Christianity” is even “Christianity”. It seems to have an exceedingly weak attachment to the idea that there is something uniquely important about Jesus Christ, as may be seen in some of the writings and events that come from the Magisterium of the Nuns.

  11. NoTambourines says:

    Meant to post that on the Pelosi thread (forgive my oversight), but I think the same overall point holds in that the Obama admin and its allies seem to see an advantage in trying to engineer a popular Christianity that is passive and defenseless except for when it can be leveraged for political gain.

  12. Suburbanbanshee says:

    If they reported on religious freedom violations, they’d have to include the US.

  13. JLC says:

    While not excusing the delay in publication, this will actually mean our diplomats can spend more time trying to influence religious freedom rather than write reports about it. From experience, the religious freedom section of the human rights report asks the same things as the international religious freedom (IRF) report, but with formatting and linguistic requirements that are different enough so you can’t just use one for the other–you spend significant amounts of time saying “Reference the IRF report for more detail” in different ways. Also, at about the time you’re finishing the human rights report, you get hit for an update to the IRF, just to check if there have been any changes before they publish it. In essence, this is a way to streamline reporting so we can get out there and actually do diplomacy. It’s a never ending cycle of updating two reports that say the same thing differently so you don’t have the time to influence the situation for the better.

    There will be an International Religious Freedom report coming out, soon, hopefully, that will cover the events of the Arab Spring and its impacts on Christians.