Burn It Down: Article 18 Is a Free Pass for Mass Delusion

[BigMike]

Let’s stop pretending. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not noble. It’s not progressive. It’s not enlightened. It is a legal enshrinement of mass delusion—a global permission slip for humans to believe whatever the hell they want, no matter how ignorant, dangerous, or outright false, and demand respect for it.

It’s the reason a child can be taught that hell awaits them for thinking critically. It’s the reason grown adults can mutilate genitals in the name of a god and call it “culture.” It’s why religious institutions can hoard wealth, obstruct science, and indoctrinate billions—with impunity.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions. But slap the word “religion” on any irrational belief system and suddenly it’s sacred. It’s protected. It’s untouchable. That is insanity, institutionalized.

Freedom of thought is one thing. But freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict under the banner of “religion” is not a right—it’s a societal rot. Article 18 is a coward’s clause, shielding dogma from accountability.

It’s time we stop coddling mythology and start defending reality. Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

[henry quirk]

Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

By Crom's testes, you're right, Mike! Far too many opportunities for the unrefined clay to go their own way. Can't have that! Crom knows that whole private thing is beyond the pale. Can't have a good communism, er, community if every Tom, Dick, and Harry are havin' private thoughts.

-----

Better dump this one too...

Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

It's even worse!

-----

And mebbe we ought take a look-see at this one...

Article 17
1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Obviously, any one who wants anything beyond access to a pot to pee in is a debbil-capitalist and needs to eat curb.

-----

Mebbe the whole U D of H R needs a good goin' thru. Prolly all manner of life, liberty, and property preservin' crap that needs to be excised from it.

[BigMike]

Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

By Crom's testes, you're right, Mike! Far too many opportunities for the unrefined clay to go their own way. Can't have that! Crom knows that whole private thing is beyond the pale. Can't have a good communism, er, community if every Tom, Dick, and Harry are havin' private thoughts.

-----

Better dump this one too...

Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

It's even worse!

-----

And mebbe we ought take a look-see at this one...

Article 17
1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

Obviously, any one who wants anything beyond access to a pot to pee in is a debbil-capitalist and needs to eat curb.

-----

Mebbe the whole U D of H R needs a good goin' thru. Prolly all manner of life, liberty, and property preservin' crap that needs to be excised from it.

Oh, Henry. You sweet summer child of sarcasm.

Let’s not pretend this is about property rights or freedom of opinion. That’s a rhetorical smokescreen as thick as the incense in a megachurch. No one’s calling to ban private thought. What we’re calling out is the legal sanctuary given to systematized, industrial-scale delusion—especially when it’s used to indoctrinate children, suppress women, murder gays, or justify violence and oppression under the warm fuzzy blanket of “religious freedom.”

Article 18 isn’t protecting “private thought.” It’s protecting the public power of unprovable, often dangerous beliefs to shape laws, education, and policy. And yes, that’s a problem. Because once a belief system steps out of the private and into classrooms, courtrooms, and parliaments—once it starts infecting public life—it’s no longer just “personal.” It’s political. It’s weaponized. And that’s not freedom. That’s a license to harm with impunity.

Let me put it bluntly: If you can’t distinguish between a man having a private opinion and a theocratic regime stoning a woman for adultery—or a school teaching creationism instead of biology—then the real problem isn’t me. It’s your moral compass.

So yes, by all means, let’s go through the UDHR. But let’s do it with grown-up eyes—eyes that can tell the difference between protecting people and protecting lies.

[Skepdick]

Let’s stop pretending. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not noble. It’s not progressive. It’s not enlightened. It is a legal enshrinement of mass delusion—a global permission slip for humans to believe whatever the hell they want, no matter how ignorant, dangerous, or outright false, and demand respect for it.

It’s the reason a child can be taught that hell awaits them for thinking critically. It’s the reason grown adults can mutilate genitals in the name of a god and call it “culture.” It’s why religious institutions can hoard wealth, obstruct science, and indoctrinate billions—with impunity.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions. But slap the word “religion” on any irrational belief system and suddenly it’s sacred. It’s protected. It’s untouchable. That is insanity, institutionalized.

Freedom of thought is one thing. But freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict under the banner of “religion” is not a right—it’s a societal rot. Article 18 is a coward’s clause, shielding dogma from accountability.

It’s time we stop coddling mythology and start defending reality. Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

As if we didn't already know it - other people's freedom gets in the way of your hegemony, doesn't it?

Even the narrative of realism will do for your intellectually oppressive purposes.

Wants to rid others of their mass delusion while larping as The Great Defender of Reality. Fucking hilarious.

[BigMike]

Let’s stop pretending. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not noble. It’s not progressive. It’s not enlightened. It is a legal enshrinement of mass delusion—a global permission slip for humans to believe whatever the hell they want, no matter how ignorant, dangerous, or outright false, and demand respect for it.

It’s the reason a child can be taught that hell awaits them for thinking critically. It’s the reason grown adults can mutilate genitals in the name of a god and call it “culture.” It’s why religious institutions can hoard wealth, obstruct science, and indoctrinate billions—with impunity.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions. But slap the word “religion” on any irrational belief system and suddenly it’s sacred. It’s protected. It’s untouchable. That is insanity, institutionalized.

Freedom of thought is one thing. But freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict under the banner of “religion” is not a right—it’s a societal rot. Article 18 is a coward’s clause, shielding dogma from accountability.

It’s time we stop coddling mythology and start defending reality. Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

As if we didn't already know it - other people's freedom gets in the way of your hegemony, doesn't it?

Even the narrative of realism will do for your intellectually oppressive purposes.

Wants to rid others of their mass delusion while larping as The Great Defender of Reality. Fucking hilarious.

Oh, Skepdick, bless your triggered little heart. That knee-jerk defense of “freedom” is so automatic I could set my watch by it. But let’s be honest here—this isn’t about hegemony. It’s about truth. You know, that thing we claim to value until it dares step on someone’s sacred narrative.

I’m not out to “rid others of their freedom”—I’m out to stop the kind of weaponized delusion that masquerades as virtue while destroying lives. There's a vast, gaping difference between the freedom to think and the freedom to institutionalize fantasy as fact. If you can't see that, it’s not because it's not there. It’s because you won’t see it.

And let’s drop the act: calling a demand for intellectual accountability “oppressive” is like calling chemotherapy “tyranny.” Just because the treatment stings doesn’t mean the disease is worth preserving.

This isn’t LARPing. This is the boring, relentless, inconvenient insistence that beliefs—especially publicly acted-upon beliefs—should be held to the same standard as any other claim about reality. If that makes me a “defender of reality,” well, fine. Better that than defender of fairy tales with body counts.

But if you’ve got a better defense for protecting mass delusion than calling it “freedom,” I’m all ears.

[Skepdick]

Oh, Skepdick, bless your triggered little heart. That knee-jerk defense of “freedom” is so automatic I could set my watch by it. But let’s be honest here—this isn’t about hegemony. It’s about truth

As per Article 18 you are free to believe that. Even if you have no clue what truth is.

You know, that thing we claim to value until it dares step on someone’s sacred narrative.

I value my values way more than I value truth; so I guess it's your narrative that has a problem.

I’m not out to “rid others of their freedom”—I’m out to stop the kind of weaponized delusion that masquerades as virtue while destroying lives.

What, like harmful delusion of truth-seeking? And pursuing totalitarian agendas under the banner of truth-seeking?

There's a vast, gaping difference between the freedom to think and the freedom to institutionalize fantasy as fact. If you can't see that, it’s not because it's not there. It’s because you won’t see it.

And let’s drop the act: calling a demand for intellectual accountability “oppressive” is like calling chemotherapy “tyranny.” Just because the treatment stings doesn’t mean the disease is worth preserving.

Thank fuck for Article 19 that grants you the right to express this opinion.

And thank fuck for the same Article 19 that I don't give a shit about your sanctimonious attempt to hold others accountable.

Truth matters, but gatekeepers of strict/narrow conceptions of "truth" (such as the correspondence theory) are totalitarian wankers larping as intellectuals. Like you.

The "truth police" are just disguising authoritarian tendencies behind intellectual language.

This isn’t LARPing. This is the boring, relentless, inconvenient insistence that beliefs—especially publicly acted-upon beliefs—should be held to the same standard as any other claim about reality.

If that makes me a “defender of reality,” well, fine. Better that than defender of fairy tales with body counts.

But if you’ve got a better defense for protecting mass delusion than calling it “freedom,” I’m all ears.

*yawn*

OK, Don Quixote

[ThinkOfOne]

Let’s stop pretending. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not noble. It’s not progressive. It’s not enlightened. It is a legal enshrinement of mass delusion—a global permission slip for humans to believe whatever the hell they want, no matter how ignorant, dangerous, or outright false, and demand respect for it.

It’s the reason a child can be taught that hell awaits them for thinking critically. It’s the reason grown adults can mutilate genitals in the name of a god and call it “culture.” It’s why religious institutions can hoard wealth, obstruct science, and indoctrinate billions—with impunity.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions. But slap the word “religion” on any irrational belief system and suddenly it’s sacred. It’s protected. It’s untouchable. That is insanity, institutionalized.

Freedom of thought is one thing. But freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict under the banner of “religion” is not a right—it’s a societal rot. Article 18 is a coward’s clause, shielding dogma from accountability.

It’s time we stop coddling mythology and start defending reality. Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions

How is that true? It certainly isn't true in the US. More than a few politicians have leveraged their "freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict" as a basis for getting elected to public office - especially within the past decade or so.

The problem is much broader than "religion" per se. Religion is a product of the underlying cause of delusion. Wouldn't you do better to identify the underlying cause of delusion and to address that instead?

[BigMike]

Let’s stop pretending. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is not noble. It’s not progressive. It’s not enlightened. It is a legal enshrinement of mass delusion—a global permission slip for humans to believe whatever the hell they want, no matter how ignorant, dangerous, or outright false, and demand respect for it.

It’s the reason a child can be taught that hell awaits them for thinking critically. It’s the reason grown adults can mutilate genitals in the name of a god and call it “culture.” It’s why religious institutions can hoard wealth, obstruct science, and indoctrinate billions—with impunity.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions. But slap the word “religion” on any irrational belief system and suddenly it’s sacred. It’s protected. It’s untouchable. That is insanity, institutionalized.

Freedom of thought is one thing. But freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict under the banner of “religion” is not a right—it’s a societal rot. Article 18 is a coward’s clause, shielding dogma from accountability.

It’s time we stop coddling mythology and start defending reality. Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

We don’t give legal protection to conspiracy theories, pseudoscience, or schizophrenic delusions

How is that true? It certainly isn't true in the US. More than a few politicians have leveraged their "freedom to teach lies, manipulate minds, and sow conflict" as a basis for getting elected to public office - especially within the past decade or so.

The problem is much broader than "religion" per se. Religion is a product of delusion. Wouldn't you do better to identify the underlying cause of delusion and to address that instead?

Exactly. You're pointing at the real dragon under the floorboards, and I’m glad someone did.

You're right—the rot runs deeper than religion. Religion is just the most socially accepted strain of the broader disease: unfalsifiable, unaccountable belief. And yes, that disease has metastasized well beyond pulpits and temples. It’s in the voting booth, in the anti-vax rallies, in climate denial, in QAnon fever dreams… It’s everywhere people are told they have the “right” to believe anything—and worse, that such beliefs must be respected.

But here's why I went after Article 18 specifically: it’s the flagship. It's the legal linchpin that makes irrational belief not just tolerated, but sacred. It sets the precedent. If we continue to enshrine religion as something untouchable—immune to challenge, critique, or consequence—then of course pseudoscience and political conspiracy follow right behind. Same method, different myths.

So yes, we should attack delusion at the root. But Article 18 is the constitutional cover story. It gives delusion a halo and a podium. And until we’re brave enough to call that out for what it is, we’ll keep confusing superstition with virtue—and mistaking respect for complicity.

You want to go after the deeper cause? I’m with you. But we start by pulling the pin on Article 18. It's not the whole bomb, but it's the fuse.

[henry quirk]

Oh, Micheal, you supercilious scamp...

No one’s calling to ban private thought.

Yes, you are.

Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

Can't imagine anything more private than between the ears.

Article 18 has to go—before it drags the rest of us down with it.

Article 18 has to go. Not part of it: all of it.

-----

What we’re calling out

Who is this we you speak for?

-----

Article 18 isn’t protecting “private thought.”

The whole of the Declaration isn't protectin' anyone or thing. It's a declaration.

-----

Let me put it bluntly: If you can’t distinguish between a man having a private opinion and a theocratic regime stoning a woman for adultery—or a school teaching creationism instead of biology—then the real problem isn’t me. It’s your moral compass.

Let me be equally blunt: you punish bonafide, measurable, violations of life, liberty, and property, not bad think.

-----

let’s go through the UDHR

Yes, let's. It's your thread so you start...

Article I
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

[Skepdick]

The problem is much broader than "religion" per se.

You are currently exercising your rights under Article 18 and 19 to assert/express your opinion of a "problem".

If BigDork had his way you'd have to be held intellectually accountable to the standard of having to prove your claim is true...

[accelafine]

Religious indoctrination is child abuse. I wonder if Henry thinks that child abuse should be allowed in the name of 'FREEDOM'.

[Alexis Jacobi]

Religious education can take the form of a quite sophisticated humanism and can be very wide-ranging, thoughtful, philosophical and also tolerant. However I do recognize that there is such a thing as religious indoctrination.

[henry quirk]

Religious education can take the form of a quite sophisticated humanism and can be very wide-ranging, thoughtful, philosophical and also tolerant. However I do recognize that there is such a thing as religious indoctrination.

I'm pretty sure my good friend, veg, makes no distinction between religious education and religious indoctrination.

It's the religious part, you see.

[Alexis Jacobi]

I think I understand. What I can’t wrap my head around is why WHY people don’t understand my religion is tolerant and beautiful. Baffling.

[seeds]

I think I understand. What I can’t wrap my head around is why WHY people don’t understand my religion is tolerant and beautiful. Baffling.

Did you swap videos of your religious ceremony?

Because unless I just experienced the "Mandella Effect," I'm pretty sure I saw you at some sort of Venezuelan version of a burning man festival where you appeared to be having some sort of entheogenically-induced seizure, followed by a romp around a fire with your fellow worshipers.
_______