a difference of opinion

A:     It seems that the UN has again, jumped on the bandwagon for a highly discriminatory form of freedom of speech, one that only caters to the Western demand of speaking their mind.

S:     Is it the kidnapping of journalists by the Taliban in Pakistan that you are referring to, or the beheadings of those covering the Islamic state campaign in Syria and Iraq?

A:     Oh come on. Even you would agree that this rhetoric of protecting the liberty of speech has become blatantly one-sided. By demanding action of crimes against journalists, who are primarily residing in Islamic countries, why is it only a ‘free’ right, when one criticizes religion?

S:     I feel that the answer is neatly, but glaringly obvious in the question you pose yourself. Maybe this high pedestal that Muslims use to tread on anything ‘Islamic’, might be the reason. Why is it that whenever someone even remotely tries to be a little critical about Muslims, it is always considered hate speech? But such loud and open objections against a Western way of life are encouraged, by those so passionate about protecting their religion.

A:     A little critical? Publishing satirical cartoons about the Prophet is considered a minute criticism? This mockery was undoubtedly a form of hate speech. Religion is something sacred.

S:     It is what you consider sacred. Football, for Americans is considered no less, than the holy trinity.

A:     I can never have a logical argument with you.