1
   

Why insulting prophet Muhammad?!

 
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 11:15 am
Oh, bugger ... last post on the page again. There's a detailed answer to Lash's post (the one with the links) on the previous page.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 11:30 am
Quickie answer...

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
You can change your religion like you can change your clothes.

This, unfortunately, is just not true. Witness the painful, drawn-out process of dis-attachment to religion (any organised religion) by those who did step away from it - and often at the cost of bitter family conflict, too.

For those who do not go through troubled spiritual disengagement or are simply not willing to take on the costs, their religion is very much a given - something you are simply born into.

As such, slandering or insulting people on the basis of their religious adherence is, in my opinion, comparable to doing so on the basis of someone's race. It is apparently also something rabbi Soetendorp, Tony Blair and 302 out of 356 Labour MPs can agree with.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 11:37 am
nimh wrote:

That's two straightforward claims at once:

- the Muslim riots are not perpetrated by a tiny minority (I've mostly omitted to nag you about that one, but it is equally undefensible);


NOT perpetrated by a tiny minority? You mean it was a general uprising in the banlieues? A sort of intifada you mean?
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 03:42 pm
Vatican to Muslims: Equal rights to all

PARIS - After backing calls by Muslims for respect for their religion in the Muhammed cartoons row, the Vatican is now urging Islamic countries to give equal rights to all religions.Saudi Arabia bans all public expression of any non-Muslim religion and sometimes arrests Christians - even for worshiping privately. And Pakistan's Islamic laws deprive Christians of many rights.

"If we tell our people they have no right to offend, we have to tell the others they have no right to destroy us," Angelo Cardinal Sodano, the Vatican's secretary of state, told reporters in Rome.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 08:35 pm
nimh is very careful to count the pine needles on each tree, while the forest is completely lost to him.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 08:39 pm
Lash wrote:
nimh is very careful to count the pine needles on each tree, while the forest is completely lost to him.

only when he disagrees with the DYS.
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 08:45 pm
I can't get any of that action?
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 08:53 pm
This thread is a constant disappointment. No one has insulted Mo-HAM-med for pages and pages.

Mohammed was a pig--he raped a nine-year-old girl, he was illiterate, he was hatefult and violent.

There . . . i feel much better now . . .
0 Replies
 
Lash
 
  1  
Reply Fri 24 Feb, 2006 08:59 pm
Hey, if I can't get people to admit there's a Muslim problem in Europe, Mohammad bashing is a pipe dream.

Laughing

BTW, I have been scouring Muslim websites for a cool Muslim. Had two nibbles.

Set-- I hope you've been feeling well. Nice to see you about.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 12:05 am
Setanta wrote:
This thread is a constant disappointment. No one has insulted Mo-HAM-med for pages and pages.


And what's about Chirac? And Clinton?
0 Replies
 
mans
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 12:43 am
wow, did he really do those things?
and people actually follow that guy!
oh well. it's a free world.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 03:23 pm
Setanta wrote:
Mo-HAM-med
There was a Brit comedian Dick Emery

Who used to say OOOH you are naughty but we like you

appropriate I think set Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 03:35 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
There was a Brit comedian Dick Emery

Who used to say OOOH you are naughty but we like you

appropriate I think set Smile


Where you allowed to watch tv as a child when that was aired? Shocked
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 03:38 pm
15 years or so ago

I used to sneak down stairs and peek behind the door to catch a glimpse of the Dick Emery Show

of course 15 years ago I was only 7.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 03:49 pm
Well, then it's okay. (I saw it first 1964. :wink: )
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 09:05 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
nimh wrote:

That's two straightforward claims at once:

- the Muslim riots are not perpetrated by a tiny minority (I've mostly omitted to nag you about that one, but it is equally undefensible);


NOT perpetrated by a tiny minority? You mean it was a general uprising in the banlieues? A sort of intifada you mean?

Uhm, no Steve; I quoted Lash's claim that they were not perpetrated by a small minority. That would be a claim I disagree with - riots are almost always the work of a small minority.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 09:29 pm
Lash wrote:
nimh is very careful to count the pine needles on each tree, while the forest is completely lost to him.

Lash conjures up an imposing blur of forest from wild assertions and gross exaggerations ... and then gets positively vitriolic when we refuse to just validate that big picture, insisting on pesky stuff such as at least getting the individual facts right an' all.

There's those who can't see the forest for the trees; and those whose forests dissolve as soon as you try to actually touch 'em.

Seriously, for a moment: personally, I think that "big pictures" based on erroneous claims will never succeed in identifying the right problem, the right solution. You've got to get the basic facts right in order to get the correct big picture in the first place.

Ergo: the Islamist forces need to be fought; but if we do so based on rhetorics rather than facts, wild claims rather than corroborated evidence, we're bound to end up getting it wrong. Thats why clearing up all this fuzz so important.

But that mindset, I assume, is a question of character as much as anything else.

In fact, Lash neatly functions as a kind of pars pro toto for the Rumsfeld/Bush mindset, here - come to think of it. They, too, had a 'big picture', and stubbornly if not with outright vitriol denounced anyone who dared point out that, ehm, there isnt actually any conclusive evidence about Saddam having WMDs yet, or: the theory of a light army being able to carry off an invasion like that hasnt actually ever been tested. No vision! Doomsayers. Stuck in the "reality-based community"! Pitiful objectors, ragging on about minor details when we've got a larger mission to accomplish ...

Yes, actually Idea . It's exactly that same mindset. Interesting. And we know what became of Cheney's and Rumsfeld's "big picture" of dethroning a Saddam armed with WMD and being greeted with flowers for it ...

Again, if you dont first get the basic facts hashed out correctly, any big picture that you are going to end up with is going to be fatally flawed.

<nods> Thats pretty much a testament of principles for me, here.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 09:38 pm
nimh wrote:
Quickie answer...

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
You can change your religion like you can change your clothes.

This, unfortunately, is just not true. Witness the painful, drawn-out process of dis-attachment to religion (any organised religion) by those who did step away from it - and often at the cost of bitter family conflict, too.

For those who do not go through troubled spiritual disengagement or are simply not willing to take on the costs, their religion is very much a given - something you are simply born into.

As such, slandering or insulting people on the basis of their religious adherence is, in my opinion, comparable to doing so on the basis of someone's race. It is apparently also something rabbi Soetendorp, Tony Blair and 302 out of 356 Labour MPs can agree with.

OK, here in this last paragraph I was obviously writing a tad too fast. If only because the fact that 302 out of 356 (New) Labour MPs voting for something is hardly evidence of it being a good thing. ;-)

Steve could easily point out, for example, that the fact that those 302 voted for the bill doesn't at all necessarily mean they were convinced of the idea. Plenty of reasons for a governing party's backbenchers to vote the party line, even without conviction.

Then again, that goes both ways. Not all of those who voted against, Labour dissidents included, necessarily disagreed with the principle that religious groups should be protected from hate speech the same way that racial groups are, itself - there were also those who said that some legislation might well be necessary, but the bill that the government presented was simply lousy.

And its true; the Labour government did an appalling job drafting and selling this religious hatred bill. Its formulations were extremely vague, and would indeed have made it possible to prosecute even innocuous expressions, hypothetically. When MP's pointed this out, the government minister merely assured them that it wouldn't be used that often as "the courts know what is meant" by the formulations - hardly persuasive.

Hell, I would have voted against this particular bill. But I do think there should be some protection against incitement of hatred against Muslims (and Hindus, etc) just like there is such protection for Jews (and Sikhs, etc). Actually, I'd kinda take that as a given.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 09:48 pm
Meanwhile, next time someone around here goes: "oh yeah, and when's the last time you heard about Christians running amok and beating people's heads in over religion", please retrieve this article.

Or: the violence in Nigeria - just another example of how it's a Muslim problem? "The escalating cycle of tit-for-tat sectarian violence", indeed.

Quote:
Religion and politics a deadly mix in Nigeria

International Herald Tribune

ONITSHA, Nigeria - Dozens of charred, smoldering bodies littered the streets of this bustling commercial capital Thursday after three days of rioting in which Christian mobs wielding machetes, clubs and knives set upon their Muslim neighbors.

Rioters have killed scores of people here, mostly Muslims, after burning their homes, businesses and mosques in the worst violence yet linked to the caricatures of Prophet Muhammad first published in a Danish newspaper.

The tumult erupted here after attacks on Christians in northern Nigeria last week by Muslims infuriated over the cartoons.

Old ethnic and political tensions between Muslims in the north and Christians here in the south have been reignited, with at least 35 bodies still visible on the streets of Onitsha on Thursday as the city slowly returned to normal after being paralyzed by the riots.

The escalating cycle of tit-for-tat sectarian violence pushed the total death toll in the last week toward 100 and perhaps beyond, making Nigeria the worst hit country so far in the caricature controversy.

The main thoroughfare leading into the city across the Niger River was covered in carrion - the bodies of Muslim Hausas trying to flee rampaging bands of youths, witnesses said. Many of the victims appeared to have been beaten to death; most of the bodies had been doused with gasoline and burned.

Residents combed through the destroyed shops and homes of northern Muslims, looting whatever the flames had not carried away.

"These things belong to Igbos," said Sunday Tagbo, 25, referring to the dominant tribe of this region, as he helped himself to sooty car parts left behind by fleeing merchants. "This is Igbo land. No more Muslims can live here."

Officials urged calm, and the city's streets returned to a semblance of normality Thursday, with markets open and heavy traffic on the streets.

But the damage of three days of carnage was evident. At the central mosque, rioters burned the building and hacked down trees.

Someone wrote in chalk on a charred wall: "Jesus is Lord. As from today know more Muhammad."

Thousands of Muslim residents fled the city, some on foot over the bridge leading to Delta state, taking refuge in neighboring cities. Thousands more huddled in police and army barracks in Onitsha and surrounding towns.

"What has become of us?" lamented Father Joseph Ezeugo, pastor of Immaculate Heart Parish. "This cannot be Nigeria today. We have been living side by side with our Muslim brothers for so long. Why should a cartoon in Denmark bring us to civil war?"

But the cartoons, political analysts say, were simply a pretext to act on very old grievances rubbed raw by political tensions.

Nigeria is entering a period of great political uncertainty in which it must elect a new president to replace Olusegun Obasanjo, who is barred by term limits from running for re-election. Speculation has been rife that he may try to extend his term.

"At the end of the day, it is all politics," said Kayode Fayemi, a political scientist and head of the nonpartisan Center for Democracy and Development in Nigeria. "Everything else is just pretext."

Conflicts between religious and ethnic groups are common and deadly in Nigeria. In 2002, riots over a beauty contest held in Kaduna in northern Nigeria left more than 200 people dead, and thousands of others have died in such clashes over the past few years.

The most recent cycle began in Borno state recently, where riots broke out over the Danish caricatures, killing at least 18 people. Muslim rioters burned churches and the homes and businesses of Christians.

In Bauchi state, riots were also sparked last week when a Christian teacher took a Koran away from a Muslim student who was reading it without permission in class, according to Nigerian newspaper accounts. Muslims were incensed because it is considered desecration to touch the Koran without performing ritual ablutions. Twenty-five people were killed.

The riots here were ignited when a busload of the bodies of Igbo victims of violence in the north returned home this week.

The violence has picked at a very old wound one inflicted by Nigeria's bloody civil war in the late 1960s, in which Igbo-led insurgents tried to form an independent state, Biafra. The war and the mass starvation it caused killed hundreds of thousands of civilians.

Some Igbo leaders still nurse a hope that Biafra will be resurrected, and the government recently arrested the leaders of a militant group advocating the re-establishment of an Igbo state.

An echo of that sentiment could even be seen in graffiti scrawled on a wall here. "This is Biafra," it read. "Rejoice."

The Igbo claim to self government is but one of many of the fraying threads in Nigeria's complex quilt of 200 different ethnic groups. Tensions between northerners and southerners, and Muslims and Christians, are a staple of Nigeria's contentious political scene, and the nation has always struggled to make sense of its vast diversity.

Its population of 140 million is evenly split between Christians and Muslims, and while most Muslims live in the North and Christians in the south, large numbers of both groups have settled all over the country. But Igbos nurse particular grudges, making the conflict between them and the Hausas, Muslims who are the dominant group of the north, particularly violent.

"Since 1970, the northerners have been stealing our wealth and ruling us like we are slaves," said Innocent Okafor, a motorcycle taxi driver who brought his 12-year-old son Jindo to see the carnage in Onitsha on Thursday, so that he might "know our history and our struggle."

"Thousands of Igbos have died in the north," he said.

"So why should some northerners not die here? We must avenge our brothers."
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Sat 25 Feb, 2006 09:55 pm
I know I have a sick sense of humor, but this really made me laugh.

"Jesus is Lord. As from today know more Muhammad."
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.09 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 05:47:10