Blasphemy laws

[ludwig]

I thought people might be interested to know that further this question related to the blasphemy laws in Pakistan..

http://www.theanswerb...y/Question965848.html

..a politician who dared to speak up against them has been assasinated....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/...d-south-asia-12111831

Blasphemy laws in the 21st century - what a joke eh?

[DTCwordfan]

Are you arranging the firing squad for many folk on this site, ludwig?

[mibn2cweus]

That God doesn't damn all who kill in his name and on his behalf . . . what more proof does one need He does not exist?

[naomi24]

The total abandonment of reason. What on earth is the solution to this madness?

[Huderon]

hmmmm ... Let's see now ... 2008 was in the 21st century is my math is right ... and that was when the UK blasphemy law was repealed.

I get the distinct impression, in the news section particularly, that a number of AB people think that Islamic countries are in some way "backward". Possibly something to do with religious belief in those countries. Well if they are "backward" we are not exactly "advanced" on that matter at any rate - after all it took us long enough to repeal our blasphemy law.

[mibn2cweus]

" . . . it took us long enough to repeal our blasphemy law." Way too long, is more like it! Thank God, someone on this planet finally came to their senses.

[mibn2cweus]

What hath God wrought? Is this not the face of evil? ~ http://news.bbcimg.co...60947_010942209-1.jpg

[ludwig]

// hmmmm ... Let's see now ... 2008 was in the 21st century is my math is right ... and that was when the UK blasphemy law was repealed. //

Yes, well spotted, your math is correct - and I repeat - "blasphemy laws in the 21st century - what a joke eh?" If you can see anywhere that I've stated or implied that these laws are only stupid in certain countries, please point that out as well.
You twit.

[ludwig]

..and by the way Huderon, countries that want to put people to death for blasphemy ARE backward, uncivilised, and barbaric. If you disagree with that I'd be interested to know why.

[jake-the-peg]

You're saying that because you come from a secular background.

Imagine if you can being a true believer (in any faith) to you then respect for that eternal truth is more important than anything in the physical world the death penalty for abusing it is a natural and obvious penalty .

Doesn't matter if you're an Ayatollah or Oliver Cromwell.

there are many people in the UK today that will tell you that any death penalty is backward uncivillised and barbaric and as many that will argue the other way.

The big question is how far one country should go to impose it's values on another.

This is where we get into the dread question of human rights

[ludwig]

// You're saying that because you come from a secular background. //

That's true. Another way of putting it would be 'You're only calling them backward and barbaric because you're not as backward and barbaric as they are'.
I take your point though Jake.

[jake-the-peg]

Or that you come from a different philosphical tradition!

Difficult to argue because I'm the same - in fact even the concept of human rights like a woman should have the right not to be abused or have an education etc. is a bit of a joke if you don't come from an enlightenment background.

Imagine trying to tell that to Henry VIII for example !

[naomi24]

Blasphemy laws in this country weren't repealed until very recently - that's true - but it's a very long time since we burnt people at the stake for the crime. Comparing Pakistan's attitude to blasphemy to that Henry VIII doesn't work because he, unlike, Pakistan had an excuse insofar as there was no example of an alternative for him to learn from.

[ludwig]

Absolutely Jake, and that's what I mean when I say 'backward'. They're at a point where we were a few centuries ago. England before about 1650 really was a backward and barbaric place by today's standards. We're lucky to have been born in a time and place where cruel and savage nonsense isn't brainwashed into people from birth as the norm, but it seems that there are plenty of Pakistanis and Somalis (remember mohammed the teddy bear?) who aren't that lucky.

The worrying thing is that technology has moved on. Can you imagine if Henry Viii or the inquisition had access to a nuclear warhead instead of just gunpowder and swords?

[naomi24]

Actually Ludwig, that crossed my mind too.

[Huderon]

What you or I think about countries with blasphemy laws and their consequences, doesn't matter a hoot. Sure we (as in our country) can try to put some pressure on them to modify or repeal their laws, but that's it. I suppose we could invade them, oust the government, dispose of all the religious leaders and start an intensive programme of re-educating the populace, but I don't think that would go down too well with the rest of the world.

Oh on the nukes ... governments, for the most part, are not going to start throwing them around, so that leaves the various other groups. Nukes are not that easy to get hold of or build ... perhaps you'd like to listen to http://www.bbc.co.uk/...mes/b00wdkf9#synopsis - the interesting bit starts just under 17 minutes into the programme (well the whole programme is interesting, but the bit about nukes starts there).

[ludwig]

// What you or I think about countries with blasphemy laws and their consequences, doesn't matter a hoot. Sure we (as in our country) can try to put some pressure on them to modify or repeal their laws, but that's it. I suppose we could invade them, oust the government, dispose of all the religious leaders and start an intensive programme of re-educating the populace, but I don't think that would go down too well with the rest of the world. //

I realise all that Huderon. I'm not advocating that we invade any of these places. I'm simply expressing disgust and exasperation that this kind of thing still goes on in the world. I think it also serves as a reminder that we mustn't allow this kind of hate filled anchronistic rubbish to gain a foothold over here under naive notions about being tolerant, inclusive, or respectful.
That's not an anti-muslim comment either. It's an 'anti-any person or group that advocates the death penalty for blasphemy' comment.

[mibn2cweus]

To whom it may concern . . . Evil exists, proliferates and thrives by our refusal to acknowledge it and point out its manifestations. In denying it, defending the indefensible, excusing the inexcusable and equivocating it with good, far from offering a solution, you are lending your support to and exacerbating the problem. The enemy you are aiding and abetting is not just ours and theirs but your own as well. In short, you are the enemy, of all humanity . . . yourself included.

[naomi24]

^^ In a nutshell - quite brilliant!! Mind if I borrow that occasionally? I will of course give credit where it is due

[mibn2cweus]

Naomi, Understand it and it becomes yours. Then there will be no need to copy and paste. But please bear in mind, none of us, neither you nor me are entirely without responsibility for the nature of the world we see around us. Regardless of the extent of each of our own individual guilt, someone must have the courage to cast the first stone if change is to be realised. Judge and prepare to be judged.

[naomi24]

Oh I understand it - and I think I do my bit at casting first stones where they need casting - often at the risk of being judged - and misjudged. Thank you.