Religious hatred bill

[Jacpher]

Johnny, It seems you have a change of heart. Was it yesterday or the day before when you posted those insulting cartoons here on SOL?

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by Castro:

^ I'm afraid the clarity of vision and the ease with which you see the simplicity of this issue has eluded the legal and legislative branches of many a western nations. That you find Ngonge's argument enlightening is good, but to assume (incorrectly, of course) that it is the last word on this issue is mighty naive atheer. So, and I'll say this again in case you have comprehension issues, there is a line that freedom of speech cannot transgress against. That line is where other freedoms (freedom from harrasment and insults) begin to be infringed upon.

 

You said you were going to think more about this, no? Go ahead.

The hadeeth I used to illustrate my point was but one example. I assumed that such a simple point was obvious! It is these assumptions that get me in trouble time and again. Forget that hadeeth and ask yourself if some of the opinions, positions and doctrines that are found in Islam can be offensive to Jews, Christians or Hindus? Ah! Before you start ranting and say “who cares if they are?â€, let me remind you of the context this was put in. We’re asking for respect from THEM, in a land where they are the majority and not Muslim lands.

 

 

Again, Castro, you speak of a line that should not be crossed. I asked you yesterday and I ask you again today, what is that line? Who decides where the line should be? The courts of law? What possible charge could you bring in a law court? Defamation of character? Slander? What? No court is going to try anyone on the simple charge of hurting other people’s feelings, saaxib. If such a law is put in place, everyone will resort to litigation at the merest hint of offence.

 

The nearest thing to the law you demand is the Religious Hatred Bill that was recently rejected in the British Parliament. This is the reason I started this whole thread in the first place.

 

I fully sympathise with Zero’s frustration above. You have rejected all the arguments we presented but never attempted to lucidly clarify your objection nor presented us with an alternative viewpoint. Zero, for his part, admitted that he’s not very comfortable with the points I presented and that they don’t sit well with him but he also agreed that, for now, and because of a lack of any other alternative, he has no choice but to reluctantly accept them. He and I are basically asking you and anyone that cares to join this discussion to roll up your sleeves and challenge our meagre deliberations. It was never meant to be the last word on the subject and if, by some miracle, someone decides to actually join the debate and throw in a different viewpoint altogether, we might end up (a few pages later) with a completely different position on this topic.

 

When I joined the topic yesterday, I was of the opinion that we should resort to the law courts and seek orders that limit the freedom of speech of such troublemakers. But, the longer I thought about it, the more ludicrous that idea seemed to me. I already gave my reasons for that in my previous two or three posts. If anyone believes that we can use the law to silence all those that offend us without us later being hoist by our own petard (the law we helped introduce) I’d love to hear their logic and see their workings.

[Johnny B]

Blessed, there is no risk that i take Sharon for a jew prophet, i´m quite familiar with the concept of the prophets.

 

 

The persona of Jeusus is attacked and is depicted as gay here in the west, where unlike most muslim countries freedom of expression is a maintained right for the sake of hosting diffrent ideologies, beleifs etc etc in the society.

not that i think a gay depiction is a bad depiction, but you can imagine how many christians get offended

 

so Blessed one , where do you draw the line of hatred? at a "Sahabi" level? say, John vs Omar?

Can you seperate Mohamed from Islamic ideology ?

I fail to absorb both the moral value of " Oh alah ,cursed are the Jews, destroy the non-beleivers " and the logic of " hate me upto here, but not further ".

 

[ February 04, 2006, 02:09: Message edited by: Rahima ]

[Viking]

Johnny,

You don't have to be offensive in our faces by posting such images. We are already getting enough disrespect from non-Muslims :mad: Nabi Issa (AS) is a Prophet of Allah SWT and deserves respect too but Muslims are often (unfortunately) less vocal when it comes to offensive caricatures of him. Please delete the above image as it is very offensive!

[Khayr]

^^^^

 

Please delete that picture (MODERATOR, ADmin,) thats disgusting and sacreligious. I know that Johnny Boy doesn't find anything sacred but a post like dat, should get you a WARNING from ADMIN. at the least, if not to be Banned.

Unlike you Johnny boy, we have principles and they don't change due to Popular Sentiments and Cyncisms.

 

I fail to absorb both the moral value of " Oh alah ,cursed are the Jews, destroy the non-beleivers " and the logic of " hate me upto here, but not further ".

Its b/c you believe in MORAL RELATIVISM

and you judge things based ON YOUR OWN RATIO which you can't understand is flawed for the precise reason that your RANK it (Ratio) to be the apex and source of INTELLIGENCE.

 

Again,

 

Our MANDATE is from HEAVEN, regerdless if every Freedom of XAWA follower disagrees. Our part as a Muslim is to uphold that mandate inshallah and to the Muslim, there should not be CONFUSION.

 

We can EXPECT the insults but WE DON'T HAVE TO ACCEPT them and if you and Ngonge, who are KEYBOARD ORIENTALISTS can't see past your HOT AIR, then thats YOUR PROBLEM.

 

They fact that 'YOU FAIL to UNDERSTAND' does not mean that something is 'FALSE' or 'WRONG'. Why? Because you are Limiting Understanding to RATIO and truncating EVERYTHING

to YOURSELF. Contrary to your belief, what is TRUE, what is RIGHT, does not depend on anyone's UNDERSTANDING, COMPREHENSION ETC. Truth is universal, truth is beyond space and time, Truth is GOD (Al-Haqq).

 

Johnny and Ngonge,

 

Maybe the Mirror is a Better place for you lot, to gain UNDERSTANDING. You sure do sound like you spend alot of time infront of it.

[Jacpher]

Johnny, I have got an idea.

 

Why don’t you print out that despicable image you posted and stand at the entrance of Vatican City while holding the image up in the air? I’m sure all of us would easily be convinced, if you come back unharmed & alive, that freedom of speech does work equally to everyone in Europe.

 

Do it at your own risk. Waxaad ka heshid SOL & its members ha la qeybsan.

[Blessed]

Johnny,

 

Clearly, we’re not on the same chapter, so I don't expect you to absorb such matters. However, one cannot place cartoons critiquing politicians on par with offensive caricatures of the Prophets. Coincidently, I was reading this:

 

 

So let's start off with the Department of Home Truths. This is not an issue of secularism versus Islam. For Muslims, the Prophet is the man who received divine words directly from God. We see our prophets as faintly historical figures, at odds with our high-tech human rights, almost cariacatures of themselves. The fact is that Muslims live their religion. We do not. They have kept their faith through innumerable historical vicissitudes. We have lost our faith ever since Matthew Arnold wrote about the sea's "long, withdrawing roar". That's why we talk about "the West versus Islam" rather than "Christians versus Islam" - because there aren't an awful lot of Christians left in Europe. There is no way we can get round this by setting up all the other world religions and asking why we are not allowed to make fun of Mohamed.

Source

 

 

I suppose what’s scared to one man is a no issue for another. I'll say it again it's not about freedom of speech. It's sheer racism (since no laws cover religion) repackaged and legitimised.

 

I'm done with this. Salaams!

[Caano Geel]

^ B

I completely agree with your senitement of the comparison. But i dont think that a Religious hatred bill is the answer.

 

What your talkig about is respect, and sensitivity to peoples believes. Religion for us is as much a part of identity as race and ethnicity, however this is not the case for most of europe and especially in the uk. Gagging people simply does not stop them and if we've learn anything it's that it gives them false excuses.

 

I think what your saying can only be achieved through education and awareness and this i fear requires opennes to dialog that is free to pose questions.

 

People in the end will respect your believes if they can empathise, and they empathise, if they can understand them, not if you gag them.

[Johnny B]

B

 

point taken !!

 

* check for a winking thank-you eye in your mail *

[NGONGE]

Full story in boring detail can be found here:

 

READ IT ALL

[Blessed]

The only acceptable racism left: Islamophobia