Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print
blasphemy (Read 13209 times)
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #15 - Nov 15th, 2008 at 2:04pm
 
bump
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: blasphemy
Reply #16 - Nov 15th, 2008 at 2:38pm
 

Why do you not wish to answer which religious figures are supposedly criticised in the Middle East?
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #17 - Nov 15th, 2008 at 3:15pm
 
Sorry Abu, I just assumed most Muslims describe Christianity etc the same way you do. For example, I believe you often say that Jesus is not the son of God. To most Christians, this would probably be considered blasphemy. I'm sure if there were any Hindus here they could come up with far more 'undiplomatic' examples.

EDIT: Here's another one. This is a reference to middle eastern newspapers. Obviously they aren't going to criticise those religious figures they also hold to be sacred.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jyllands-Posten_Muhammad_cartoons_controversy#Comparable_references

Jewish religious symbols, notably the Star of David, the main feature of the Israeli flag, are displayed in derogatory fashion, e.g. being composed of a menacing snake.
Back to top
« Last Edit: Nov 15th, 2008 at 3:26pm by freediver »  

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: blasphemy
Reply #18 - Nov 15th, 2008 at 4:15pm
 
Quote:
I just assumed most Muslims describe Christianity etc the same way you do. For example, I believe you often say that Jesus is not the son of God.


But that's not criticism, that's just a difference of opinion on how he is perceived, we revere and respect him, we would never criticise him, in fact doing so would be blasphemy, and would probably incur whatever punishment it is you're trying to discover here in this thread Smiley

Likewise we don't criticise Buddha, Krishna nor any other religious figure, as we consider it disrespectful.
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #19 - Nov 15th, 2008 at 4:37pm
 
Quote:
But that's not criticism, that's just a difference of opinion on how he is perceived


So what if someone said that Muhammed was not in fact a prophet, but was just a man who happened to like war mongering and having sex with little girls. Or that Buddha was not divine, but was just a fat bloke who was always happy. Would that be a criticism, or a difference of opinion? Do you revere and respect Buddha and Krishna?
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #20 - Nov 20th, 2010 at 10:27pm
 
Is this the correct Islamic punishment Abu?

Pakistani Christian sentenced to death for blasphemy

http://www.english.rfi.fr/asia-pacific/20101112-pakistani-christian-sentenced-death-blasphemy

A Pakistani court has sentenced to death a Christian mother of five for blasphemy, a first such conviction for a woman. Human rights groups protest the conviction and call for blasphemy laws to be repealed.

Asia Bibi was sentenced to death on Monday by a local court in Nankana district in Pakistan's central province Punjab.

Her conviction has sparked protests from human rights groups and indignation from groups representing Christians in Pakistan.

In June 2009, Asia was asked to fetch water while working in the fields. A group of Muslim workers objected to her touching the water bowl on the grounds that she was not a Muslim.

Later the women complained to a local cleric and alleged that Asia had defiled the name of the Prophet Mohammed. Asia was arrested and a local judge sentenced her to hang and ruled out any chance that she had been falsely implicated.

Human rights and minority groups have slammed the conviction and say they want the controversial blasphemy legislation repealed.

“99% of cases against Christians have been filed in Punjab province under the blasphemy law after the formation of this controversial law which indicates a rise in extremism in Punjab,” says Watson Gill, a coordinator for the Pakistan Christian Congress.

Asia's husband Ashiq Masih says he is going to appeal the death sentence which needs to be upheld by the Lahore high court, the highest tribunal in Punjab, before it can be carried out.

"The case is baseless and we will file an appeal," he said.

Around 3 per cent of Pakistan’s population is believed to be non-Muslim.
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: blasphemy
Reply #21 - Nov 20th, 2010 at 10:59pm
 
There can be no correct Islamic punishment when the Caliphate system does not exist, so no.

It is Pakistani law and a Pakistani punishment.

Is American law of sentencing people to death a Biblical law? The same punishment exists in the biblical texts, and America is a predominantly Christian country right?
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #22 - Nov 22nd, 2010 at 8:42pm
 
So they err because they kill the lady without proper authority, but not because they kill the lady?

Quote:
Is American law of sentencing people to death a Biblical law? The same punishment exists in the biblical texts, and America is a predominantly Christian country right?


Are you suggesting that the Bible is a body of law in the same way that Islam is? Is the inability to draw conclusions about biblical law meant to shed light on why you can't answer the question about Islamic law, or confuse the issue?

What is the penalty for blasphemy under Islamic law, in a proper Islamic state, with all the other qualififcations you need before giving an answer?
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: blasphemy
Reply #23 - Nov 22nd, 2010 at 9:25pm
 
Quote:
Are you suggesting that the Bible is a body of law in the same way that Islam is?


It quite clearly purports to be.

How more plain does it need to be than "And he that blasphemeth the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, [and] all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemeth the name [of the LORD], shall be put to death."?

Is that ambigious to you fd? Going by your thought patterns thus far, I wouldn't be surprised if it were.

That's quite clearly an instruction to implement capital punishment on anyone who blasphemes, whether native (ie. believer) or not.

Quote:
Is the inability to draw conclusions about biblical law meant to shed light on why you can't answer the question about Islamic law, or confuse the issue?


I think you're well aware of the intent. It is to expose your hypocrisy and sensationalism. You harp on and on about Islam and it's books, when the holy book of your own background/society fits the criteria much better for what you wish to condemn.

Quote:
What is the penalty for blasphemy under Islamic law, in a proper Islamic state, with all the other qualififcations you need before giving an answer?


I think you already know it's a capital offense. I honestly don't see the attraction in asking the questions over and over? Your pathetic wiki is based on a misguided premise that Islamic laws somehow contradict Australian secular laws. As above, so do Biblical laws, doesn't stop the parliament reading Biblical prayers when opening does it? Doesn't stop Jews & Christians being good law-abiding citzeins does it? How you take a set of laws is up to you fd. If you choose not to implement the blasphemy law from the Bible, then it doesn't affect you does it? Likewise if you choose not to implement the blasphemy law from the Islamic texts. Your feeble attempt to paint some kind of incompatibility here is thrown right back in your face. It's based on the delusion that each and every citizen is supposedly required to carry out the punishments of the state, which is just nonsense. And we've been over this time and time again, and I've already painted the picture for you of an American citizen living here, believing in the U.S law of capital punishment, not contradicting the Australian law system. But as usual, the feeble minded are far from being able to reason such things out.
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
mozzaok
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 6717
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: blasphemy
Reply #24 - Nov 24th, 2010 at 9:15am
 
The "desire" to have sharia law applied, based upon a book claimed to be divine, and mary poppins like, "perfect in every way", along with the punishments laid down in the text, is very different to abiding by modern secular laws Abu.
Pointing out anachronistic punishments from the bible only highlights the difference between the Islamic approach to justice, and that of modern secular societies, which do not constrain their justice system to a code written in a different time, for a different time, and from a very different culture.
Back to top
 

OOPS!!! My Karma, ran over your Dogma!
 
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 67759
Gender: female
Re: blasphemy
Reply #25 - Nov 24th, 2010 at 12:37pm
 
abu_rashid wrote on Nov 22nd, 2010 at 9:25pm:
[quote]Likewise if you choose not to implement the blasphemy law from the Islamic texts. Your feeble attempt to paint some kind of incompatibility here is thrown right back in your face. It's based on the delusion that each and every citizen is supposedly required to carry out the punishments of the state, which is just nonsense.


Secular states don't follow the law of the Torah or the Koran.

I think what FD is getting at is your willingness to institute the law of the Koran.

And now my interest is piqued, Abu: do you want to see these sorts of laws applied?

I know it's not every citizen's responsibility to make laws, but there's no Jewish move to reintroduce the laws of Leviticus. There is an Islamic move to introduce Shariah.

I think FD is asking you if you think this is a good idea.

Fair enough question, isn't it?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #26 - Nov 25th, 2010 at 10:10pm
 
Quote:
I think you're well aware of the intent. It is to expose your hypocrisy and sensationalism.


What hypocrisy? I ask you a simple question, like what is the punishment for blasphemy under Islam.

And yes, it is sensational Abu. I don't need to add anything to it - your own words are enough.

Quote:
You harp on and on about Islam and it's books, when the holy book of your own background/society fits the criteria much better for what you wish to condemn.


But Abu, I do not condemn your holy book. I condemn you for wanting a return to the barbarity. How is that hypocritical? Trust me, if you rejected Shariah law, I would have nothing to criticise you for. I am not disputing that these things happened in the past in all societies. What I dispute is whether this is something we should seek a return to. I don't know how, but you seem to have missed this point.

Quote:
I think you already know it's a capital offense.


Actually, no I did not. Hence the question. This is what I had on the wiki:

Blasphemy/free speech Islam forbids criticism of God, Muhammed or Islam. It also restricts other areas of free speech. Phone sex lines for example would be illegal. Penalty?

I have updated the wiki for you:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/wiki/index.php?title=Islam_and_Australian_values#Confli...

Thanks again for contributing to the accuracy of the wiki.

Quote:
I honestly don't see the attraction in asking the questions over and over?


I think of it as a little victory every time I get a striaght answer from you. If you think this victory is hollow and you had already given the answer, feel free to link us to it so everyone can revel in my ignorance.

Quote:
Your pathetic wiki is based on a misguided premise that Islamic laws somehow contradict Australian secular laws.


Values Abu - it's about values. Obviously they are worlds apart from Australian law also.

Quote:
As above, so do Biblical laws, doesn't stop the parliament reading Biblical prayers when opening does it?


So long as they don't start stoning people to death and chopping their hands and feet off I think that is pretty harmless. Or is that yet another example of my hypocrisy? Am I wrong to defend civilised society and freedom of speech while not getting wound up over prayers in parliament?

Quote:
If you choose not to implement the blasphemy law from the Bible, then it doesn't affect you does it?


Yes it does Abu. It means I am free to say what I want.

Quote:
Likewise if you choose not to implement the blasphemy law from the Islamic texts.


Do you honestly think I would change my mind if it was some other religious person on here who wanted the death penalty for blasphemy? You are not making any sense Abu. You still see this whole argument as a battle between Islam and one religion or another, but you have not even figured out what you are up against, and why Shariah law is something that every other religion, every atheist, every agnostic will unite against, not because it is Islam, but because it is barbarity.

Quote:
Your feeble attempt to paint some kind of incompatibility here is thrown right back in your face.


So you don't see any incompatibility between the society you grew up in and the death penalty for blasphemy? Why is it so hard for me to believe that you grew up in a typical western community?

Quote:
It's based on the delusion that each and every citizen is supposedly required to carry out the punishments of the state, which is just nonsense.


What is based on that Abu? BTW, I agree with you, it is nonsense.
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Karnal
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 67759
Gender: female
Re: blasphemy
Reply #27 - Nov 26th, 2010 at 11:30am
 
I don't think Abu wants to discuss this anymore. Pity! It was quite interesting.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Offline


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 35310
At my desk.
Re: blasphemy
Reply #28 - Nov 26th, 2010 at 10:02pm
 
It just occured to me that I may not have asked him whether he supports shariah law. He does appear to be a bit embarrassed by it, so maybe his views differ from Malik's.

He always comes back to it eventually. If not here, the topic will come up again in another thread. You just have to get used to only getting a bit out of him at a time.
Back to top
 

Ayers rock - the first casualty of climb-it change.
WWW  
IP Logged
 
abu_rashid
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Aussie Muslim

Posts: 8353
Re: blasphemy
Reply #29 - Nov 26th, 2010 at 11:51pm
 
karnal,

Quote:
Secular states don't follow the law of the Torah or the Koran.


Precisely. So all the hype and garbage about Shari'ah law being "snuck" into the West is just absolute nonsense.

Christians themselves, who are the majority, cannot even get their laws applied in their own countries, as neither can Muslims in their own countries, so the idea that Islam is a threat as it has laws is just ludicrous, that's my whole position here.

Quote:
I think what FD is getting at is your willingness to institute the law of the Koran.


Well there's a lot of people in Australia, who'd like to institute a lot of laws that are not in compliance with Australia's current legislation. I don't see too much hype about those people not being compatible with the "Australian way of life". Come on Karnal, don't let yourself be whored off for this cheap and nasty cause.

Quote:
And now my interest is piqued, Abu: do you want to see these sorts of laws applied?


I do believe the Islamic Shari'ah to be perfect, and under a Caliphate of course they should be applied. Should they be transplanted into an Australian secular context? No, of course not. Any hype claiming Muslims are calling for this is fanciful at best.

Quote:
I know it's not every citizen's responsibility to make laws, but there's no Jewish move to reintroduce the laws of Leviticus.


Ultra Orthodox Jews are constantly trying to re-introduce Torah/Talmud law in occupied-Palestine. Britain has been implementing "Jewish law" alongside English law for over 70 years now (no hoohah about that), and it's the same kind of thing that was spoken about with regard to Muslims, and the whole of Europe were up in arms. I think you can quite clearly see there's an agenda behind all this.

Quote:
There is an Islamic move to introduce Shariah.


Yes, in the Muslim world (and a fairly unsuccessful one at that), not here, hence it's complete irrelevance to Australia.

Quote:
I don't think Abu wants to discuss this anymore. Pity! It was quite interesting


Similar stuff to this was discussed with fd for several years running now. It leads nowhere, except to him going off and taking things wildly out of context and writing his little wiki, thinking he's making some great contribution to exposing Islam or something. I'm sure that you can see why I find it tiresome.
Back to top
 
abu_rashid  
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 
Send Topic Print