When superstition becames law.

The accusation that Stephen Fry had broken the law regrading blasphemy, and the conviction and imprisonment of “Ahok” the ex-governor of Jakarta, are legally unrelated, unless the interpretation of “God” were the same, and if they were, a great deal of trouble might be avoided. That leaves the possibility of using the two legal systems against each other as blasphemous in the eyes of the opposite.

This may all seem academic to we who live in states that have adopted secularist interpretations of reality. One of those interpretations is that the state should not sponsor or enforce the beliefs of any religion. We take this for granted, but we should not. Both Ireland and Indonesia were founded on religious freedom. If those were honest principles, they would extend to all views and interpretations of the universe. That would be real freedom of conscience. Consider this quote from an Irish atheist:

“Mick Nugent, co-founder of Atheist Ireland, said the dropping of the case against Fry underlined how “dangerous and absurd” the country’s relatively new blasphemy law actually is.
Nugent pointed out that Islamic states such as Pakistan have used Ireland’s blasphemy legislation in arguments at the United Nations for a UN-backed motion denouncing what it says are blasphemous attacks on religious beliefs.”

So while we secularists and liberal-progressive humanists are sleeping, our government could sign away our rights to our view of religion, at least at the United Nations, and in the past, no UN policies, that I know, have been debated locally, before our diplomats signed up. Blasphemy laws are the ultimate tool for silencing critics of religion.

If a person believes in possession by demons or witchcraft, most people view this as silly, childish, and superstitious in adults, but if a million people believe it, we allow it the status of a religion. There is no actual difference. The belief in omnipotent, omnipresent, deities, and communication with such deities by humans cannot be accepted as an objective point of view. It is as much superstition as believing in the power of a rabbits foot or a voodoo gris-gris sachel.

Yet now we have a situation where secularists are actually defending the belief in these superstitions. We see it on this forum continually. Their logic goes that you can believe in anything you like as long as you don't break the law. That is true, but it is no guarantee once the superstitious reach the number of a voting block, and that is only a matter of time.

There is a great old Frank Zappa number that goes, “And they said it couldn't happen here.” Then consider how the Australian government went, cap in hand, to Jakarta when Indo military chief Nurmantyo accused Australia of insulting Islam. Even if that were the case, Indo blasphemy law and prosecution shows they deserve to be insulted by anyone who believes in freedom of conscience.

It is hard to say if Indonesians deserve to be insulted due to the Ahok case.  It is complicated, as it involves more than religion.  Most people in Indonesia believe that the jail sentence (which even the prosecutors did not call for) are politically motivated.  If it so, then I put the blame squarely on the judge involved.   April election showed that 43% of the people voted for Ahok, thats 3% more than the other candidate, is a good indication of popularity of Ahok despite his perceived crime.   So now, the question is what do we gain by insulting Indonesians now?  Insulting is not going to further strengthen support for Ahok, or their support for secularity.  The insults would only push people into less secular views as it plays to the views of the extremists. 

Issuevoter


Quote:

..................Yet now we have a situation where secularists are actually defending the belief in these superstitions. We see it on this forum continually. Their logic goes that you can believe in anything you like as long as you don't break the law. That is true, but it is no guarantee once the superstitious reach the number of a voting block, and that is only a matter of time...................

Well put.

Sprintcyclist wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 3:56pm:

Issuevoter Quote: ..................Yet now we have a situation where secularists are actually defending the belief in these superstitions. We see it on this forum continually. Their logic goes that you can believe in anything you like as long as you don't break the law. That is true, but it is no guarantee once the superstitious reach the number of a voting block, and that is only a matter of time................... Well put.

What say ye about the "Christian" voting block's prosecution of Fry, Mr Cyclist?

they should be spreading RESPECT for our churches  instead they think jailing people is the answer  all it does is drive criticism underground  where it ferments into rage......even I would think our Muslim chums in Jakarta are jack with this.

cods wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 4:13pm:

they should be spreading RESPECT for our churches  instead they think jailing people is the answer  all it does is drive criticism underground  where it ferments into rage......even I would think our Muslim chums in Jakarta are jack with this.

What do you respect about our Churches, cods?  What do you have to say about the prosecution of Fry at the hands of a Christian voting block?

The monkeys have spoken.

Long live the monkeys

tickleandrose wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 3:11pm:

It is hard to say if Indonesians deserve to be insulted due to the Ahok case.  It is complicated, as it involves more than religion.  Most people in Indonesia believe that the jail sentence (which even the prosecutors did not call for) are politically motivated.  If it so, then I put the blame squarely on the judge involved.   April election showed that 43% of the people voted for Ahok, thats 3% more than the other candidate, is a good indication of popularity of Ahok despite his perceived crime.   So now, the question is what do we gain by insulting Indonesians now?  Insulting is not going to further strengthen support for Ahok, or their support for secularity.  The insults would only push people into less secular views as it plays to the views of the extremists.

It is not complicated. Blasphemy laws and prosecution are about religion. The perceived insult by the Chief General was about religion. But you are missing the point, which is that both Ireland and Indonesia according to their founders have freedom of conscience as a corner stone. Defamation of character is one thing, criticism of religion, or even the rejection of religion is punishable in those countries. Worse still, is the fact that secularists are afraid, or to philosophically confused to take these people to task. And further, if a religion and its faithful are so thin-skinned as to take offense at what unbelievers have to say about them, they must feel a very tenuous grasp on their holiness.

Until proven otherwise all religions are superstitions, cant rely on word of mouth these days.
The ten commandments seems a fair way to go.

Johnnie wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 9:39pm:

Until proven otherwise all religions are superstitions, cant rely on word of mouth these days. The ten commandments seems a fair way to go.

The first 4 seem like nonsense.


The 10 Commandments List,

   1  You shall have no other gods before Me.
   2  You shall not make idols.
   3  You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
   4  Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
   5  Honor your father and your mother.
   6  You shall not murder.
   7 You shall not commit adultery.
   8 You shall not steal.
   9 You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
  10  You shall not covet.

Johnnie wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 9:39pm:

Until proven otherwise all religions are superstitions, cant rely on word of mouth these days. The ten commandments seems a fair way to go.

Like these ones? I'm sure it's blasphemous to ignore them, so you agree with blasphemy laws.

No other gods before me.
No graven images or likenesses.
Not take the LORD's name in vain.
Remember the sabbath day.

The reluctance of the Irish authorities to press charges against Stephen Fry, is not the amelioration of religion. It is the effect general education and exposure to ideas. The Indo prosecution of "Ahok" shows exactly how far their society has come in the same amount of time that it took for the Irish to become more tolerant. Indonesia is going backwards, relishing its ignorance and superstition.

Ok their are a few contentious commandments there but on the whole it is the way we should conduct ourselves.

The left spent the last 150 years trying to remove religion. Now they defend it (only Islam of course). This is a result of the new identity politics completely smacking up their previous approach to criticism. 

tickleandrose wrote on May 10^th, 2017 at 3:11pm:

It is hard to say if Indonesians deserve to be insulted due to the Ahok case.  It is complicated, as it involves more than religion.  Most people in Indonesia believe that the jail sentence (which even the prosecutors did not call for) are politically motivated.  If it so, then I put the blame squarely on the judge involved.   April election showed that 43% of the people voted for Ahok, thats 3% more than the other candidate, is a good indication of popularity of Ahok despite his perceived crime.   So now, the question is what do we gain by insulting Indonesians now?  Insulting is not going to further strengthen support for Ahok, or their support for secularity.  The insults would only push people into less secular views as it plays to the views of the extremists.

So we should not mention it and hope the problem goes away?

freediver wrote on May 12^th, 2017 at 9:07pm:

tickleandrose wrote on May 10th, 2017 at 3:11pm: It is hard to say if Indonesians deserve to be insulted due to the Ahok case.  It is complicated, as it involves more than religion.  Most people in Indonesia believe that the jail sentence (which even the prosecutors did not call for) are politically motivated.  If it so, then I put the blame squarely on the judge involved.   April election showed that 43% of the people voted for Ahok, thats 3% more than the other candidate, is a good indication of popularity of Ahok despite his perceived crime.   So now, the question is what do we gain by insulting Indonesians now?  Insulting is not going to further strengthen support for Ahok, or their support for secularity.  The insults would only push people into less secular views as it plays to the views of the extremists.  So we should not mention it and hope the problem goes away?

No comment about the persecution of Fry, Effendi?  You seem more concerned about things other than what is in  your own back yard.

I wonder why no mention of then Bishop George Pell's effort to prosecute Andres Serrano.   While it failed it was made under Victorian law.   Tsk, tsk.   So much for their defence of Free Speech then, hey?

Aussie wrote on May 12^th, 2017 at 9:10pm:

freediver wrote on May 12th, 2017 at 9:07pm: tickleandrose wrote on May 10th, 2017 at 3:11pm: It is hard to say if Indonesians deserve to be insulted due to the Ahok case.  It is complicated, as it involves more than religion.  Most people in Indonesia believe that the jail sentence (which even the prosecutors did not call for) are politically motivated.  If it so, then I put the blame squarely on the judge involved.   April election showed that 43% of the people voted for Ahok, thats 3% more than the other candidate, is a good indication of popularity of Ahok despite his perceived crime.   So now, the question is what do we gain by insulting Indonesians now?  Insulting is not going to further strengthen support for Ahok, or their support for secularity.  The insults would only push people into less secular views as it plays to the views of the extremists.  So we should not mention it and hope the problem goes away? No comment about the persecution of Fry, Effendi?  You seem more concerned about things other than what is in  your own back yard.

I jut checked Aussie. He isn't there any more.

Cute.


Quote:

No comment about the persecution of Fry, Effendi?

Yes actually. What made you describe that one as "in my backyard"?

freediver wrote on May 12^th, 2017 at 9:41pm:

Yes actually. What made you describe that one as "in my backyard"?

Your origins are Christian, no?

So, what is your comment about the persecution of Fry?

Aussie wrote on May 12^th, 2017 at 9:44pm:

freediver wrote on May 12th, 2017 at 9:41pm: Yes actually. What made you describe that one as "in my backyard"? Your origins are Christian, no? So, what is your comment about the persecution of Fry?

I thought you said I was Jewish?

Since when does Christianity originate from Ireland?

Quote:

I thought you said I was Jewish?

Did you?  You'd be quite wrong, but no-one will be surprised to hear that, ey Effendi?  You have a remarkable and building record (on misquoting and misrepresenting) which is quite impressive I have to concede.


Quote:

Since when does Christianity originate from Ireland?

No-one said it did Effendi.  (We can add that to your record.)

What is your comment about the persecution of Fry, Effendi?

Aussie wrote on May 12^th, 2017 at 9:44pm:

So, what is your comment about the persecution of Fry?

Yes it's interesting. We have 2 cases. One is Stephen Fry being investigated with potential prosecution under Irish Christian blasphemy laws. The other is the prosecution of Ahok under Indonesian blasphemy laws.

So why doesn't anyone want to discuss the Stephen Fry case?

The_Barnacle wrote on May 14^th, 2017 at 11:51am:

Aussie wrote on May 12th, 2017 at 9:44pm: So, what is your comment about the persecution of Fry? Yes it's interesting. We have 2 cases. One is Stephen Fry being investigated with potential prosecution under Irish Christian blasphemy laws. The other is the prosecution of Ahok under Indonesian blasphemy laws. So why doesn't anyone want to discuss the Stephen Fry case?

It may have something to do with the case being dropped by the Irish Police. Please see early posts.

issuevoter wrote on May 14^th, 2017 at 12:18pm:

It may have something to do with the case being dropped by the Irish Police. Please see early posts.

I doubt it

The_Barnacle wrote on May 14^th, 2017 at 12:28pm:

issuevoter wrote on May 14th, 2017 at 12:18pm: It may have something to do with the case being dropped by the Irish Police. Please see early posts. I doubt it

The investigation was 'halted.'  The Irish blasphemy law remains intact.  We have no right to have a go at Islam on the matter without conceding/recognising our own hypocrisy.

issuevoter wrote on May 14^th, 2017 at 12:18pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on May 14th, 2017 at 11:51am: Aussie wrote on May 12th, 2017 at 9:44pm: So, what is your comment about the persecution of Fry? Yes it's interesting. We have 2 cases. One is Stephen Fry being investigated with potential prosecution under Irish Christian blasphemy laws. The other is the prosecution of Ahok under Indonesian blasphemy laws. So why doesn't anyone want to discuss the Stephen Fry case? It may have something to do with the case being dropped by the Irish Police. Please see early posts.

Apparently it is in my backyard, wherever that is, so I ought to comment on it, rather than people like Ahok being actually jailed for blasphemy in Indonesia, or that Australian guy being actually jailed for having the wrong opinion on history.

Don't you have the right or capacity to be critical of the blasphemy laws which exist in the West, including Australia, Effendi?

;)

Aussie wrote on May 14^th, 2017 at 1:17pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on May 14th, 2017 at 12:28pm: issuevoter wrote on May 14th, 2017 at 12:18pm: It may have something to do with the case being dropped by the Irish Police. Please see early posts. I doubt it The investigation was 'halted.'  The Irish blasphemy law remains intact.  We have no right to have a go at Islam on the matter without conceding/recognising our own hypocrisy.

Speak for yourself, if you think you are hypocritical about blasphemy. Where do you get this "WE" idea?

Quote:

Speak for yourself, if you think you are hypocritical about blasphemy.

I'm certainly not.  It is laughable that blasphemy is still an offence, even in Australia.  Therefore, I am not about to get all uppity about an equally absurd thing in Islam.  Clean up our own back-yard first.


Quote:

Where do you get this "WE" idea?

'We' are those who are not cleaning up our own back-yard.