 |
An Afghan court in northern Afghanistan sentenced a journalism student to death for blasphemy for distributing an article from the Internet that was considered an insult to the Prophet Muhammad, said the judge in charge of the court. |
The student, Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh, 23…was charged with directly insulting Muhammad by calling the prophet “a killer and adulterer,” the judge, Shamsurahman Muhmand, said in a telephone interview…
Kambakhsh is a student at the faculty of journalism in Mazar-i-Sharif and also works for a daily paper, Jahan-e-Naw, as a reporter. He was accused of downloading a controversial article and adding some of his own paragraphs about the ignorance of the Prophet Muhammad on women’s rights…
You have to ask after a while – does a theocracy, by nature, have to become intolerant?
#35 – Will it be ok to proselytize faith with free schools, hospitals, meals, shelter, support groups, group pressure, $ bribes, brainwashing, and unlimited advertising?
Are you saying churches do a lot of public service? A few do. A few do more harm. But I think I was clear but I’ll repeat the important point…
2) Proselytize your faith with the barrel of a gun, and you will be met with overwhelming force and no mercy.
So, no, you won’t be met with forceful opposition by serving food to the homeless in the hypothetical fantasy world where I am the supreme ruler and a harem of scantily clad women lounge around my throne all day, feeding me grapes and pleasuring me.
# 23 Phillep said, on January 24th, 2008 at 11:35 am
Hindus are fighting Moslems in India to keep from being converted or murdered.
This is laughable history revisionism for any honest observer of India.
(I suspect your other “fact” are equally bogus but I’ll address India since I know it well.)
Aggressive Hindu nationalism — as typified by the RSS — is absolutely NOT a self-defensive reaction to Muslims. Activist radical Hindus also famously kill Christians, and Hindu moderates too.
Why don’t you just admit it — you’re an anti-Muslim bigot. It’s not a position to be proud of but at least you could stop torturing facts and logic.
I’ll say it again: most of the major religions* have their violent conservative wings. To single out Islam as unique reveals you to be a intellectual fraud.
(*The one exception may be Buddhism. I’m not aware of any major radical Buddhist movements. Maybe it’s a good testimony of the religion or maybe they are just behind the trend! Or maybe I just need to Google more.)
39 THC. “no one is remotely foolish enough to suggest that we can even begin to imagine what society will be like 200 years from now.”
See, you’re wrong again…
Answer these questions:
Will knowledge of atomic bomb-making become more, or less prevalent over the next 200 years?
Will there be more, or less unstable nations with this technology?
Will more, or less people have access to critical A-bomb materials?
Will more, or less people understand how to build one?
Do any of these people have an absolute surety of the existence of, and requirement to go to, a better and rewarding after-world or heaven?
Do any of these people have an absolute surety that it is their duty and requirement to destroy all infidels and non-believers in the present world?
Do any of these people believe that all innocents killed will forgive them in the next life?
Now go ahead and be foolish…
RBG
There is no doubt the future will see the continuing bifurcation of society into the illiterate bible thumpers and the steady progress of science into all areas of life.
It will be stupid and tragic when the flat earth cave dwellers venture forth, steal some technolocy, and end human life on earth.
Unpleasant, but I’ll go with stupid every time.
Well, RBG, if by ‘predicting the state of society in 200 years time’ you mean predicting that society will be nonexistent due to proliferation of nukes, then fine. Yes, it is very iffy, there even being anything left resembling a society, if certain idiots have their way. All the more reason to do everything possible to wean humanity from their fairytales.
But supposing we are still here, and we are not nuked back to Stone Age, the scientific discoveries and developments of the decades to come will have repercussions which are absolutely unpredictable. With the past as a guide, about the only thing that can be safely said is that a) certain aspects of current society, ones that few would ever suspect, will still be around, fundamentally unchanged, and b) certain other aspects of society, ones that no one expects to change significantly for centuries at the least, will be transformed in ways not merely unexpected, but practically inconceivable, and far, far sooner than anyone could believe possible.
Yeah, I get your point – that’s all moot if the loonies get their hands on certain weapons…
It’s frightening to think that I actually mostly believe in the scenario I presented above. I also completely agree with your point about the unpredictability of future society and mainly used that as a convenient jump-point for an “End is Near” soapbox rave.
If it’s any comfort, I don’t think that it would mean the all-out end of present civilization. Only the destruction of a few major US cities followed by the justifiable invasion of every nation remotely capable of supporting a nuclear attack; the suspension of all global rights; and near-indiscriminate mass incarceration and executions on the basis of the greater need for the self-defence of “humanity.”
RBG