Blasphemy ‘is no crime’, says Macron amid French girl’s anti-Islam row

[firedragon]

Goodness gracious....someone's become angry & abusive.
If you want to discuss this with me, you'll have to regain
your equanimity, & behave yourself.

I think you put the wrong cap on.

Have a great day. Cheers.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I believe a large portion of people feel aroused by immigration, and even more so by allowing immigrants to change their culture to be more like the immigrants. I know this sounds strange, but it's the only logical conclusion I've been able to come up with as to why people *allow* these negative cultural shifts to occur, while remaining silent.

I'm an immigrant now, and live among a large expat community immersed in a larger Mexican community. Our culture is very influential here. For starters, young Mexicans don't seem to be able to own enough cell phones or blue jeans. The movies shown in the theaters are almost all American movies. I've heard rap in Spanish now.

And Mexican holidays are becoming Americanized. Christmas was a strictly desert holiday here with camels, mangers, and Magi when we arrived, but Wal-Mart is bringing them American Christmas with Christmas lights and trimmed trees, and they seem to like it. Likewise with the Day of the Dead that is slowly adding a trick-or-treat aspect complete with little ghost and vampire costumes, also courtesy of Wal-Mart, which is probably Americanizing much of the world.

But we don't bring them any of that. That stuff is all imported.

We have, however, brought them some of our ways. Their vision of what pet is has changed for the better. They used to be watch dogs almost exclusively and treated indifferently. We taught them that these are friends to be loved and respected, not left on the roof all day or tied to a tree.

And we also have made the community more aware of litter and the value of not littering.

Lattes are readily available here now, as are chicken tenders and Subway sandwiches.

And several expat volunteer organizations serve locals, such as Have Hammer Will Travel, which is teaching carpentry skills to young locals.

I'd say that we have created a positive cultural shift, but it's not all positive.

No, but immigrants to every Western country could be required to uphold the constitutions, and customs of the country

I don't remember upholding the US Constitution when I lived there. You never had freedom of speech with me, for example. Those rules apply to the government.

Lets say Hindus commit some stupid and bigoted atrocity, are you gonna blame it on Hinduism?

Possibly. Is the behavior found more frequently (with statistical significance) in Hindus than other kinds of people?

If that is the case, you can blame a lot of things on a lot of things like atheism, fascism, marxism, humanism, genetics, ideas, blood, race, colour, etc. Its the definition of bigotry.

That's not my definition of bigotry, which can only be directed at people, not "ism"s.

What you are describing is exactly what I do here. To understand what Christianity is and how it affects its adherents, one looks at a large cross-section of Christians and compares them to cross-section of various types of non-Christians such as secular humanists to get a sense of how these worldviews influence thought and behavior.

Can we blame abortion clinic bombings on Christianity? I'd say so. Look at who the bombers are, and look at the demographics that don't bomb these clinics, like humanists.

This is not to say that every Christian wants to bomb these clinics, but that those people who do want to bomb these clinics are going to cluster among Christians more than non-Christians.

When we make generalizations such as that Americans like hamburgers, we are not saying that every American likes hamburgers, just that there will be a larger concentration of hamburger eaters among Americans than say Mexicans. I don't see any bigotry there.

 

[firedragon]

Possibly. Is the behavior found more frequently (with statistical significance) in Hindus than other kinds of people?

Can you provide a statistical validation with sociological evidence to claim the same with a good research that points to the religion and in comparison all other thoughts and philosophies that existed? I will accept.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Lets say Hindus commit some stupid and bigoted atrocity, are you gonna blame it on Hinduism?

Possibly. Is the behavior found more frequently (with statistical significance) in Hindus than other kinds of people?

Can you provide a statistical validation with sociological evidence to claim the same with a good research that points to the religion and in comparison all other thoughts and philosophies that existed? I will accept.

What for? What claim did you think I made?

You know how research works, and the validity of that method. Basically, we divide people into two or more cohorts that are indistinguishable except for one trait (randomized) and examine them for one or more other traits in search of a correlation (if a medical study, we also double-blind the clinician and patient, and use both the administered therapy and placebo).

And we do that informally every day. If Bob becomes an angry drunk when he has tequila, noticing that is the only study needed. The method has general applicability.

Or, study the matter more formally. If you want to know if cigarettes cause lung disease, follow the fates of enough smokers versus non-smokers for enough time so that the study is sufficiently powered to detect a distinction if any. If there's no difference, then no. If the smokers have more lung disease, then yes.

Likewise, if the atrocity were consistently seen more often in Hindus than non-Hindus, such as self-immolation, we can correlate it with Hinduism, just as we can correlate abortion clinic bombings with Christianity and suicide bombings with Islam, but neither with secular humanists, who ironically are the ones usually called militant atheists. We don't need formal studies and research papers to learn such things.

And if I did produce a research paper for you, it would have been generated using this technique, whatever it showed.

 

[Notanumber]

We know what Christianity and Judaism teach too. Thankfully, most followers of all three faiths are more circumspect in their day-to-day lives.

It would not be called the religion of peace if it did not have something to hide like the truth.

 

[firedragon]

What for? What claim did you think I made?

Your statement i responded to.

 

[atanu]

‘Emmanuel Macron has waded into a row over a schoolgirl whose attack on Islam has divided France, insisting that blasphemy is “no crime”.

The French president defended the teenager, named only as Mila, who received death threats and was forced out of her school after filming an anti-religious diatribe on social media.

Macron’s intervention comes after his justice minister, Nicole Belloubet, was criticised for claiming Mila’s attack on religion was “an attack on freedom of conscience” while saying the death threats were “unacceptable”.’

Read more here: Blasphemy 'is no crime', says Macron amid French girl's anti-Islam row

In many Muslim countries, blasphemy/apostasy is illegal and punishable by death, through implementation of so called shariah. This, in my opinion, is human-political rather than a problem of Islam. Many Muslim scholars have pointed out that the sharia is not necessarily in conformity to Holy Quran. But I am not sure.

What I am sure is that Holy Quran calls all mankind one and chastises those who see differences on account of hatred in their own hearts.

On the other hand, I think that while judging the apostates is the sole responsibility of God alone, blasphemy which is usually meant to hurt may require censure as per applicable law. But in neither case, a death sentence is justified.

In Hinduism, as stated by Shri Krishna in Gita, an apostate does not incur any wrath. Such a person has to resume the spiritual journey from the point of departure and for this God provides guidance and environment.

Similar to implementation of shariah (that usually is not in conformity to Holy Quran) in certain Muslim countries, a section of Hindu leaders want to impose Hindutva on all Indians, although evidently Hindutva is not Hinduism.

IMO, true religiosity-spirituality is distinct from political posturing and that is true of all sectarian groups.
...

 

[Wandering Monk]

In that some people are really quick to take something done by an individual who happens (or is believed) to be Muslim and instantly use that to attack Islam as a whole and by all Muslims by association? I wouldn’t say unique by any stretch of the imagination but it’s certainly very prevalent these days.

Yes, and these radical nutcases give the world plenty of opportunity to do so. You would think there would be a huge backlash by the peaceful Muslims against the Islamist terrorists.

Waiting for that to happen.

 

[atanu]

Yes, and these radical nutcases give the world plenty of opportunity to do so. You would think there would be a huge backlash by the peaceful Muslims against the Islamist terrorists.

Waiting for that to happen.

I also sometimes feel that the radical nutcase violent cases might often be staged to foment trouble and to divide and rule. Politics is not the domain of gentlemen.

 

[danieldemol]

What did the girl actually say?

According to Al-Jazeera she said, “I hate religion. The Quran is a religion of hate.”

Source: 'Blasphemy' case divides France

 

[Revoltingest]

In many Muslim countries, blasphemy/apostasy is illegal and punishable by death, through implementation of so called shariah. This, in my opinion, is human-political rather than a problem of Islam.

Putting the way you did....it sure does look like Islam is the problem.
I'd say that the political problem results from both culture & Islam.

Note that Islam is no single religion, given the differences (sometimes
violent) between the various flavors. Islam gives rise to them all, so
we cannot say that it's defined by the peaceful ones....it's defined by
the spectrum spanned by them all.

 

[danieldemol]

On the other hand, I think that while judging the apostates is the sole responsibility of God alone, blasphemy which is usually meant to hurt may require censure as per applicable law. But in neither case, a death sentence is justified.

I think your attribution of intention to hurt is you telling yourself a victim story, in most cases it is simply meant to be educational.

In any case it would be utterly impractical to legislate against people feeling hurt. Besides to do so would rob them of the chance to grow such spiritual qualities as patience and being magnanimous.

 

[atanu]

I think your attribution of intention to hurt is you telling yourself a victim story, in most cases it is simply meant to be educational.

Educational? Well. I do not agree. I can say a lot of things about your religion without knowing much and hurt you. Or I can intentionally foment trouble to gain political-economic mileage.

In my opinion, the growth of fundamentalism has significantly been the result of global politics. Can you deny systematic destruction of the progressive regimes and stimulus to Bin Laden et al?

In any case it would be utterly impractical to legislate against people feeling hurt. Besides to do so would rob them of the chance to grow such spiritual qualities as patience and being magnanimous.

I agree that legislation is impractical and not required at all. It will be a regressive state where such legislation is made.

What I am telling is that I will not knowingly indulge in blasphemy because I respect and care for faith/belief of others.

Furthermore I think that restraint is taught in Hindu scripture.. And I can show restrain from Quran too. Restraint and teaching of love is integral to all religions. But restraints are lost on the nut cases and intentional political instigators are not bound by scriptures. We know of cases where political trickery plays role rather than spirituality.

I always request the spiritual minded to not fall for the motivated propaganda or to react to careless animosity of the non religious. But I understand that human mind/ego is ruled by emotion.

 

[atanu]

Putting the way you did....it sure does look like Islam is the problem.
I'd say that the political problem results from both culture & Islam.

Note that Islam is no single religion, given the differences (sometimes
violent) between the various flavors. Islam gives rise to them all, so
we cannot say that it's defined by the peaceful ones....it's defined by
the spectrum spanned by them all.

Well. I am sorry that I do not agree. I believe that you do not analyse the world events in large historical perspective and use happenings of a short time window to generalise. Only recently we have had two world wars. Islam did not start those. It is the so called Christian west that bombed and ****ed other countries.

 

[atanu]

According to Al-Jazeera she said, “I hate religion. The Quran is a religion of hate.”

Source: 'Blasphemy' case divides France

Surely this is not crime, but suggests hatred/ignorance/recklessness on part of the speaker.

 

[danieldemol]

Surely this is not crime, but suggests hatred/ignorance/recklessness on part of the speaker.

I agree that it suggests hatred of an idea and ignorance, however I see it as no more reckless than the comments she was responding to. I acknowledge that one bad turn does not deserve another, but I think it not possible to attribute ignorance and poor motive to the girl, maybe all she knows of the Quran is what she perceived from the comments directed towards her judging her as a whore for being a lesbian.

 

[Revoltingest]

Well. I am sorry that I do not agree. I believe that you do not analyse the world events in large historical perspective and use happenings of a short time window to generalise. Only recently we have had two world wars. Islam did not start those. It is the so called Christian west that bombed and ****ed other countries.

Oh, I never said that Islam was the only source of violence.
And I did consider the many centuries of Islam's existence.
Remember the Ameristanian war against Islamic pirates in the
1700s? Yeah, their violence goes back that far & even earlier.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Here people are free to be outspoken and sometimes vulgar to diss the Vatican, since this Pope has gone "political "...

So I do not understand why there should be double standards.

This Pope?
Hahahahaha....
*Wipes a tear*
Thanks mate, needed a laugh.

'This Pope...', he says.
Hahaha.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

True. Muslims sometimes just call themselves a name but are hypocrites.

Same as those Christians who murdered William Tyndale. They called themselves Christian which means little Christ. The anointed. The one who said give your other cheek.

But what you said is that "The religion of Peace strikes again", not "Muslims who claim the religion of peace struck again".

Do you see your issue?

Not really. The Bible and Quran both provide ample examples, reasons, and justifications for the horrors, cruelties, and wickedness of the Crusader and Jihadist alike. There is no "true Islam" just as there is no "true Christianity." And with internal contradictions and inconsistencies that are in no short supply, it ends up being that no one is right and no one is wrong.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Oh, I never said that Islam was the only source of violence.
And I did consider the many centuries of Islam's existence.
Remember the Ameristanian war against Islamic pirates in the
1700s? Yeah, their violence goes back that far & even earlier.

My favorite historic figure, Vlad Dracul III, he was fighting against Muslim violence and oppression and the spread of the Ottoman Empire all the way back in the 1400s, and very clearly and obviously American bombings had nothing to do with the expansion of the Ottoman Empire back then and the sacking of Constantinople.