Youssef (Egypt's Jon Stewart) Arrested for "Insulting Morsi"

[Godobeyer]

Isn't it a statement about the way things are in a society in general if you fear someone is going to be assassinated soon over making some jokes?

Don't get me wrong, not saying anything about the swathes of decent, civilized Egyptians. But how do things get so bad, and what can be done about them?

We're struggling with societal problems in America too. Seems humans have to deal with crazies worldwide, eh?

there is no doubt that some people want him dead (extrem muslims ) because of his "mocking show "fun show and scandal show for some people and me

some muslims considerate the Muslim BrotherHood leaders as angels" they don't make sins " or " get had wrong opinion" and their speech is the absolute truth and maybe indirect opinion from God .

there is some contraditions and mixed in the situation not only in Egypt it's in all muslim world , especialy when a religous did not practice his own religion as well .

it's like drinking ketchup with choclate milk .

for my opinion the egyptians should get the lesson from Algeria , if they did not the situation would be worst .

YES , craziest is worldwide , but it's shame when it's struck to religion by bad religous people .

 

[F0uad]

I'm not insinuating you don't think injustice should go unanswered -- I was explaining why I'm commenting on matters happening on the other side of the globe from me. The question was "why are you nosing about in others' business when there is bad business in your own back yard" and my answer was "because imaginary borders and distance are inconsequential to my level of caring for peoples' wellbeing."

You can't change the world by not starting with your own community.

The thing is that secularism is fair for everyone -- if 10% of a population is oppressed because 90% wants to oppress them, that's still tyranny and it's still unconscionable. It's an injustice for a government to do so even if it serves a majority to do so -- especially if there's an alternative wherein everybody wins and nobody loses.

I don't want to be offensive but this is the biggest crap i have ever heard in the last months, Secularism is fair yet you agreed that there is so much wrongs in these Secularist countries and then you mixed democracy with secularism what is totally illogical.

Saying "a majority doesn't want secularism" is about the same argument as "a majorty doesn't want to be just or fair to those different from them," which isn't much of an argument if the topic is justice, fairness, and equality.

So you want to force secularism on a majority.. real fair..

Of course this all depends on what's meant by "secular." Secularism is NOT the banishment of religion from the public square or the ability to freely practice religion (so long as it doesn't trample anyone else's rights) -- it's just the disentanglement of religion from governmental function: protecting the practice of religion for those who wish to practice it, and protecting those who practice different religions (or none at all) from being subject to religious taboos with the force of law. (i.e., I can't tell you not to worship as you see fit and you can't impose your religious taboos on me)

Secularism does lead to those actions examples America, Turkey and many more, again Egyptians are Muslims and not atheists if you have a country full of Atheists or non practicing people then sure go for a secular state. Denying Islam/Sharia when the majority has voted for it is undemocratic.. so take a pick.

Youseff had to pay bail to be released -- why was he arrested in the first place?

You are the OP have you not looked into it?

I'm not defending America's record on this. America has important laws in theory against habeas corpus, unwarranted search and seizures, innocence until proven guilty, etc. --

Not really i advice you to read the Patriot act.

but I'll agree with you that America has not lived up to these high ideals. Again, I'm not defending America as a beacon of justice, so pointing out America's shortcomings -- tu quoque argumentation -- isn't going to work here. I find America just as disgusting and unjust in practice as you probably do.

I don't care about America to be honest. The thing i get upset is that Americans are the only ones (that i know off) that like to point fingers at other nations/people and the rest of the world never does this when there country is doing worse.. Fix your problems then come back i hate hypocrites and double-standards.

 

[Meow Mix]

You can't change the world by not starting with your own community.

My girlfriend and I contribute to our community every week, politically and otherwise. We *are* working on changing the world.

I don't want to be offensive but this is the biggest crap i have ever heard in the last months, Secularism is fair yet you agreed that there is so much wrongs in these Secularist countries and then you mixed democracy with secularism what is totally illogical.

What does secularism have to do with the "wrongs" happening in secular countries? That doesn't make any sense at all. What are you talking about?

Secularism is by definition an absence of oppressing (with governmental power) the free expression of religion -- while also preventing religions from oppressing non-adherents.

So you want to force secularism on a majority.. real fair..

That doesn't make any sense. Secularism is just disallowing anyone from foisting their religion on anyone else, and disallowing anyone from preventing anyone from worshipping as they see fit. In other words, not using governmental power to enforce religion or anti-religion.

One might as well complain, "So you want to force non-oppression on a majority.. real fair.."

Secularism does lead to those actions examples America, Turkey and many more, again Egyptians are Muslims and not atheists if you have a country full of Atheists or non practicing people then sure go for a secular state. Denying Islam/Sharia when the majority has voted for it is undemocratic.. so take a pick.

How does the government NOT oppressing based on religion lead to "those actions?" What actions? I think you're confused about what secularism is, and about what it's culpable for.

If a majority voted that people with blonde hair have to ride at the back of the bus, is that fair? Of course not -- you're speaking like democracy IN ITSELF is a just system, but that's nonsense. Pure democracy is just two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner: it's not fundamentally just, it's merely mob rule. And mobs tend to be very unjust.

Justice comes from modes of government whereby the rights of the minority are protected even while the majority is served. NECESSARILY, such a government will be secular since it shouldn't allow religious or anti-religious oppression.

Of course, if a religion includes sacrificing children or otherwise infringing someone else's rights/consent, then a just society would still prohibit allowing that particular practice -- but that wouldn't be "anti-religious" by any reasonable stretch of the term.

You are the OP have you not looked into it?

I've certainly looked into it -- the question was a rhetorical. His arrest -- the reasons behind it -- were fundamentally unjust.

Not really i advice you to read the Patriot act.

I'm aware of it, please re-read my post where I mentioned that my country has high ideals, though has never been able to completely follow through with them. That includes a baffoonish administration abusing power to pass swill like the Patriot Act.

I don't care about America to be honest. The thing i get upset is that Americans are the only ones (that i know off) that like to point fingers at other nations/people and the rest of the world never does this when there country is doing worse.. Fix your problems then come back i hate hypocrites and double-standards.

Don't think of me as an American then, because I don't support my government's every action throughout history or currently. You can't call me a hypocrite just because I happened to have been born here. I could have been born in Nazi Germany and still point at what's going on in Egypt and say "this is fundamentally unjust." Your charge of hypocrisy doesn't hold any water.

Edit: For me to ACTUALLY be a hypocrite, I'd have to be arguing that America has done no wrong while still pointing elsewhere, or I'd have to be ignoring American's problems while pointing elsewhere. Neither is true. I *rail* against the problems going on in America not just in argument but with my girlfriend and a few other friends' sweat, time, effort, and money ALL the time.

So no, I'm not a hypocrite at all.

 

[Sahar]

So you want to force secularism on a majority.. real fair..


Secularism does lead to those actions examples America, Turkey and many more, again Egyptians are Muslims and not atheists if you have a country full of Atheists or non practicing people then sure go for a secular state. Denying Islam/Sharia when the majority has voted for it is undemocratic.. so take a pick.

Actually, Fouad, it doesn't matter what Egyptians think for their happiness and well being, as long as there are people thousands of miles away think that their non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!! It's fair after all!!

 

[Debater Slayer]

Actually, Fouad, it doesn't matter what Egyptians think for their happiness and well being, as long as there are people thousands of miles away think that their non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!! It's fair after all!!

I don't think that not being from a given country or countries necessarily means that one can't criticize perceived injustices occurring there.

Take Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and/or Myanmar as examples: millions of people discuss what's happening there and strongly condemn the atrocities being constantly committed against people in those places. I'm not from any of those countries, nor do I have family or friends there; I only criticize what's happening there because I view it as profoundly unjust and abusive.

So, when someone from a different country criticizes mine--or when I criticize theirs--I don't see it as trying to force their views on me. They have a right to criticize what they perceive to be injustices outside their country, just as I have a right to criticize their country if I think it supports unjust or abusive policies.

As for the majority argument, I agree that most Egyptians do seem to support the Muslim Brotherhood (so far, anyway), but that doesn't mean that the Muslim Brotherhood is necessarily just or fair; what the majority support can be totalitarian, oppressive, or otherwise unfair.

I'm not necessarily saying that most Egyptians support any of that, by the way. I'm just trying to point out that criticism coming from outside isn't always illegitimate or unjustified and that the majority opinion isn't always fair or justified.

 

[Sahar]

I was not speaking about the Muslim Brotherhood but about the idea of preferring an Islamic rule over a secular one and respecting the people's choice. It's obvious that the majority of Egyptians don't prefer the latter form of governance. It's indeed frustrating when someone have no knowledge about my country or our problems and tell me, Egyptians' choice doesn't matter because they are not in accordance with his world view. It seems we should resort to a minority rule when this minority calls for secularism and somehow this will be fair. :sarcastic
Now I don't go around telling Americans or Europeans that you should favor the form of government that I see fair over what they do already see fair. However, I do criticize secularism and will do. There is a difference between criticism and on the other hand disregarding different societies' choices and dictating my world view over them. I have no problem whatsoever with criticizing Islam, its values or laws but I have a problem when an American tell me my people's choice doesn't matter because it wasn't for secularism.

Also, I am not sure if most Egyptians support MB, given the current affairs, their errors and the strong propaganda against them. But my last post wasn't about MB specifically.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I was not speaking about the Muslim Brotherhood but about the idea of preferring an Islamic rule over a secular one and respecting the people's choice. It's obvious that the majority of Egyptians don't prefer the latter form of governance. It's indeed frustrating when someone have no knowledge about my country or our problems and tell me, Egyptians' choice doesn't matter because they are not in accordance with his world view. It seems we should resort to a minority rule when this minority calls for secularism and somehow this will be fair. :sarcastic
Now I don't go around telling Americans or Europeans that you should favor the form of government that I see fair over what they do already see fair. However, I do criticize secularism and will do. There is a difference between criticism and on the other hand disregarding different societies' choices and dictating my world view over them. I have no problem whatsoever with criticizing Islam, its values or laws but I have a problem when an American tell me my people's choice doesn't matter because it wasn't for secularism.

Also, I am not sure if most Egyptians support MB, given the current affairs, their errors and the strong propaganda against them. But my last post wasn't about MB specifically.

Without actually doing anything to force a specific worldview on other people, then I don't think supporting X or Y worldview is dictatorship. If a country invades another to establish a certain form of governance against the majority's choice, for example, then that would be dictatorship and a complete disregard for what the people want. However, merely stating that X worldview is better than Y worldview and explaining why one believes so doesn't necessitate any of that; people do it all the time without trying to impose their beliefs on others.

And (in my opinion) what the people want matters in the sense that it gives an overall idea of their values and beliefs as well as what to expect from them in elections, etc. However, it does not have any bearing on their choice's fairness, justifiability, or justice. Majorities have oppressed minorities in many countries throughout history, and a minority seeking recognition and basic human rights (as is the case in Myanmar, for example) doesn't mean that they are trying to force their views on the majority.

I was pointing to the Muslim Brotherhood as one example of a party that the majority supported but who aren't necessarily competent or fair. I believe the way they've been handling things has turned many people against them, but like you said, there's also a lot of propaganda against them that contains false information to try to turn people away from supporting the MB (which seems to have worked on some people, too).

 

[Sahar]

And (in my opinion) what the people want matters in the sense that it gives an overall idea of their values and beliefs as well as what to expect from them in elections, etc. However, it does not have any bearing on their choice's fairness, justifiability, or justice. Majorities have oppressed minorities in many countries throughout history, and a minority seeking recognition and basic human rights (as is the case in Myanmar, for example) doesn't mean that they are trying to force their views on the majority.

As I said I have no problem with anyone expressing their disapproval of Islam or any Islamic government. I don't disagree that a majority can oppress minorities.
That's why I believe in Islam that prevents injustice to anyone living under its rule!

Without actually doing anything to force a specific worldview on other people, then I don't think supporting X or Y worldview is dictatorship. If a country invades another to establish a certain form of governance against the majority's choice, for example, then that would be dictatorship and a complete disregard for what the people want. However, merely stating that X worldview is better than Y worldview and explaining why one believes so doesn't necessitate any of that; people do it all the time without trying to impose their beliefs on others.

Oh yes the US didn't invade other countries or doesn't support dictator corrupt rules. So much to speak about the secular democratic America. Maybe this is the problem? I can't separate what MM says from the US interference in our affairs? From the fact that the US is spreading injustice all over the world? Maybe...

 

[Debater Slayer]

As I said I have no problem with anyone expressing their disapproval of Islam or any Islamic government. I don't disagree that a majority can oppress minorities.
That's why I believe in Islam that prevents injustice to anyone living under its rule!

Fair enough. I suspect that our views of what is "just" may be different, but we seem to agree on the core idea that a majority opinion doesn't necessarily constitute justice.

Oh yes the US didn't invade other countries or doesn't support dictator corrupt rules. So much to speak about the secular democratic America. Maybe this is the problem? I can't separate what MM says from the US interference in our affairs? From the fact that the US is spreading injustice all over the world? Maybe...

I won't speak for anyone else, but I think that judging individuals in general based on the actions of their countries' governments may be unfair in many cases, especially since not all individuals in any given country support what their government does.

And I'm saying this as a person who disapproves of most things that the majority approves of in his home country. Were I to be judged based on what the Egyptian government does or what most Egyptians support, many incorrect conclusions would be drawn about my views. That's one of the reasons I strongly believe that people should mostly be looked at as individuals and not as large groups who all agree with each other.

 

[Sahar]

I won't speak for anyone else, but I think that judging individuals in general based on the actions of their countries' governments may be unfair in many cases, especially since not all individuals in any given country support what their government does.

You are right. Maybe Meow Mix is against forcing secularism on Egyptians and I couldn't see that.

 

[England my lionheart]

Actually, Fouad, it doesn't matter what Egyptians think for their happiness and well being, as long as there are people thousands of miles away think that their non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!! It's fair after all!!

It has nothing to do with "non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!!",its more witnessing a Card sharp blatantly cheating and getting called out for doing so,the brotherhood had a great opportunity and they blew it.

 

[Meow Mix]

You are right. Maybe Meow Mix is against forcing secularism on Egyptians and I couldn't see that.

I'm at work and won't be able to respond to the other posts in more detail until later, but correct -- I don't advocate forcing secularism on Egyptians or anybody; though I do hope to be able to convince people through reasoned argument that secularism is the most just system for a mixed body of citizens (which any country will have)!

I should have maybe been more clear that (while I do believe secularism is superior) given the power somehow to force it on the world, I would not press the button!

 

[Meow Mix]

Actually, Fouad, it doesn't matter what Egyptians think for their happiness and well being, as long as there are people thousands of miles away think that their non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!! It's fair after all!!

This doesn't address any of the actual points made about what secularism is though.

Is saying "Hey this country shouldn't discriminate against non-brunette people" the same as "shoving hair color equality down people's throats?"

How does one "shove" the OPPOSITE of oppression?

Maybe this would help: if advocating secularism is "shoving," can you describe what exactly is being shoved -- what negative consequences for practicing Islam for Muslims would there be?

I think you are speaking about a different sort of "secularism" than I am, or something. To clarify again, when I talk about secularism, I'm merely talking about the separation of religion from government such that nobody's religion (or their religious taboos) can be forced on anyone else, and nobody can prevent anyone else from worshipping as they see fit -- not with the force of law.

Saying something like, "Taking away my ability to foist my religious taboos on other people is oppressive!" doesn't really work. (Not that I'm saying this is what you're saying, but this is why I'm confused about your rejection of secularism)

 

[Meow Mix]

As I said I have no problem with anyone expressing their disapproval of Islam or any Islamic government. I don't disagree that a majority can oppress minorities.
That's why I believe in Islam that prevents injustice to anyone living under its rule!

Do you believe I wouldn't face any injustice if I were to live under its rule -- with my desire to marry my girlfriend as my lover and life partner (for equal treatment under the law as heterosexual couples), as a bacon lover, casual alcohol imbiber, open critic of prophets and religions? That I feel entitled to counting as a full witness, that I prefer forensic science to having four witnesses were I ever to be raped, that I'd also prefer to have equitable inheritance rights as any hypothetical brothers?

I worked my way through my undergraduate studies without any debt by stripping -- and I quite enjoy dressing immodestly occasionally.

Would I really have just treatment under an Islamic government? Simply saying "Yes because that stuff is sinful" isn't really a good argument, I wouldn't say -- not saying that's what you'd do, just pre-empting it.

Oh yes the US didn't invade other countries or doesn't support dictator corrupt rules. So much to speak about the secular democratic America. Maybe this is the problem? I can't separate what MM says from the US interference in our affairs? From the fact that the US is spreading injustice all over the world? Maybe...

I am not the US and don't support the US's actions, as DS has pointed out. I do not understand this notion of judging an individual by their host country's actions.

 

[Sahar]

This doesn't address any of the actual points made about what secularism is though.

Is saying "Hey this country shouldn't discriminate against non-brunette people" the same as "shoving hair color equality down people's throats?"

How does one "shove" the OPPOSITE of oppression?

Maybe this would help: if advocating secularism is "shoving," can you describe what exactly is being shoved -- what negative consequences for practicing Islam for Muslims would there be?

I think you are speaking about a different sort of "secularism" than I am, or something. To clarify again, when I talk about secularism, I'm merely talking about the separation of religion from government such that nobody's religion (or their religious taboos) can be forced on anyone else, and nobody can prevent anyone else from worshipping as they see fit -- not with the force of law.

Saying something like, "Taking away my ability to foist my religious taboos on other people is oppressive!" doesn't really work. (Not that I'm saying this is what you're saying, but this is why I'm confused about your rejection of secularism)

Hey, if you and some Egyptians want to advocate secularism and convince the rest of Egyptians with secularism, you are free...but I am warning you these trials have showed miserable failures until now.

Are you actually saying that secularism prevent regimes from oppressing people?
When the US was the home of racism against the black, the regime wasn't secular? The Nazi regime wasn't secular?
Or when Muslims were oppressed in the Balkans under the communist governments, they were not secular?

Why to go far away, here in Egypt, all these years under oppression, the regime wasn't secular?

Just because religion was dropped out of the equation, oppression would magically stop?!! :sarcastic Actually, history is full of horrible injustices and massacres that were committed as an outcome of and under secularism.

The problem is I have expressed what I think and the Islamic stance about the issue of secularism numerous times on the forum, and I did it with you before and I feel like I am repeating myself.

But I just wanted to emphasize that Egyptians shall see their thoughts about their well being manifested on the ground some day (I guess this doesn't include taking off their clothes and walking naked or semi-naked or conducting some indecent behavior in public, selling their bodies and dignity for money...it could be their sense of justice and injustice involves less trivial and luxurious issues) and hopefully they will manage to resist any foreign interference in their affairs.

 

[Sahar]

It has nothing to do with "non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!!",its more witnessing a Card sharp blatantly cheating and getting called out for doing so,the brotherhood had a great opportunity and they blew it.

I think any objective close observer of the Egyptian scene, can see that Morsi and his group are having a furious fight against anti-revolutionary forces which aim to destabilize the country so that they can blame MB for this. They are using the judiciary, media and thugs to spread chaos through out the country, counter any move, any decision, any change made by Morsi just to see him failing.
This doesn't mean that MB are without mistakes but fact that any revolution must face frantic opposition, should be taken into consideration, and if we were moving smoothly, then we must know that something went wrong.
The MB have been in rule for how long? 9 months? 10 months? I don't think that any sane person should judge them based on this short period given the current circumstances and that we are recovering from a regime change.

 

[Meow Mix]

Hey, if you and some Egyptians want to advocate secularism and convince the rest of Egyptians with secularism, you are free...but I am warning you these trials have showed miserable failures until now.

Are you actually saying that secularism prevent regimes from oppressing people?
When the US was the home of racism against the black, the regime wasn't secular? The Nazi regime wasn't secular?
Or when Muslims were oppressed in the Balkans under the communist governments, they were not secular?

No, I've never said or even insinuated that secularism prevents all oppression -- I've said that necessarily, a non-oppressive government will happen to be secular.

Separating religion from government doesn't magically form a government that doesn't oppress or commit atrocities -- I've never, ever implied that.

What it does do is eliminate one form of oppression: religious oppression of minorities, and oppression of religious expression. Secularism grants citizens the freedom to worship as they wish and prevents them from oppressing others based on their own religious taboos that others might not share, that's all.

Of course there will be secular governments that still engage in other forms of oppression. It's not a cure-all, it's just an aspect of justice.

Think of secularism as another term for "policy against religious repression and oppression." Well, many governments have policies against citizens murdering one another, let's call that amurderism. I can then make the same error by saying "Look at x country, it adopted amurderism yet still oppressed y people!"

But that would be silly: amurderism isn't a cure-all, it's just one aspect of a just government: and so is secularism. You can't point at secular countries that have done awful things and count it as evidence that secularism is itself unjust, it just doesn't make any sense.

Secularism itself is just. That some secular countries have perpetrated atrocities is incidental and unrelated to secularism as a just governmental practice.

Why to go far away, here in Egypt, all these years under oppression, the regime wasn't secular?

Just because religion was dropped out of the equation, oppression would magically stop?!! :sarcastic Actually, history is full of horrible injustices and massacres that were committed as an outcome of and under secularism.

The problem is I have expressed what I think and the Islamic stance about the issue of secularism numerous times on the forum, and I did it with you before and I feel like I am repeating myself.

But I just wanted to emphasize that Egyptians shall see their thoughts about their well being manifested on the ground some day (I guess this doesn't include taking off their clothes and walking naked or semi-naked or conducting some indecent behavior in public, selling their bodies and dignity for money...it could be their sense of justice and injustice involves less trivial and luxurious issues) and hopefully they will manage to resist any foreign interference in their affairs.

I'm not advocating any sort of foreign interference. I'm advocating fairness, like I do for my own troubled country. A country that foists religious taboos on non-practicioners of said religion is fundamentally unfair even if that's what the majority wants: that's just mob rule, just two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner.

Democracy alone is not enough -- having a majority rather than a totalitarian dictator is indeed nice, but it's still just mob rule. The justice, fairness, and equality comes from more philosophical considerations: and secularism is an extremely important one -- otherwise you end up with horrific injustices like a country that only recognizes and protects whatever it defines as "the divine religions."

With secularism, everybody wins: everybody gets to worship the way they see fit and nobody gets to tell anyone else that they can't. Nobody has to spend their money to support religions they don't agree with, etc. Muslims are free to observe Islamic rules for themselves but prohibited from forcing it on others for instance -- and in turn, no one is able to tell them they can't worship and follow whatever rules they please so long as they step on nobody else's rights in doing so.

(This is why I also oppose minaret and burqa bans: such bans are NOT secularist in nature, they are anti-religious; and secularism is NOT anti-religious. Secularism protects religious worship!)

 

[dust1n]

Oh given the oppressive history of Turkey's secularization

What's Turkey's oppressive history of secularization?

People live in bad conditions because "religion is codified as law"!

It really doesn't help when people can't reserve the right to complain about their society.

You forgot to mention the fact that most of who were killed in that battle of the presidential palace were Muslim Brotherhood members...if the secularists are ready to use thugs to kill their opponents, what would happen if they were in rule?! Oh, right they used to imprison and kill them...the Egyptian regime that Egyptians revolted against was secular!! Strange, huh!!

I forgot to mention it, because it wasn't in my source that I just provided. It fact, my source says nothing about it. So, I can only go by information given to me, or found on my own.

 

[dust1n]

To be fair, on that violent day, indeed MB supporters did beat and torture people, which is condemned but also the opponent (with their thugs) did the same and worse; murdered 10 people with guns and rifles, 8 of them were Muslim Brotherhood members.
PHOTO GALLERY: President Morsi supporters mourn 'members' killed at palace clashes - Multimedia - Ahram Online

It may be a shock to ya, but I'm aware both sides have perpetuated violence.

 

[dust1n]

Actually, Fouad, it doesn't matter what Egyptians think for their happiness and well being, as long as there are people thousands of miles away think that their non religiousness and secularism should be shoved down Egyptians' throats!! It's fair after all!!

Having an opinion is equivalent to shoving things down Egyptians' throats now, I guess.