Briton Charged With Insulting Islam in Sudan Over Teddy Bear

It could be. South park is the most politically accurate show on television. If Matt Stone and Trey Parker ran for president I would vote them both into office.

 

exactly. The bible/koran was not written to be used as a tool to govern others. It was written to guide others in a way of life that is fair and equal so that people are not mistreated and that everyone can get along with everyone else. Alas these books are being abused.

 

Yeah my Father studied the Qur'an, and he is really pissed off with the current situation of it.

 

yeah, turning flower and rice into bullets and grenades.... great idea.

 

I knew I had read it before! I humbly forward the credit on to you, good sir.

-monkey

 

The outcome is only as good as the process by which it is achieved. If we go in guns-a-blazing, inevitably killing many civilians in the process, we can't very well condemn other countries for being the bad guys, can we?

Somebody did help this woman. Muslims from the UK, and if I understand correctly, Sudan, voiced support for her. Successful diplomatic negotiations managed to get her out of prison and on her way back home.

Where we go from here is very important, and will undoubtedly add or subtract from the world's view of the west.

(sorry for the double post)

-monkey

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7120263.stm

15 days, thats just stupid.

 

That's not how it works. Therapists know the important distinction between 'rescuing' someone, and helping someone help themselves. You can't rescue people. You inevitably impose your own values on them by force. It's what happened in Iraq, and you see how that worked out. Moreover, every party there has their own interpretation of the sort of 'freedom' that the people of Iraq should be enjoying, so all you do is facilitate more conflict.

In the end, you can only help people help themselves. You can give ordinary people prosperity by (fair) trade, which in turn allows them to develop health and education. People who are relatively healthy and prosperous are not preoccupied by mere survival and have time to acquire education and think about relative luxuries as who they'd like to see in government. They are less likely to follow fundamentalist demagogues because they're illiterate and dirt poor and bitter, and easily suckered by promises of how things will be better if only they get rid of the scapegoats.

At least, that's what the US and UK governments say when they suck up to China.

No, but history has shown us that any regime change has to come from the people. Governments have guns but they can't kill every citizen out there. If people decide to overthrow the government en masse they can easily do it. Moreover it is the only way they can do it. It is a matter of ownership.

The debate is similar as to that about gun control. If you make guns freely available to the public, the people most inclined to use them are just the kind of people you don't want to do so. If you send guns into Sudan, they will not fall in the hands of poor oppressed farmers, but in the hands of militarised factions whose leaders have their own ambitions to become the next demagogue.

As supermonkey says:

We put Saddam in power. We had to have someone to fight the Iranian fundamentalists, which, incidentally, only acquired power after the dictator we put in power there was overthrown. Before our intervention in 1953, Iran was a Westernalised democracy.

Let's dwell on this logic: through subsidising Saddam we subsidised one of the most bloody wars in Middle East history, presumably to 'free' the Iranians from their oppressive fundamentalist government. Guess that didn't work, then: we ended up with another bothersome dictator in Iraq, a whole lot of dead Iraqi and Iranian civilians, and a fundamentalist government in Iran that managed to consolidate itself further through the Iranian people's hatred for us.

And then we wonder why they're all so pissed with us in the Middle East.

There is such a thing as self-serving attribution bias: everyone will interpret information to fit how they want to see things. It's human nature. Christians and atheists do it too. Everybody does.

You have to understand that there is not much the UK government can do, except withdraw aid funds and trade. And they're not going to do that, lest they lose economic grip on a country that is the next major supplier of oil.

Again, as supermonkey pointed out:

 

Yeah I know that, but the way they are doing it with the Qur'an is in a different league here, they are changing the Qur'an so differently, that in a few years it won't be original at all, they change every phrase so that they can do what they like, when it states a common sense rule, they will change it so that they can do basically anything and call it "In the name of Religon".

 

Same thing happened with the Bible. Islam is simply 700 years behind on Christianity.

 

**** Muhammad? **** all religious "beings" imo tbh.

I'm not anti-Islamic, I hate all religions.

 

Such passionate dislike is almost... a belief.

 

I wish common sense was a religion.

 

There's reports on CNN this morning of armed protests going on in Sudan, calling for Gillian Gibbon's death. Apparently there are those who think the sentence of fifteen days didn't go far enough. However, the Sudanese government is supposed to be expediting deportation proceedings. I wouldn't doubt they believe it's best for her own safety.

Pathetic. At least various more sane Muslim leaders in Britain and elsewhere are condemning the decision.

 

common sense isn't common. Think of some one who has a average intellect. now realise that half the population is dumber then that.

 

Sorry for side tracking the thread, but would be funny if someone incorporated a mod into Unreal 3, so that when the announcer says "God like" a little teddy bear appears. Ok back to discussion.

 

Yes, because the world would be a much better place with no religion but people with views like that .

<A88>

 

I disagree. A passionate belief that all religion is rubbish, and should be purged from our society, could stem from perfectly rational, logical, and realistic values.

 

I wonder how long before Allah dissociates herself from Islam.

ninja edit: for dramatic effect.

 

It may be based on logic and rationale, but that does not make it fact. It is still an assumption, a belief.

And passion implies emotion. Note that Duste used the word "hate". We are firmly in the land of fundamentalist belief here: "All religion is wrong", etc. Stalinist Russia and Maoist China tried that approach: didn't work out too well for them.

Perhaps we should get rid of science too. Think of all the evil that produced: WMD, eugenics...