Saudi Arabia calls for worldwide ban on criticism of religion
62 replies, posted
saudi arabia is just as ass backwards as any other middle eastern country. they're only not super wartorn like the rest because they're on an ocean of crude oil.
i hate how they (and other countries) make all muslims seem like stone-age pricks who can't take a joke. indonesian muslims are not only cool people on the whole, but they're actually functional in a civilized environment. not all of them, of course, but i became friends with a good amount of indonesians around my age back in high school and we've all been good friends since. and i'm a gender non-conforming super gay conservative atheist. they all know that, but their consensus is "to love god, you must love his creations (humans, and to them, all they create by association)". that's the kind of islam that civilized countries with it teach.
tbh if i had to live in an middle/upper class, really religious community and could choose what religion they followed, i'd choose by-the-book islam because it's nothing like what the middle east, pricks in the UK and scandinavia, and dirty chechens would have you believe.
like christianity and westboro baptist, this is another case of the insane minority yelling the loudest and being the most "newsworthy", so they get the most attention.
[QUOTE=Fayez;48359758]They were invading armies, of course they resulted in large amounts of death. If Muslims and Christians have skeletons in their closets for the invasions and wars conducted by them, than Atheists have skeletons in their closets for the massacres conducted by the USSR.[/quote]
No they don't? An atheist by definition means they lack a religion. An atheist is somebody who simply lacks belief in any kind of god, which in turn means that there is nothing they are obligated to follow at all. The USSR persecuting religions does not reflect anything at all on atheists.
[quote]The reason why those religions suffered under Muslim rule was because due to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya"]Jizya[/URL] which made many people convert to avoid it.[/QUOTE]
Jizya isn't the only problem. There have been far too many instances of persecution under Muslim rule for Abdulmajeed Al-Omari to say what he said without appearing a hypocrite.
[QUOTE=Explosions;48358815]You might be surprised by just how many Western progressives would actually support something like this.[/QUOTE]
I'm not, a lot literally seem to be Islam apologists, I get that from Faisal Saeed Al Mutar, who has spoken a lot on that subject. I don't get it about some progressives, who in their right mind can support gay rights in our country, but support the killing of them in others? That is the truth too, they say we need to respect their culture, etc.
[QUOTE=Fayez;48359758]They were invading armies, of course they resulted in large amounts of death. If Muslims and Christians have skeletons in their closets for the invasions and wars conducted by them, than Atheists have skeletons in their closets for the massacres conducted by the USSR.
The reason why those religions suffered under Muslim rule was because due to [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jizya"]Jizya[/URL] which made many people convert to avoid it.[/QUOTE]
How do atheists have any of those skeletons in their closets?
Atheism lacks any form of organized dogma that completely fucking invalidates your judgement here
[QUOTE=Sobotnik;48359798]No they don't? An atheist by definition means they lack a religion. An atheist is somebody who simply lacks belief in any kind of god, which in turn means that there is nothing they are obligated to follow at all. The USSR persecuting religions does not reflect anything at all on atheists.[/QUOTE]
Then why should the deaths caused by invasions conducted by Muslims and Christians reflect badly on current Muslims and Christians when they had nothing to do with it?
[QUOTE]
Jizya isn't the only problem. There have been far too many instances of persecution under Muslim rule for Abdulmajeed Al-Omari to say what he said without appearing a hypocrite.[/QUOTE]
I think this guy is a fuckhead, and I'm not going to argue that never been persecution of other faiths under Muslim rule. It's happened many times. I'm saying that while under Muslim rule, Zoroastrianism and Buddhism mainly suffered due to the Jizya, not due to persecution.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;48359773]The Quran basically tells people to fight unbelievers until they are converted. My knowledge of the Quran is very shallow and maybe there's a second meaning to this, but there's two or three instances that I see people quoting often.
[URL]http://quran.com/8/39[/URL]
[URL]http://quran.com/9/29[/URL]
To be fair, destroying the local culture and religion is pretty much what most empires did back then.[/QUOTE]
The first quote basically says that during times of war during non-Muslims, fight them until they are converted or gone, but to leave them be if they surrender.
The second one says to fight those who refuse to pay the Jizya until they are either converted or accept to pay the Jizya.
[QUOTE=Saber15;48359759]Beyond what Sobotnik said, Muhammad also destroyed all the other idols in Mecca when he occupied the city, though I am not sure if the actual followers of the religions were persecuted.[/QUOTE]
The Prophet destroyed the pagan idols in Mecca because they were the idols of the various tribes that he was fighting.
[QUOTE=Fayez;48359895]I think this guy is a fuckhead, and I'm not going to argue that never been persecution of other faiths under Muslim rule. It's happened many times. I'm saying that while under Muslim rule, Zoroastrianism and Buddhism mainly suffered due to the Jizya, not due to persecution.[/QUOTE]
Not, what you did was ask about sources on the Islam persecution of religions in lands they conquered. You're basically admiting that you didn't have a point back then.
No one will care about what these guys have to say in ~30 years time. Once the Saudi Oil Reserves run out I can guarantee the rest of the world will trip over themselves cutting and running from that nightmare of a country.
[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;48358173]Freedom of speech does not exist to protect their feelings nor is there a right not to be offended.
They can take their stone age "if it offends me i want it banned" mentality and go home.[/QUOTE]
Not to be nitpicky but the stone age mentality is "If it offends me* I will smash it".
Banning things is so late bronze age at the earliest.
*or if it looks threatening, if I'm hungry, or bored, shit I'll probably just smash it anyway.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;48360002]Not, what you did was ask about sources on the Islam persecution of religions in lands they conquered. You're basically admiting that you didn't have a point back then.[/QUOTE]
I said I wanted specific examples of Muslims "destroying the fuck" out of any of the religions they conquered. There are many Churches and Buddhist Temples that were built before Islam was created, and, despite being under Muslim rule for centuries, still stand today.
[QUOTE=Saber15;48359759]Beyond what Sobotnik said, Muhammad also destroyed all the other idols in Mecca when he occupied the city, though I am not sure if the actual followers of the religions were persecuted.[/QUOTE]
Yeah? And the Christians butchered Muslims from the Reconquista all the way up to the 1400's mostly because they weren't Christians. You know who the leader was who demonstrated an act of humility by letting the losing side be able to send merchants and pilgrims? Sultan Saladin. And yet the Christians still launched the 4th Crusade years later (which didn't make it to to the "holy land" but that's another long history lesson). The Muslims also spared all women, children and anyone who wanted to flee during the People's crusade. The Christian armies slaughtered people without any real thought to it. Shit even Jews [I]in Western Europe[/I] were attacked and slaughtered on multiple accounts by crusader armies who were heading out to join the Crusade.
We can cherry pick history [I]all[/I] night long and I can assure you I can find many more violent acts coming from Christians than you can Muslims. It's not the religion that's the problem it's us damn pesky Humans and our primitive xenophobic tendencies that probably stem from years of evolution as stone age ass bitches when anything that wasn't us was probably an actual danger and would probably kill us if it had a decent chance to. Being able to solve problems diplomatically is pretty new to us considering the fact that for a large part of history the main method of solving conflict was to simply kill and/or enslave anyone that opposed you.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360253]Yeah? And the Christians butchered Muslims from the Reconquista all the way up to the 1400's mostly because they weren't Christians. You know who the leader was who demonstrated an act of humility by letting the losing side be able to send merchants and pilgrims? Sultan Saladin. And yet the Christians still launched the 4th Crusade years later (which didn't make it to to the "holy land" but that's another long history lesson). The Muslims also spared all women, children and anyone who wanted to flee during the People's crusade. The Christian armies slaughtered people without any real thought to it. Shit even Jews [I]in Western Europe[/I] were attacked and slaughtered on multiple accounts by crusader armies who were heading out to join the Crusade.
We can cherry pick history [I]all[/I] night long and I can assure you I can find many more violent acts coming from Christians than you can Muslims. It's not the religion that's the problem it's us damn pesky Humans and our primitive xenophobic tendencies that probably stem from years of evolution as stone age ass bitches when anything that wasn't us was probably an actual danger and would probably kill us if it had a decent chance to. Being able to solve problems diplomatically is pretty new to us considering the fact that for a large part of history the main method of solving conflict was to simply kill and/or enslave anyone that opposed you.[/QUOTE]
The difference is that there's no one defending Christians crimes.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;48360311]The difference is that there's no one defending Christians crimes.[/QUOTE]
Uhh yeah there are. I don't know what rock you live under but okay. There are plenty of people who say the Crusades and other Christian crimes aren't real crimes because "Christianity is too broad a group to be held liable for what members of it did in the past." etc.. "MY religion didn't do that because I'm not Catholic Christian. " etc..
There are a lot of Christians who defend crimes against Muslims and lots of Non-Christians do as well. It happens even here on FP. Just because you choose to not hear it doesn't mean they're not screaming.
[I]The difference[/I] is that Muslims are currently being generalized to all be savage baby-killing, freedom hating terrorists, so of course you're going to see more people defending them, because the majority of discussion of that nature is fucking Christians and assholes saying ignorant shit like "just glass all them damn towel head sand niggers! Let God sort em out with their 72 virgins Hyuck Hyuck.".
And I think all religious crimes shine badly on all people of the world. There are more than we can count.
But it seems to be a Muslim nation seeking to censor my criticism of religion
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;48360311]The difference is that there's no one defending Christians crimes.[/QUOTE]
Why would they need to? The vast majority of the world is Christian, they can just brush over them like nothing happened. Just say 'What a tragedy' and leave it there.
Besides, I [I]have[/I] seen people defend Christians' crimes. Did you not see the Irish Troubles? You'll [I]still[/I] find people who say the IRA were right to blow up cars and murder civilians. Are you honestly saying that there are no Christians who defend terrorism committed by Christians in the past or present? So none of these backwards, disgusting African countries who punish being gay with execution and reward corruption exist (since they're the ones [I]committing[/I] the crimes)? Remember that Christianity is the most widespread religion in the world. Remember that almost all of the world's Muslims are packed into a very small part of the world.
Are you [B]really[/B] saying no Christians defend Christian crimes?
[editline]3rd August 2015[/editline]
And obviously, no Christians have [I]ever[/I] called for criticism of their religion to be banned.
[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;48360362]
But it seems to be a Muslim nation seeking to censor my criticism of religion[/QUOTE]
The Pope also said we shouldn't criticize religion, and so have many governors and senators in the past (some of which tried to ban atheism and other various things). You going to burn them at the stake too? Or does that not fit your agenda properly?
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;48360368]
And obviously, no Christians have [I]ever[/I] called for criticism of their religion to be banned.[/QUOTE]
Exactly.
Especially during the catholic reform period and emergence of other sects of Christianity. I also distinctly remember there never being any country primarily founded because people were trying to escape religious persecution in Christian countries. I just can't wonder where we get these strange ideas.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360378]The Pope also said we shouldn't criticize religion, and so have many governors and senators in the past. You going to burn them at the stake too? Or does that not fit your agenda properly?[/QUOTE]
I don't want to burn anyone at the stake.
Yes I also hold them accountable for that. It should be noted that saying "you shouldn't do this" isn't the same as trying to ban it. But hey, what do I know?
Keep your assumption driven hate boner raging.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360378]The Pope also said we shouldn't criticize religion, and so have many governors and senators in the past (some of which tried to ban atheism and other various things). You going to burn them at the stake too? Or does that not fit your agenda properly?
[/QUOTE]
There's a difference from the pope saying
"It's normal, it's normal. One cannot provoke, one cannot insult other people's faith, one cannot make fun of faith."*
(which is wrong in it's own right, I can damn well make fun of what I want, the concept that any idea is up to criticism is a cornerstone of enlightenment) and isn't anything near
"This requires everyone to intensify efforts to [B]criminalize[/B] insulting heavenly religions, prophets, holy books, religious symbols and places of worship."
Abdulmajeed Al-Omari is asking for what is basically censorship of criticism and comedy, this is inexcusable in any modernized free nation. Words do not hurt people, people hurt people, I cannot hurt Christianity's feelings by insulting it.
*This is it's whole issue, where the pope is saying things like "If Dr. Gasbarri, a great friend, says a swear word against my mother, then a punch awaits him," In my eyes that means he thinks the attack on Charlie Hebdo is justified, since if you insult Religion, you get what's comin'.
[QUOTE=draugur;48360335]
There are a lot of Christians who defend crimes against Muslims and lots of Non-Christians do as well. It happens even here on FP. Just because you choose to not hear it doesn't mean they're not screaming.
[/QUOTE]
Are you one of those people who declares the crusades were a European aggression on the middle east and that the Islamic hordes committing jihad did nothing to prompt the crusades? lol..
Saudi Arabia is one if not the main advocate of Islam in the world today. How can such intolerance be allowed in the world? Religion has no place in politics and should remain a personal thing that should be practiced inside the home. Banning criticism of a religion is some real darkage shit. What separates Atheists and muslims\christians is Atheists can see how flawed their religions are. This is an attack on freedom of speech and Atheism as a whole.
[QUOTE=Fayez;48359895]Then why should the deaths caused by invasions conducted by Muslims and Christians reflect badly on current Muslims and Christians when they had nothing to do with it?[/quote]
I'm not saying that. I'm saying it reflects badly on the religion if conversions were done through awful means. People rightly criticize Christians for murdering pagans and forcing them to convert for instance, or Muslims for murdering pagans and forcing them to convert.
Atheists have nothing to be worried about because atheism itself is a lack of belief or ideology. By definition it cannot cause anything good or bad because it is a lack of something.
[quote]I think this guy is a fuckhead, and I'm not going to argue that never been persecution of other faiths under Muslim rule. It's happened many times. I'm saying that while under Muslim rule, Zoroastrianism and Buddhism mainly suffered due to the Jizya, not due to persecution.[/quote]
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Zoroastrians[/url]
Stop pretending history hasn't happened.
[editline]3rd August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Fayez;48360129]I said I wanted specific examples of Muslims "destroying the fuck" out of any of the religions they conquered. There are many Churches and Buddhist Temples that were built before Islam was created, and, despite being under Muslim rule for centuries, still stand today.[/QUOTE]
[url]http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Worship_Places_Converted_or_Destroyed_by_Muslims[/url]
If your religion is being criticized, why not take it and improve it?
[QUOTE=draugur;48360335]Uhh yeah there are. I don't know what rock you live under but okay. There are plenty of people who say the Crusades and other Christian crimes aren't real crimes because "Christianity is too broad a group to be held liable for what members of it did in the past." etc.. "MY religion didn't do that because I'm not Catholic Christian. " etc..[/QUOTE]
The Catholic Church was a state, not just a religion. I don't think the Islam was ever a state(before DAESH at least). It's different.
Also you seem to forget that before the crusades, the muslim launched a series of military campaigns of their own. I'm not saying they're innocent, but they weren't fighting innocent people either.
[QUOTE=Jamsponge;48360368]
Are you [B]really[/B] saying no Christians defend Christian crimes?
[/QUOTE]
No, the difference is there's a moviment right now that defends everything the muslims do, and if you're against what they do you're a islamophobic, just like there's also a moviment that wants to paint the muslims as baby-eating monsters.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;48362324]If your religion is being criticized, why not take it and improve it?[/QUOTE]
Because it's easier not to.
[QUOTE=itisjuly;48362324]If your religion is being criticized, why not take it and improve it?[/QUOTE]
By even saying that you're offending many people, lots of Muslims included.
[QUOTE=Ragekipz;48362354]The Catholic Church was a state, not just a religion. I don't think the Islam was ever a state(before DAESH at least). It's different.
Because it's easier not to.[/QUOTE]
I guess you have never heard of Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc which are all Islamic States.
[url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_state[/url]
We're past this line of thinking, Saudi Arabia. Grow up! Or do you want us to respond in our own version of immaturity with several thousand drawings of Mohammads?
If you believe in something utterly stupid, prepare to be criticized.
Christianity and Islam are certainly not innocent, you'd be ignorant to think that. But, one of those religions has changed and the other remains stuck in the medieval ages.
Trying to wave your dick around Saudi Arabia.
Cant want to see you dipshits run out of oil.
I guess we shouldn't criticize Scientology or Satanism either. Religion as a whole has such a diverse set of beliefs that Saudi Arabia may as well of just been direct in talking about banning criticism of Islam itself.
Can't we just nuke them and be done with it?
[QUOTE=itisjuly;48362324]If your religion is being criticized, why not take it and improve it?[/QUOTE]
"Improving" a religion would be considered blasphemy by many believers, as it generally requires either modifying religious texts (MAJOR blasphemy) or altering the interpretation of it (also major blasphemy, just look at the Islamic Sunni / Shia divide over interpretations of the Koran)
[QUOTE=Explosions;48362948]By even saying that you're offending many people, lots of Muslims included.[/QUOTE]
I know, only shows how ironic the request for ban is.
[editline]3rd August 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Saber15;48363923]"Improving" a religion would be considered blasphemy by many believers, as it generally requires either modifying religious texts (MAJOR blasphemy) or altering the interpretation of it (also major blasphemy, just look at the Islamic Sunni / Shia divide over interpretations of the Koran)[/QUOTE]
It's 2015, how about religion 2.0 where improving is good, not bad.
[QUOTE=Saber15;48363923]"Improving" a religion would be considered blasphemy by many believers, as it generally requires either modifying religious texts (MAJOR blasphemy) or altering the interpretation of it (also major blasphemy, just look at the Islamic Sunni / Shia divide over interpretations of the Koran)[/QUOTE]
Yet we see major revisions happening all the time in cadence with popularized political opinions "revision of murder, limbo, apostasy crimes, etc."
Its hilarious how much they lie and make up bullshit to keep their current little version of the standard running, apparently if these things were the "words of a god" how the hell would that ever be alterable by human adaption, what was said is what was said, people lived off the past set of rules for hundreds of years, interpreting it differently doesn't mean you get to rewrite it, it's just a hilarious cop out to prevent themselves from being popularly disliked, dishonest and distasteful to any logical human being who understands the situation..
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.