Yes, I know this is a touchy subject generally but I'd like some opinions on this particular case I just read about on the BBC News website.
It seems to have caused a bit of a kerfuffle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7112929.stm
Yes, I know this is a touchy subject generally but I'd like some opinions on this particular case I just read about on the BBC News website.
It seems to have caused a bit of a kerfuffle.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7112929.stm
Absolutely ridiculous...
Since when is it a crime to name a bear after Muhammad, and even if it's against the religion to picture the man, it doesn't apply to other religions, anyway. And what happened to the basic democracy? I don't know how it is in UK, but being able to freely name something is a right.
From what I can gather... which is not an in-depth knowledge of Islam I might add... is that it is okay to honour a person with the name of the prophet but not to give that name to objects or creatures as it is seen as an insult by some.
We have democracy (at the basic level but I won't go into the state of British politics right now) but this teacher was not in the UK, she was in the Sudan.
The reason I highlight this is that as Britons living in the British Isles (I'm not sure how this translates to other countries), we are expected to embrace and almost to yield to cultural differences and diversity within our country yet it seems that this policy does not appear to be valid elsewhere. This is where this case has come from. She is a British citizen teaching in the Sudan, and, although she should indeed have some knowledge of the culture of the children she teaches, she should not have to have an in-depth knowledge of the intimate and intricate 'laws' surrounding it. She didn't steal anything, she didn't kill anyone, she didn't incite hatred (the children named the bear in honour of the prophet) and I'm sure the prophet Mohammed will recover from the embarrassment of being a bear for a week. It's something that's completely alien to me and, evidently, to a lot of other people. Surely, compassion and education for those who are different would be more productive than the proposed fourty lashes?
It seems to be a matter of interpretation. Many Muslims have commented on this story citing pretty much what I have outlined here.
Last edited by Pendragon; 11-30-2007 at 07:46 AM.
On the other hand, ignorance of the law is not a valid defence in the UK courts.Originally Posted by Pendragon
And I don't think Sudan ranks very highly on the "openess and freedom of religion charts" [although I'm not overly familiar with Sudan and their cultural system].
--
Mats
Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.
I'm aware of that... but Britain is a democracy with a very diverse set of cultures.On the other hand, ignorance of the law is not a valid defence in the UK courts.
Picture this situation in say, Chipping Norton? It would not happen in this country because there would be an outcry from every man (and woman) and his (her) dog and the labour party would be rapidly evicted from Westminster by the people who have the power. Us. We have the power to a limited degree to change legislation. I doubt the Sudanese have that liberty.
This is precisely the point of this thread... to discuss this fact.And I don't think Sudan ranks very highly on the "openess and freedom of religion charts"
Last edited by Pendragon; 11-30-2007 at 07:54 AM.
Sure, UK is much more "non-religious" - in fact, I think that England [or UK] was one of the first places after what would become the USA to introduce "Freedom of religion" in law. Other countries doesn't necessarily have this, or at least not as thoroughly.
Of course, a few hundred years back, someone in the UK could be prosecuted in court for Heresy, with, I believe, a death penalty as one possible punishment. So, whilst it's freedom now, it hasn't always been that way.
Some places aren't nice to people of other religions, and Sudan is one of those.
--
Mats
Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.
They're ruled by religious law, what would one expect?
What else can I say - totalitarianism.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
Well, some of the most important things in totalitarianism are restricting freedom of speech, only one allowed ideal of life, abusing basic human rights, secret security organizations (like KGB). Is Sudan in the UN?
Edit: Oh right. Almost every country in the world is in the UN. It doesn't seem to me that the UN is capable of resolving such problems...
Last edited by maxorator; 11-30-2007 at 08:26 AM.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
I dont get this.. these people make a big issue out of such a small thing. They should be concentrating on improving living conditions and eradicating hunger from Sudan, and they are more concerned about someone naming a cute teddy bear mohammed.. I dont know much about islam, and i dont know whether it is a crime to name someone mohammed, but if it is a crime, i must say it is a very stupid law.
Code:>+++++++++[<++++++++>-]<.>+++++++[<++++>-]<+.+++++++..+++.[-]>++++++++[<++++>-] <.>+++++++++++[<++++++++>-]<-.--------.+++.------.--------.[-]>++++++++[<++++>- ]<+.[-]++++++++++.
These dudes manage religion to be used as a machine to drive the attention of this ignorant people from the real issues of the country. Amazes me the fact that this people start a "revolution" for the name of a teddy bear and act in order to solve their real issues which handicap their people.
Thantos it is clear that you have no idea about what you are talking. I've had the bad experience, IMHO, of living with muslins. When you refer to the fact she was not aware of "the law" I bet my ass that you haven't thought that this "law" is inside of a book created in the following way:
"The Qur'anic verses were originally memorized by Muhammad's companions as Muhammad recited them, with some being written down by one or more companions on whatever was at hand, from stones to pieces of bark."
And I assure you can can read this as you wish as any book you can find 2000 interpretations for the very same combination of letters. Also the writings haven been manipulated to cope with the interest of a given class of people who ruled the country.
About the respect of the government to others people culture.
From Wikipedia:
A letter dated August 14, 2006 from the Executive Director of Human Rights Watch found that the Sudanese government is both incapable and unwilling to protect its own citizens in Darfur and that its militias are guilty of crimes against humanity. The letter added that these human rights abuses have existed since 2004.[37]
I would ask in the following way so if the UK states a rule which states that attendants to Muslim religious manifestation in any of the UK territories are condemned to death since it is not the "true" faith of the Royal state (afaik they are Anglican) than those Muslins will call it a Jihad and accuse the world of pursue them and forbid than to follow the "True word of the lord". Also I have lived twice with Muslims and sincerely much of my actual hate by this religion was originated from it. I saw this sons of a dog treating women (we where in Germany) like they were dogs. So they full they mouth up with ***t to claim respect for their beliefs but they pay absolutely NO RESPECT FOR OTHER CULTURES since according to they LSD based vision of the Holly Truth all others are infidels hence forth must be submitted to the true word of the lord. Oh and they don't help you to clean the house since it is women work. So sincerely I think they deserve as much respect as any other criminal.
Correct them if the UN is wrong.
Last edited by maxorator; 11-30-2007 at 08:36 AM.
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
If I get it right these may not be used against these rights. That Abu Hamza seems to try to destruct the human rights, so how can they apply to him then?
"The Internet treats censorship as damage and routes around it." - John Gilmore
Looks like some in the Sudan are now calling for her execution.
Do the kids get punished for coming up with the name?
"Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are god. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are gods."
-Christopher Hitchens
I do believe the laws themselves are backwards. Basing modern lawn on a book over a thousand years old invites almost militaristic enforcement of them.
