• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Censorship Goes Too Far - Pakistan Bans Facebook and Youtube.

DarkSun

:eltiT
I was just on Facebook a while ago, and a former expatriate I knew from KSA posted something on her wall that I found almost bizarre. Evidently, Pakistan had banned Facebook. Not only that, but it had also censored Youtube. Wanting to know more, I had a look through Google and found this. Apparently, just because someone made a Facebook application inviting people to draw cartoons of the prophet Mohammad... an entire country has to have their right to participate in Facebook relinquished from them

http://http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8693842.stm

Personally, I find this ridiculous beyond belief. Of all the problems in Paki, the High Court chose to waste its valuable time on something so incredibly arbitrary, so immeasurably petty, as banning two social networking sites simply because a bunch of stuck-up prudes disagree with some of the content.

There is a lot of heretical material on the internet; not just for Islam, but for every religion. Christianity, Buddhism, Baha'i - of all the religions in the world, it's Islam that seems to be showing that it simply cannot take criticism, cannot accept the fact that some people disagree with them. When South Park portrayed God as a freaking Yowie in one of its episodes, I never heard a word from devout Christians. But as soon as the prophet Mohammad was portrayed as a man dressed in a teddy-bear suit, Trey Parker and Matt Stone recieved death threats.


This is more than ridiculous. It's just sad. Personally, I don't think it should matter that Facebook had an application inviting people to draw cartoons of the prophet Mohammad. And it's not just the government imposing this ban - there are people in Paki who actually support this restriction of their freedom. Myself, I think that if a Muslim is truly devout, they would not feel so insecure as to condemn a public networking site, simply because it posted material against their religion, just because they feel special, only because they can't handle criticism. If the government truly believed something, and a Muslim's faith was strong, then it shouldn't matter how much questionable content they saw, they would remain unaffected.

And if a Muslim doesn't like something, then they can always choose to ignore it... Why ruin something for every other person on this planet, the vast majority of which either are not Muslim, or have strong enough faith to take a freaking joke and get on with their lives? So as you can see, I have some fairly strong views on this. I'd like to hear the other side of the coin, just as I'd like to see if anyone agrees with me.

I apologise if this is in the wrong forum, I was unsure where else it should have gone.
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
I have notice for a while now that Muslims (not only Muslim authorities, but most if not all Muslims) do indeed have a very hard time with any portrayals of Mohammad, even if they are completely respectful. It is my understanding that the Wikipedia articles on the Prophet are constantly under pressure to have his pictures removed as well, for instance.

It is not purely a matter of failure to react to ridicule or criticism. Apparently to Muslims it is disrespectful already if anyone publishes any sort of portrait of Mohammad.

I find that rather troublesome.
 

MissAlice

Well-Known Member
Yes I read about it, tis ashame at least for a nation. Wouldn't mind it being about Muslims but to assume every citizen in Pakistan should have their facebook taken down just seems plain wrong. I really don't go on facebook much but I'd be mad as a hatter if my nation was telling me what I should or shouldn't view or own.

Guess east and west really are fundamentally different in their values.
 

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Far as I can tell, most Muslims just aren't very enthusiastic about treating non-Muslims in a different way than they would treat Muslims.

I'm not sure I disagree with them in this regard, either. Discrimination of Muslims by Muslim authorities is still wrong.
 

DarkSun

:eltiT
I have notice for a while now that Muslims (not only Muslim authorities, but most if not all Muslims) do indeed have a very hard time with any portrayals of Mohammad, even if they are completely respectful. It is my understanding that the Wikipedia articles on the Prophet are constantly under pressure to have his pictures removed as well, for instance.

It is not purely a matter of failure to react to ridicule or criticism. Apparently to Muslims it is disrespectful already if anyone publishes any sort of portrait of Mohammad.

I find that rather troublesome.

You're not the only one.
 

DarkSun

:eltiT
Far as I can tell, most Muslims just aren't very enthusiastic about treating non-Muslims in a different way than they would treat Muslims.

Why not? It's all well and good to treat everyone as equals, but at the same time, you really have to accept that not everyone believes the same thing, and be tolerant of that. Doing otherwise is only going to end badly.
 

DarkSun

:eltiT
I could be wrong but I think it is forbidden in Islam to show a depiction of the prophet Muhammad.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/2/removal-of-the-pics-of-muhammad-from-wikipedia

Yes, but I somehow doubt the people who made this application were Muslim. So these rules do not apply to them - they didn't believe they were true. People shouldn't be allowed to impose their morality on other people - I see no reason why religious beliefs should be an exception to that.

Forcing an entire nation off of Facebook, to me, seems arrogant and presumptuous. Why should an entire nation suffer when there's really no need?
 
Last edited:

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Why not? It's all well and good to treat everyone as equals, but at the same time, you really have to accept that not everyone believes the same thing, and be tolerant of that. Doing otherwise is only going to end badly.

And if often does indeed end badly.

However, the challenges of dealing with religious diversity are not quite that easy to solve, either.

Most Christians and Muslims have some degree of difficulty in accepting that not everyone believes in their god or would at least be better off if they did. That is the main reason why their proselitizers are sometimes so damn insistent - to the point of being disrespectful and offensive.

To a point I can see their plight. When I do believe that someone is running fast towards serious problems, I don't have too easy a time myself.

Indeed, how can anyone safely deal with such a choice? I've seen abusive families and the like and to this day I wonder if there is any safe benchmark to tell omission from respect.

There is definitely such a thing as wronging someone by failing to act, and at this point in my life I believe that we simply can't safely assume anything on the matter. At some point we will have to shrug, take a deep breath, and accept that we must either act or refuse to act, but either way we risk commiting a serious mistake.

I guess that is why Faith is needed to a religious person - not to know what it is safe to do, but instead to accept that we must run risks while learning the best course of action, and those risks don't really ever end.
 
Last edited:

Zadok

Zadok
It is unusual for an individual of one religious or culture persuasion to respect those of a different religion and culture. Sadly it is the disposition of ignorance to assume offence when none is intended. If someone does not understand why they are offensive it is best they take the initiative to become informed rather than just escalate misunderstanding.

Many times war can be avoided and is unnecessary - especially religious wars. Seldom when there is war - is there no religious overtones. Most rare of all is the individual willing to offer themselves to suffer for peace taking upon themself the misplaced anger to put an end to it. Most will take nothing to themself and call for revenge or point blame to others thinking that will solve the problem - and it never does.

Zadok
 

DarkSun

:eltiT
I can understand that displaying illustrations of the prophet Mohammad is disrespectful in Islam, and I respect that whole-heartedly. But to just ban an entire website because of one application that can easily be ignored... How is that not going too far? And how is it even practical when people can just use a proxy to get access anyway? As if it weren't short-sighted enough to impose your morality on others - banning the thing is going to have no real effect on access to the site. I'm having a little trouble understanding the logic here.
 

MSizer

MSizer
It's utter stupidity. Let's grant for the moment, for the sake of argument that muhamed is indeed the last prophet as a muslim would believe, and that also it is sinful to portray him in pictures. What is the point of taking facebook down just because other people are sinning? The pictures still exist. It' snot as though they've eliminated the sinful act by dropping the web page. I've always found that type of zeal very fake. It's as though they're taking the opportunity to act like fanatics hoping that god will see how devout they are, despite the fact that they're acting foolishly.
 

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
I would expect any good Muslim to not look at such pictures. This being the case, what's the point of banning something which none of your citizens are looking at?
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
Shi'ites aren't against respectful pictures of Muhammad, but Sunnis are. Shi'ites have icons of Muhammad, similar to what eastern Christians have. MSizer report this post if you must, I'm showing them an example of an Islamic icon.

Muhammad_face.gif


01b.jpg
 

MSizer

MSizer
Shi'ites aren't against respectful pictures of Muhammad, but Sunnis are. Shi'ites have icons of Muhammad, similar to what eastern Christians have. MSizer report this post if you must, I'm showing them an example of an Islamic icon.

Muhammad_face.gif


01b.jpg

I'm not sure you understand my position. Why would I report this? I couldn't care less if muhammad was depicted performing homosexual acts.
 

Badran

Veteran Member
Premium Member
There shouldn't of course be a ban on facebook, especially that this kind of choice is for people to make, not the governments, if Muslims don't want facebook, they won't log onto it.

This kind of decisions are basically another example of certain schools of though that are the main reason for the image of Islam in the world today.
 
Top