• 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!

China Cracks Down on Muslims' Freedom to Observe Ramadan

Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
China is reportedly cracking down on Muslims' freedom to observe Ramadan:

From the article said:
China is trying to prevent people from fasting during Ramadan in the predominantly Muslim province of Xinjiang.

According to the World Uyghur Congress (WUC), officials in the region ordered all restaurants to remain open and a series of measures have been put in place seemingly designed to prevent people observing the holy month.

The region is dominated by the ethnically distinct Uyghur people, a group who have suffered years of repression as Beijing has tried to wipe out religious expression and all forms of allegiance to institutions other than the Communist party.
Click to expand...

Source: China is banning Muslims from fasting during Ramadan

Further evidence that not having an official state religion doesn't always guarantee freedom of religion.
 
leibowde84

leibowde84

Veteran Member
Debater Slayer said:
China is reportedly cracking down on Muslims' freedom to observe Ramadan:



Source: China is banning Muslims from fasting during Ramadan

Further evidence that not having an official state religion doesn't always guarantee freedom of religion.
Click to expand...
It has nothing to do with not having an official state religion. That is an extremely dishonest assessment. China is a communist country. They have animosity towards any religious adherence. So, it has no connection with any capitalist nation.
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
leibowde84 said:
It has nothing to do with not having an official state religion. That is an extremely dishonest assessment. China is a communist country. They have animosity towards any religious adherence. So, it has no connection with any capitalist nation.
Click to expand...

I have no idea how you concluded the above from my statement. My point is that lack of an official state religion is not a foolproof way to ensure freedom of religion, which is an argument I've seen come up before. The OP is not meant as criticism of state secularism, since I'm completely for the latter.

You could have asked what I meant instead of assuming dishonesty.
 
Lorgar-Aurelian

Lorgar-Aurelian

Active Member
Debater Slayer said:
China is reportedly cracking down on Muslims' freedom to observe Ramadan:



Source: China is banning Muslims from fasting during Ramadan

Further evidence that not having an official state religion doesn't always guarantee freedom of religion.
Click to expand...
Yeah this has been an ongoing thing. Despite a lot of what I said I can feel for the Uighurs. They haven't really done anything as far as I can tell but the CCP (Chinese communist party) is kind of full of hateful idiots willing to abuse people. Add this to all the **** they have done to Falun Gong / Falun Dafa practitioners and it's kind of obvious who the villain is in china right now.
 
Lorgar-Aurelian

Lorgar-Aurelian

Active Member
@Debater Slayer @Sartre @leibowde84 I'd just like to say if you guys are interested in this topic I've recently got a book called The Souls Of China : The return of religion after Mao by Ian Johnson. It's really interesting and if you are at all interested in religion in modern china I would certainly recommend it. It's 10 bucks last I checked on amazon.
 
A Vestigial Mote

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Kilgore Trout said:
None of these measures force people to eat.
Click to expand...
I was reading through the replies, waiting for this one... I am surprised it took this far into the thread to get there.

On a scale of 0 to 100, how would any of you rate the amount of "oppression" exemplified by an order to "force restaurants to remain open", when the target of said "oppression" is a group actively trying to fast during the same time? My vote is zero. If anything it is more an example of a candidate for making the "dumbest plans I have ever heard" list. How does keeping the restaurants open do anything more than tempt those fasting? Are we saying there wouldn't be such temptation otherwise? And are we crazy?
 
LuisDantas

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
If all that is being done is allowing / ensuring restaurants to remain open, then I must agree that at first glance at least it can hardly be called oppression.

But I must first ask whether those restaurants wanted to close, and why is it perceived as necessary to deny them that right.

Unless it is established that those restaurants being open is somehow vital for social needs, it seems like an attack at the rights of those restaurant's owners and possibly workers as well.
 
Kilgore Trout

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
A Vestigial Mote said:
I was reading through the replies, waiting for this one... I am surprised it took this far into the thread to get there.

On a scale of 0 to 100, how would any of you rate the amount of "oppression" exemplified by an order to "force restaurants to remain open", when the target of said "oppression" is a group actively trying to fast during the same time? My vote is zero. If anything it is more an example of a candidate for making the "dumbest plans I have ever heard" list. How does keeping the restaurants open do anything more than tempt those fasting? Are we saying there wouldn't be such temptation otherwise? And are we crazy?
Click to expand...

I read through the article twice thinking I must have missed something important in the body which justified the headline, let alone the OP's interpretation of the headline, whose hyperbole has no meaningful connection to the facts.
 
A Vestigial Mote

A Vestigial Mote

Well-Known Member
Kilgore Trout said:
I read through the article twice thinking I must have missed something important in the body which justified the headline, let alone the OP's interpretation of the headline, whose hyperbole has no meaningful connection to the facts.
Click to expand...
The only things I see are the 24-hour shifts for "party activists" - which, I suppose if some of those are Uyghur, then that would definitely suck for those that were - but it mentions abstaining from drink, which only has to be done until sunset - so even on a 24 hour shift, sunset and beyond would be a full 8-10 hours during which imbibing fluids would be acceptable. And the other thing was trying to make students attend sporting activities - which would burn calories, etc. but only applied to Fridays, apparently. I don't know... still seems rather tenuous.
 
Last edited:
Kilgore Trout

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
A Vestigial Mote said:
The only things I see are the 24-hour shifts for "party activists" - which, I suppose if some of those are Uyghur, then that would definitely suck for those that were. Though in the same paragraph it makes the gaff of saying "which make forgoing food and drink almost impossible" - who is forgoing drink? Anyone plan on dying of thirst for Ramadan? And the other thing was trying to make students attend sporting activities - which would burn calories, etc. but only applied to Fridays, apparently. I don't know... still seems rather tenuous.
Click to expand...

Sadly, it's not an uncommon example of much "journalism" these days. A few decades ago, a high-school newspaper editor wouldn't let through what primary media sources publish these days.
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
suncowiam said:
Sounds like communism to me. I don't think it has to do with religion but to do with ideologies. :)
Click to expand...

I think it has to do with both, since religions are a subset of ideologies.

This kind of thing is not exclusive to religion, though, as far as I can see.
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Sartre said:
As my response to OP,
Did anybody ever think that the lack of a state religion would lead to freedom of religion, 100% of the time?
Click to expand...

I've seen that argument come up from time to time, yes, which is part of why I cited the example in the OP.
 
Debater Slayer

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
Kilgore Trout said:
None of these measures force people to eat.
Click to expand...

A Vestigial Mote said:
I was reading through the replies, waiting for this one... I am surprised it took this far into the thread to get there.

On a scale of 0 to 100, how would any of you rate the amount of "oppression" exemplified by an order to "force restaurants to remain open", when the target of said "oppression" is a group actively trying to fast during the same time? My vote is zero. If anything it is more an example of a candidate for making the "dumbest plans I have ever heard" list. How does keeping the restaurants open do anything more than tempt those fasting? Are we saying there wouldn't be such temptation otherwise? And are we crazy?
Click to expand...

Kilgore Trout said:
I read through the article twice thinking I must have missed something important in the body which justified the headline, let alone the OP's interpretation of the headline, whose hyperbole has no meaningful connection to the facts.
Click to expand...

A Vestigial Mote said:
The only things I see are the 24-hour shifts for "party activists" - which, I suppose if some of those are Uyghur, then that would definitely suck for those that were - but it mentions abstaining from drink, which only has to be done until sunset - so even on a 24 hour shift, sunset and beyond would be a full 8-10 hours during which imbibing fluids would be acceptable. And the other thing was trying to make students attend sporting activities - which would burn calories, etc. but only applied to Fridays, apparently. I don't know... still seems rather tenuous.
Click to expand...

The measures don't officially force people to eat, that is. They seem to me kind of like forcing someone to take a walk in the South Pole but not saying outright that the goal is to force them to wear winter clothes.

I can see where you're both coming from, though; the measures seem mild compared to many other forms of religious/non-religious dictatorship, but I'm reserved about giving the benefit of the doubt to the Chinese regime given other instances of anti-religious bias and oppression on their part. I think it makes sense to view the measures as being intended to hinder Muslims' ability to fast.

LuisDantas said:
If all that is being done is allowing / ensuring restaurants to remain open, then I must agree that at first glance at least it can hardly be called oppression.

But I must first ask whether those restaurants wanted to close, and why is it perceived as necessary to deny them that right.

Unless it is established that those restaurants being open is somehow vital for social needs, it seems like an attack at the rights of those restaurant's owners and possibly workers as well.
Click to expand...

The full article mentions more than restaurants' remaining open.
 
LuisDantas

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Sartre said:
I'd say the argument could be made that the current red cult functions quite similarly to a religion.
Click to expand...
It can and it has been made. If I am not mistaken, sociology usually treats communism as a religion.

That is not all that helpful, since there are so many understandings for that word, and some of them are very much at odds with each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top