1. 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!

Featured Criminalisation of Blasphemy: is it equal to criminalising proselytism?

Discussion in 'Religious Debates' started by firedragon, Sep 13, 2020.

Tags:
  1. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    Freedom of religious belief is key to the existence of men as rational free-thinking individual citizens in the state. It emanates directly from a normative premise of equality, the demand that every doctrine should be open to scrutiny, and a belief that no dogma can be held with certainty.

    One thing people should understand is that as soon as a law is implemented that provides a hint of siding with a race or creed the crowd pertaining to that race or creed embraces a false sense of power. This sense of power can make people senseless. Someone said one day that "power is the most stupid thing on earth, because it makes it easier to act than to think". As if this was said as a prediction, a country having blasphemy laws like the obvious country we are discussing these days, Pakistan will show you how people take power into their hands. This is a drunkardness while the potent alcohol is power. Its the worse kind.

    If this is the reason for upholding religious freedom, then the legal right to religious freedom must be interpreted accordingly. If religious freedom is protected because no religious dogma can be held with certainty, then those who challenge the existing dogma should be encouraged and not punished. It follows that activities such as blasphemy and proselytism, which do exactly that, must not be criminalized. Critique, discussion and a robust exchange of ideas are best promoted when individuals are free to convince others to convert to their belief, and to speak for and against religions, even in ways that may be deemed by some inappropriate, free from fear of prosecution.

    I believe its either this way or that way, there is no middle ground. What I mean by that statement is, if you install blasphemy laws, be it small or severe as in jail time or death penalty itself, that's the beginning of the end. Though it maybe very difficult for a Buddhist to see a picture of the Buddha on a bikini, the moment a country imposes a law against such an act, people tend to go power drunk. The eventual outcome being ethnic tension and even hundreds, thousands and even hundreds of thousands of deaths, economic demise and decades of war. The government must consider individual freedom as one of the most fundamental matters to be included in the security vault of law. This may create some heartache, but people will behave into it eventually. It is absolutely unethical to insult another persons religious figure. If one wishes to debate or dialogue the topic of theology it is quite easy to do it with respect, but with vigorous analysis. That being said, imposing laws on this matter seemingly has no positive outcome whatsoever.

    If proselytism is allowed in a country, so should be blasphemy. Now because some people might turn this statement to mean "Only if proselytism is allowed in a country, so should be blasphemy" I am editing this post to say that it was an analogy, not a basic requirement.

    Peace.
     
    #1 firedragon, Sep 13, 2020
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2020
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  2. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    If I follow you, I agree:

    We should defend free speech. Free speech allows proselytizing and criticizing.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  3. Tambourine

    Tambourine Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2020
    Messages:
    2,484
    Ratings:
    +1,186
    All of this sounds extremely reasonable to me.
     
  4. Brickjectivity

    Brickjectivity Veteran Member
    Staff Member Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2012
    Messages:
    29,031
    Ratings:
    +10,289
    Religion:
    dystopian Christian
    I would add "freedom to be incorrect." In other words its permitted to be incorrect, to hold incorrect positions from what are generally accepted and to speak those incorrect positions and to consider them to be correct in speech.
     
  5. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    Incorrect in theology is absolutely subjective. You can never make it objective so of course in freedom of thought its built in but can not canonise it like blasphemy or proselytism. Hope you understand.
     
  6. Amanaki

    Amanaki Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    11,784
    Ratings:
    +7,125
    Religion:
    Sunni Islam
    After reading your OP @firedragon i did a bit of research, and i realized that my own view from the other day about blasphemy laws was incorrect. My understanding was that Islams teaching in the Quran did say blasphemy should be punished some way. This understanding was incorrect and i can no longer hold such a view.

    It may happen that some muslims do hold this form of view and that make the person wrong and not the teaching, i come to the view that showing anger or irritation toward those who say blasphemy is more harmful to our belief, then just ignoring their words, but be ok to discussion.
     
  7. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    I truly respect that.

    Brother. My comment might drag us into a different discussion but here goes anyway. When you engage in Quranic hermeneutics you would see that if you apply Quran bi Quran or if elaborated "understanding the Quran based on the Quran" which is a very very old methodology of Tafsir you would quickly come to realise that there no blasphemy based punishments whatsoever. In fact the Quran says La ikraha fiddheeni, and it says "Lakum Dheenukum Waliaddheen" both meaning that there is no karaha or any kind of force, this way or that way in the dheen or the system of religion, and that "your faith is to you, my faith is to me".

    The problem that I see is that people have not read the Quran. It discusses those who mock the religion extensively in many places. It says in one verse that those who mock will be in a lower status in the after life, nothing about punishing them in this life. But it does say that if people are mocking God and/or its scripture, you are supposed to not sit with them until they change what they are talking about. Do you understand that? Dont sit with them until they change their narrative. That is if they are mocking.

    The problem with many people is that they might change what I say as "mocking" into "disagreement or criticism". No way. Disagreement and criticism is not mocking. The Quran is talking about those who mock. Even at that juncture it tells you to not sit with them only until they seize the topic, when they change the narrative, you can sit with them. And you know what it says after that? It says "God will do the needful in the hereafter". Thus it is not your responsibility to take Gods law into your hands. It is up to God. We are supposed to walk the higher path. I think that's a very wise advice.

    Thus, anyone of any theology or non-theological systems, what ever you are it is always better to just leave the mockers to their work until they change their narrative. Thats it. Even Atheists get mocked by theists. Even Muslims, Christians and Hindus mock atheists. Its been a sad state of affairs, and all of these hypocrisy is simply hypocrisy. Thus, lets leave God to his work, and live life.

    Peace brother.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  8. Amanaki

    Amanaki Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    11,784
    Ratings:
    +7,125
    Religion:
    Sunni Islam
    I have to say really understand your message here :) and i agree fully with you.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  9. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    Islam is so slippery this way. No matter that "some Muslims" around the world torch Danish embassies "because cartoons", that's not Islam? No matter that the Quran insults non-Muslims over 500 times, that's not Islam?

    Tell me, where is this "true Islam" you're defending?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Amanaki

    Amanaki Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    11,784
    Ratings:
    +7,125
    Religion:
    Sunni Islam
    The true Islamic teaching is in the Quran and in the correct practice of the teaching.
    If someone interpretation say its ok to slaughter others in the name of Allah or insult others it is not Islam.

    You are allowed to defend your self but should not harm others.
    As far as i have read the verses of voilance is not in attacking, but in defence. But other muslims in this forum with deeper knowledge then me would answer better then i do right now.
     
  11. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    Well first off, for 1400 years now Muslims have VIOLENTLY disagreed with each other concerning "correct practice".

    Second, the definition of the word "defense" in Islam can have a really twisted meaning. If Muslims set out to conquer non-Muslims, and the non-Muslims resist being converted to Islam, then Muslims can call their violent attacks "defensive".
     
  12. Amanaki

    Amanaki Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    11,784
    Ratings:
    +7,125
    Religion:
    Sunni Islam
    I have nothing against shia muslims or other branches of islam, not do i have anything against other religions or atheists for that matter.
    All i want is to practice in peace with everyone.
     
  13. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    you just changed the topic. Are you going to take back what you said about Islam a few posts ago?
     
  14. Amanaki

    Amanaki Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2018
    Messages:
    11,784
    Ratings:
    +7,125
    Religion:
    Sunni Islam
    That i realised that I has misunderstood something in the teaching is not to say Islam is wrong. I was wrong not the teaching.
     
  15. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    you are trying your best to get into this "500" by hook or crook with no understanding of the text whatsoever. Why not open a new thread for your favourite topic mate rather than steering this thread into that?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    i'm not doing that at all. i'm simply responding to claims that others are making. if apologists would stop making the same tired old claims, we could all move on. :)
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  17. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    Well mate, you are also making the same old claim. Its old. ;)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  18. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    but the difference is, i'm responding, not initiating ;)

    if apologists would stop bringing up these tired old excuses, critics wouldn't have to respond to them.
     
  19. firedragon

    firedragon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2013
    Messages:
    6,810
    Ratings:
    +1,853
    Well, if apologists like you bro also stop your age old apologetics, maybe others also will stop. You see what I see? -_-
     
  20. icehorse

    icehorse Veteran Member
    Premium Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2014
    Messages:
    10,192
    Ratings:
    +5,659
    Religion:
    spiritual anti-theist : )
    I guess I'm an apologist for secularism? Don't bite the hand that feeds you bro, without secularism we wouldn't have forums like this to debate in!
     
    • Like Like x 1
Loading...