These are not 'blind examples' my friend. Where do the blasphemy and apostasy laws in all these countries come from? Aren’t they ultimately based on books? Are not the laws that prevent minorities from worshipping or constructing a place of worship in Saudi Arabia and the persecution of Baha’is and Ahmadiyyas, finally based on the books?
This is not what I am saying - This is what the religious scholars in all these countries who have been studying their book for more than 1000 years, and who have made these laws, believe and say. If all of THEM think that the books command them to kill people for apostasy and persecute those who are willing to accept prophets from other religions, on what basis can you or I say that 'it all shows how to stay peacefully' and that 'no religion says to not be tolerant to other religion'?
Who is in a better position to understand the content of books written in Arabic, in Arabia, 1500 years ago, Aditya? 20, 30, 40 year old Indians? Or 1000s of old, religious scholars from Arab countries whose ancestors wrote the books? Are we right, and they wrong!?
You have been taught by RSS school to spread hatred & lies with your fellow citizens and you are doing the good job of what you have been told to do so.
Re: Re: URGENT NEED
by Raja Sen on Jan 08, 2011 11:39 AM
Yes the whole world is getting loaded with secular idiots... Firstly the world should be saved from them... !!!
Re: what a shame
by modern chanakya on Jan 07, 2011 04:14 PM
such converts should be ostracised from civilised society. i dont find any creative work in his music its all hypes and hooplas which made him star
Re: Re: what a shame
by Sandeep Ghosh on Jan 08, 2011 09:34 AM
Don't forget his mother is Muslim so he was always half muslim. What wrong he commited if choose to be complete muslim. @Arun Kant... if my child want to choose his religion, I will gladly allow him. Bottom line he should be good person in peace with himself.
Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by Arun Kant on Jan 08, 2011 11:12 AM
Imagine there are two religions A and B.
Religion A says to its followers - if you "want to choose any other religion, we will gladly allow you. Bottom line is you should be good person in peace with yourself."
And religion B says "If you dare change your religion you will not just be thrown out of the society but also be murdered because that is what our religious leaders have told us is written in our holy book."
Which religion do you think is better?
(Since you seem to be a sensible person) I will assume your answer is A.
But what do you think is going to happen over the long term? Over 20,50,100 years?
The numbers of A (the more liberal and tolerant of the two) will start decreasing and B will only increase (because it's more intolerant)!
Re: what a shame
by dr.aditya_sinha@rediffmail.com on Jan 07, 2011 04:44 PM
everyone has the right to select their own religion.u cannot put ur decisions on others.Shame on u saying such things.at end of the day ,we shd be a good human being..
Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by dr.aditya_sinha@rediffmail.com on Jan 08, 2011 01:43 PM
Mr. arun Kant, ur theory of religion is baseless...u know half knowledge is always dangerous...did u ever gone through Gita or Quran or Bible or any other Religius books,it all shows how to stay peacefully only...so dont put ur unnecessary theory without any logic...
Re: Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by Arun Kant on Jan 08, 2011 08:30 PM
Yes Aditya, I have gone through all three. Are you saying all religions are equally tolerant?
Iran, Saudi Arabia, Nigeria, Qatar, Sudan, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen , UAE, Malaysia, Pakistan - these are just some of the countries in which changing your religion is illegal and/or punishable by death IF you belong to the majority religion. Even speaking against the majority religion can be punished by death. (Pak Governor's case, where the killer was showered with rose petals(!), by well educated lawyers, and the priests even refused to pray for him is a recent example).
Ask yourself why such laws exist only in these countries?
And before you say its the 'followers' mistake' that they are so intolerant, understand that its not average followers who make such laws - its some of the most senior scholars and high priests of the religion who have insisted on such laws. Can you and I claim to have more understanding than them about 'their' religion!?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by dr.aditya_sinha@rediffmail.com on Jan 09, 2011 02:25 PM
dont take the blind examples of the countries u mentioned.. im talking of reading those books... no religion says to not be tolerant to other religion..
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by PREM KUMAR on Jan 09, 2011 02:10 PM
You have been taught by RSS school to spread hatred with your fellow citizens and you are doing the good job of what you have been told to do so.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: what a shame
by Arun Kant on Jan 08, 2011 08:40 PM
I doubt if you have read the books you mention. Because if you had, you would know that all books are a mix of good and bad. Some parts are humane and moral while some other parts are violent and sectarian.
That's why it's important that people are allowed to pick and choose the parts which are good and ignore the bad. Some religions, unfortunately, still insist that 'every word' of what is written in some ancient book is correct. And that's why intolerance, hatred, suicide bombing and practises such as chopping hands and stoning people to death is more common in some countries.
And as far as your claim of my 'theory' being 'baseless' and 'without any logic' is concerned - What do you expect to happen in countries in which the majority religion is more intolerant? The number of minorities will go down (or be very low) and the percentage of those in the majority will go up (or be very high). Right? Thats exactly the trend in such countries - Pakistan (15-20 minority around partition to less than 2% now) , Bangladesh (22% in 1951 to about 10% now).
And what do you think will happen in more liberal/secular countries? The opposite - which is what is happening in India (the majority's numbers have gone down from 85% in 1951 to 80.5% in 2001 while the minority numbers are increasing, from about 10 to 13.5 now).
Half knowledge is indeed dangerous, that's why blind secularism needs realism to prevent it from turning into appeasement. :-)
