"No compulsion in religion": The tragedy of Abdul Rahman

Like which ones, specifically?


....I know it is seemly impractible in a political sense, but in a morality sense the number of persons that are saved/needed to be saved does not matter.

 

//grumble

Is it possible we can analyse things with our heads, rather than hearts?

"Zomg why did we liek figth tehm, for this?"

Not only is farraday, as always*, right; he's illustrated just how little understanding many of you have for the difference in practise to the US. It's democratic, from the greek demos and kratien; the people, to rule. They're doing that. It's not liberal democratic like we are, but it's still about the will of the people.

Secondly; you're trying to change a traditionally conservative judiciary with a protracted military campaign and a few cities devoid of violence? Yeah, um, but no.

Face it, the only people who think like Americans are Americans; like Australians, Australians and like Afghans, Afghans. If you try and shoehorn the American worldview into this context, you'll never understand it.

Instead of wringing your hands to the point of exhaustion and "zomg"-ing too much, ask yourself, "why did this happen"? If you answer is as simple as "teh islam is evil!" or "we wasted our time in Afghanistan", then maybe the more remedial environment of YJCC is more toyour liking.

The Afghanistan legal system is still presided over by judges used to rigid shari'a style rulings. We didn't purge them. They're still going to make bass-ackwards decisions like this, and we can't do much besides react and hope Mr Rahman is spared the ignominy of a stupid death. We could be proactive, but how do you tell if someone's going to make a decision of prime idiocy? Create a hypothetical and ask? Or should we get rid of every Afghan judge?

If this were Saudi Arabia, he'd be dead by now. Bear that in mind, in that he's getting some chance.

E_S

* - Farrie is only wrong when disagreeing with me

 

Ender again, a calm voice of reason and I will be the first to admit that I'm a "zomg."

He definently has a point, you didn't see this kind of outcry over poor Ateqeh Rajabi

Reading her story really got me worked up.....


Then again we have no affect on Iranian or Saudi Arabian internal affairs. We do in Afganistan and I think we should do the right thing. Let them riot, let them hate us for who we are.



EDIT: Sorry Ender but that's what I believe! *shrugs*

 

Read a history book. Specifically the inquisition. I never said they practiced their barbarism today, however, the situation is very similar to what happened in Europe during the middle ages.

 

Lorn, sometimes I can sound like a cultural relativist but I don't mean to. I don't excuse other cultures, merely point out we need to transcend the boundaries of our own paradigms to see them for what they are. You don't have to apologise for your beliefs.

E_S

 

Yes your absolutely right, Islam today represents Christianity in the middle ages, all the more reason to try and see Islam tone down its conservatisim to a level where people arent being killed just because they have different fews, society itself isnt being oppressed because of a religion. Sadly I dont think we will see the day that that happens in most middle eastern and muslim dominated countries, also its not our (meaning "western") place to tell these countries how to think and act but on the other hand we can stop supporting regimes who blatantly ignore human rights.

 

Is it possible we can analyse things with our heads, rather than hearts?

I'm trying to do both, Ender. It ain't easy, but I'm trying. My head is telling me, sadly, that this guy's doomed no matter what happens, and his death's only going to make international tensions even worse.

Face it, the only people who think like Americans are Americans; like Australians, Australians and like Afghans, Afghans.

Regardless of your nation of origin, there is nothing right about murdering someone simply for leaving one religion for another. Pretty much every non-Islamic civilization in the world would agree, Western OR Eastern. This isn't about nationalistic mores, this is about simple basic human dignity and rights.

If this were Saudi Arabia, he'd be dead by now.

That speaks volumes right there, Ender.

He definently has a point, you didn't see this kind of outcry over poor Ateqeh Rajabi

I didn't know about that story. That kind of horror is all one can expect out of Iran anymore, but I guess we'd figured the Afghanis would be better behaved post-Taliban (or at least while our troops were still there).

 

Hey, Catholicism updates itself every thousand years or so, how would you feel if someone came into your religion (ignorant of its practices) and tried to change it?

 

Christianity today... Islam middle aged... trying make equalities is silly. Fundamentally Christianity and Islam are different religions, and trying to equate them makes as much sense as equating historical hinduism with modern wicca.

That's not to say you can't draw from Christianity's rich historical heritage of bigotry and intolerance for inspiration, but equating it to Islam is just silly.

Anyways.

Unles he's willing to throw down with the fundamentalist interpritation of Islam, I doubt that Mr Karzai will do that, instead I think the best result we cna hope for is Mr Rahman's deportation to Pakistan.

Here's the thing, we're talking about somethign that is in their Constitution. While the conservatives here no doubt find it repugnant, most of them would demand that our Judicairy stop messing around with our constitution and follow it. Even fi the judge disagreed with the law, would you want a judiciary that rewrote the constitution on whim?

I rather think not.

No, there is a recourse here, and it is not in rialing against fundamental islam, calling in a miliatry strike to free Mr Rahman, or overthrowing the afgahn government. It's in convincing Mr. Karzai that the liberal nations of the world would react favourably to him using his constitutionaly mandated powers to protect Rahman from death.

 

I thought he was going to be declared legally insane and released, at this point?

 

I of course was inferring it was right...

If we can be somewhat serious, like just a little?

If you don't try and put yourself in an Afghan frame of mind and can't stop being an America/Brit/whatever when viewing this, you're going to spend an inordinate amount of time missing the point - even going so far as to be oblivious of the point you just missed.

Further reading: farrie's post.

E_S

 

We should solve this the American way.

"Hey Afghanistan, how much is this Christian going to cost me...I'll pay half that...Deal, he lives."

 

I wasnt talking about changing religion, I was talking about trying to influence leaders of the country that WE helped set up. There is no reason that state leaders should have anything to do with religion, but again this is coming from a western perspective.

 

I wasnt talking about changing religion, I was talking about trying to influence leaders of the country that WE helped set up. There is no reason that state leaders should have anything to do with religion, but again this is coming from a western perspective.

The religion is a part of the state, though.

 

Indeed, it is the Islamic Republic of Afgahnistan.

OBvious;y this is translated into English, so it isn't perfectly faithful, but their constitution starts...

We the people of Afghanistan:
1. With firm faith in God Almighty and relying on His mercy, and Believing in the
Sacred religion of Islam,

 

I quite the Catholic church and if someone came in to change things that might be a good thing.

Furthermore, killing people for leaving the religeon was the hip thing back in the middle ages. Catholics have grown past that type of ignorant thinking.

Even Muslims in this country haven't grown past it, CAIR has come out to help but you don't really see anyone else taking a stand.

I wouldn't let that happen in my name...my religion....

 

...you could be.

 

Furthermore, killing people for leaving the religeon was the hip thing back in the middle ages. Catholics have grown past that type of ignorant thinking.

Yes, white-washing history is a nice thing, isn't it? And it's not ignorant thinking. Foolish, tyrannical, and maybe primitive, but not ignorant. Ignorance implies that you don't know something. To the society that's going to kill this man, it's perfectly acceptable. And if you're going to argue that, "They are ignorant, they don't know it's wrong to kill people for their religion." Correction, it's wrong in the western nation's culture. It's not wrong in theirs. Which is a big difference.

 

So what is your opinion on what should happen Ender, what should we do? In your quest to be an ultra-individualist you've seemed to have planted yourself in the role of someone that's more than happy to fault other people's views but unable to vocalize his own.

What is this "Afghan frame of mind"? Is it religious and cultural intolerance? See the problem with the whole "you've got to understand where they're coming from" mentality is that it leads to inaction and just seeks to further enable those types of behaviors. Honestly... it strikes me as fluff, more to do with the people you're arguing with than the topic you're arguing about. See, what I'm trying to do is to understand the "Ender frame of mind"... doesn't mean I shouldn't call you out on it or try to change it when I disagree with it.

 

If I understand this right, the man was let off because he was deemed insane, he was given an out on a technicality so it would go away. I understand looking at it in their "state of mind" but I can still say their state of mind is wrong. A civilization cannot progress as a theocracy.

 

In my opinion, Cyrpug, the man should be allowed to worship the wrappers of Milky Ways if he pleases; however, in the Afghan context, the legal system is dominated by hardline conservatives and as such, Article 1 of their constitution can be somewhat literally interpreted.

Ultimately, we're better off trying to get him out of Afghanistan than wringing our hands and saying, "In America, this would never happen."

E_S

 

For the love of peace,LET THE MAN GO! If they don't want him in the country let him leave but don't MURDER him! If they killed this man it would be no less than what happened to Jews during the Holocaust.

 

Actually, that comparison, whilst a commendable emotional appeal to two "teh evils! ", isn't at all applicable.

In one instance, there was a deliberate attempt to wipe out an entire religious group.

In this case, a man has broken Afghan laws. One man. Yes, the laws are daft and inhumane, but to trivialise the deaths of millions of Jews, gypsies, leftists, and homosexuals to make your point emotionally when a few extra seconds and a few dozens of words could have done it doesn't rate much respect in my book.

E_S

 

The case has been dropped, by the way. The judges cited 'lack of evidence' for dropping the case. But I blame pressure from the US for that one.

You can find the proof here.

 

It doesn't help in the least bit that people still want him dead. Even the government can only protect him to a certain extent. Do you really think that, being the dangerous place that Afghanistan is, this guy is going to live for five minutes after being released?