Let the circus continue.....

grateful,

Fair bit of cherry-picking there, and a load of bulldust.

Come off it, Grateful, some of us have read the Koran: time and again, Muhammad calls down the most dreadful punishments on anybody who seems to have insulted Islam: for example, Surah 5: (from memory) verse 33, which speaks of cutting off a persons right arm and left leg if they insult the prophet or Allah.

One can open the Koran at random and find quite brutal demands on unbelievers, anybody who fight against Islam, Jews especially, and apostates. Why did Malala Yusufzai get shot in the head, if not for somehow insulting Islam (or at least its patriarchal core) by championing the right of girls to get an education, which somehow transgresses against Islam ?

Why are homosexuals thrown off high buildings by ISIS if not because they have offended Allah somehow ? Perhaps they should restrict their activities to young boys ?

I'm beginning to think (I'm a slow learner) that one major difference between Islam and Christianity is that, at least on paper, Islam is all about POWER, a god with total power, while Christianity is, at least on paper, about LOVE, a god who loves all including sinners. I'm struck by the parochiality of the one (the 'ummah'), and the universality of the other (cf. the Good Samaritan story). In that sense, Islam is essentially inward-directed, right-wing, verging on fascism, while (perhaps to draw a long bow) Christianity is outward-directed, left-wing - putting it all very crudely. I'm sure some could nit-pick that to their heart's content, specially those on the faux 'Left', the friends of Islamist-fascism, totalitarians together.

Someone remarked to me that Islam is focussed on shame while Christianity is focused on guilt. I'm not sure what the consequences of that might be, except that one is group-oriented while the other is individual-oriented. And I'm not using 'group' there in a positive way, but in a parochial way, as 'anti-Other' or 'anti-outsider'.

Grateful, we're not all mugs out here: we can see you coming.

Joe

What good are freedom of speech and association laws when our own citizens seek to make them too costly, or inconvenient, or too unsafe to enjoy?

That is a great question but might I pose another in contrast?

What good is living an independent fulfilling life when our own citizens seek to make them too costly, or inconvenient, or too unsafe to enjoy?

Now don't get me wrong I actually support complete freedom of speech. I really do. I like knowing exactly what people are thinking, unfiltered and uncensored.
I think that makes it way easier to pick the arseholes in the room.

Having said that though I also recognize that for people who have been discriminated against (Muslims, Aboriginals, Homosexuals, woman and on and on...) for people who have been barred or excluded from certain activities based on their age or gender of ethnicity etc... I do understand and sympathize with the knee jerk urge these people have to shut down any and all conversation that further degrades, offends or impugns these parts of their identities. Especially when hurtful words or hateful ideologies often serve as a prelude to physical violence.

So whilst freedom of speech is tremendously important I think certain people need to spend less time waxing lyrical about how they don't get enough of it and consider instead why that is. Why are people afraid of what might come out of your mouth at any given moment and what can be done to fix it.

Joe said: "Come off it, Grateful, some of us have read the Koran: time and again, Muhammad calls down the most dreadful punishments on anybody who seems to have insulted Islam: for example, Surah 5: (from memory) verse 33, which speaks of cutting off a persons right arm and left leg if they insult the prophet or Allah."

Thankyou Loudmouth. Here are the verses (Q 5:33-34):

"Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment,Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."

I consulted a Tafsir (interpretation of Quran) by Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi, eminent scholar in Islamic jurisprudence (see his bio below).

The verses you refer to have nothing to do with insulting the prophet or freedom of expression. They relate to punishments that can be meted out for acts of violence committed by armed gangs unless they repent prior to being caught (in which case they can still be convicted but would not be subjected to these punishments). Please consult pages 129-140 of Maariful Quran Vol 3 (Versus 33-34, Surah 5) for the details and cases.

Maariful Quran Vol 3: http://www.maarifulquran.net/index.php/maarifulquran/maarifulquran-english-pdf

Bio of Maulana Mufti Muhammad Shafi: https://www.deoband.org/2011/12/history/biographies-of-scholars/shaykh-muhammad-shafi%E2%80%98-the-mufti-of-pakistan/

cont...

cont...

Of course in "more civilised Western society" we would prefer to have gangs and mafia take over than impose such "draconian punishments" ... which just happens to save a lot of innocent lives and allow people to lead their lives free of intimation and terror: in peace!. But that's a separate issue.

So in stark contrast to your claims (which are clearly false) we have the hadith I quoted in the previous 2 posts which, far from calling for punishment for those who insult the Prophet, in fact call for tolerance and allow freedom of expression.

As for the article, I agree that laws and declared values are meaningless without commitment of individuals. But I think in Australia we do have that commitment.

It is the author who is engaged in subtle game to impose his own views and silence dissent. Anyone who dares speak out against Ayaan Hirsi Ali is stigmatised as being "animated" by a "spirit of forced conformity". No debate, no consideration is given to their position at all!

Let the circus continue…