Muslim Mob Torches Christian Neighborhood in Pakistan

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by Balerion, Mar 9, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    Technically not, but practically yes.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. p-brane Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    289
    Are you saying that practically, the Israeli government is a theocracy? If so, can you be more specific?
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It's not formalized, but even the liberal parties tend to bow to the demands of the orthodox minority.
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. p-brane Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    289
    Even if that`s true, that`s very far from a theocracy. In a theocracy, the clerics are at the top as a matter of law. In the parliamentary version of democratic government found in Israel, there are many parties, some religious, others just the opposite. There are periods where too much deference is paid to the former. This is true even in the US, particularly in the republican party who`ve been too deferential to christian evangelicals. But as in the US, the pendulum in Israel has swung the other way as a result of the message sent by Israelis in their recent elections. This is not possible in a theocracy.
     
  8. spidergoat pubic diorama Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    54,036
    It's certainly not egalitarian with respect to minorities like Arabs. It's a Jewish state. It will never swing away from that.
     
  9. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    But this is your own personal belief coming to the fore and attributing something you think must have happened. There is absolutely no mention or evidence that it had.



    You have never heard of "divide and rule"? It was the policy that was deliberately adopted in India by the British and the French to a lesser extent..


    Yes, but after the partition, Pakistan was not like it is today.



    In 1951, Hindus constituted 22 percent of the Pakistani population and the Hindu population was concentrated in East Pakistan which later became Bangladesh, while Hindu population in West Pakistan was less than 2%.[2][3] By 1998 the proportion of Hindus was down to around 1.7 percent.[4] This huge drop is due to the creation of Bangladesh in 1971, where the bulk of pre-1971 Pakistani Hindus resided and emigration of Hindus from Pakistan. Minority members of the Pakistan National Assembly have alleged that Hindus were being intimidated to force them to leave Pakistan.[5]

    The increasing Islamization of Pakistan and antagonism against India, a nation with a Hindu majority, has been an influential factor in the persecution of Hindus. Such Islamization include the blasphemy laws, which make it dangerous for religious minorities to express themselves freely and engage freely in religious and cultural activities. The promulgation of Sharia, Quranic law has also increased the marginalisation of Hindus and other minorities. The destruction of Babri Mosque and anti-Muslim pogroms in 1991 in India, resulted in riots and attacks on Hindus in retaliation. Hindus in Pakistan are routinely affected by anti-Muslim pogroms in India and violent developments on the Kashmir conflict between the two nations. It remains the hope of many that a permanent peace between the two nations will go a long way in making life better for the roughly 2.5 million Hindus living in Pakistan. The 1998 census recorded 2,443,614 Hindus in Pakistan.





    22% of Hindus in the early 50's to 1.7% in 1998 shows a huge decline and that decline has been because of the rise in radical Islam in Pakistan.

    None at all. The point was that any time you see a State declared as a religious state, no matter what the religion is, you will see a rise in extremism and nationalism within that religion and a rise in discrimination and abuse.

    It needs to become secular. It needs to revert the changes since the 70's.. Changes in education - since Islamisation has creeped into education as well and intolerance is now part of day to day schooling in Pakistan.. And this is a fairly new occurrence.

    And frankly, the actions of the West at present in the region aren't helping moderate Muslims trying to change the tide of Islamisation in Pakistan.
     
    Last edited: Mar 15, 2013
  10. p-brane Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    289
    There is nothing Israeli arabs fear more than the prospect of ending up on the palestinian side of the border when a two-state solution is achieved.

    But not a theocracy.

    It would defeat the whole point of the creation of Israel if it ever did.
     
  11. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    Actually as its a state for a religious group I think it fair to call it a theocracy. Maybe it isn't on the technical sense( but than no country outside of the Holy See is) but in spirit it most certainly is.
     
  12. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    civil riots spilling into wholesale violence?
    are you joking again?
     
  13. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Actually....

    http://www.indianetzone.com/47/religious_policies_aurangzeb.htm
    http://www.travelingwiththebeloved.com/PLACES/ELLORA AND KHULDABAD/imampur.html
    http://epicworldhistory.blogspot.com/2012/05/mughal-empire.html

    Was the claim that he'd never loaded anyone up on blasphemy charges from an apologist site? Look, this is kind of an obvious one: he's not going to pull out all the stops as a reactionary religious asshole and then skip the best part. Do we really need to haggle these little points?

    OK, but it's been like that before. The British weren't responsible for Aurangezeb. A religiously intolerant system has existed there before, and it's a cert that reactionary thought persisted to be re-awoken in the British mandate.

    That's true but the worst culprit right now is Islamism. One could certainly be forgiven for thinking that Islamic theocracy is particularly bad.

    Maybe not, but then again the Islamists never really needed that excuse before. As usual, the original and major cause is religion.
     
  14. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    probably not. religion is just a really good cover throughout history people have used relgion as a cover for their baser motives. look at the crusades.
     
  15. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Can't remember. May have been wiki. I will find it tomorrow.

    It's late here at the moment and I have to get up early.


    The divide and rule that the British implemented was to prevent a nationalistic India, since there was a push to view themselves as Indians first and whatever religion second in their bid to rid themselves of British rule. So the British made sure to separate them along solely religious and then caste lines.. It was a deplorable move and one that resulted in the deaths of countless of people and literally, tore the country apart.


    I have a cousin who is Muslim and I cannot agree that the religion is bad. Over a billion people cannot be bad.

    Certainly, there are aspects of extreme conservatism and radicalism within the religion, as there is amongst all religions, which sadly, tarnish the whole.

    However when I look at this current incident, I don't see it as a result of a bad religion but as a result of discrimination and political gain. People will use whatever tools on hand to get ahead. In Pakistan, because of the rise of extremism, one of the best political tools is religion and it is used effectively for the majority to ensure the minorities remain minorities.. if that makes sense?

    The moment a country favours one religion over another, and declares themselves a theocracy, there will be discrimination. Islamic state, Jewish state, Christian state.. there will be discrimination, without fail.

    The original and major cause is greed and the thirst for power. Religion is just a tool..

    And speaking of tool...

    [HR][/HR]


    Of course.

    Because they are made to feel so safe and secure in Israel... I'm sure pouring gasoline and setting the house on fire while the family were inside was just the settlers trying to be welcoming..? Yes?

    Impromptu barbeque perhaps? Toasting marshmallows?

    Nothing says safety and happiness like your children being stoned while going to school, shot at and your houses and farms set on fire, while you are still on the premises with your children, by marauding extremists thugs who are actively trying to kill you. Of course the artwork on the walls is just there to make sure their homes are well decorated.

    No wonder they would rather stay in Israel. After all, when they get all of the above, why would they wish for anything better?
     
  16. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    No, the point of theocracy is theocracy. If your argument were so, I should take it up that Nazis didn't really hate Jews. And if that were so, we should wander around making excuses for them, too.

    Well enough, but I cast a very skeptical eye on the claim that Aurangezeb engaged in every other kind of repressive Islamist jurisprudence but skipped over blasphemy. I think you do as well.

    That could as easily be said of Aurangezeb, but the impression is that he was actually pious enough to suppress other religions. It's fair to say that religious hatred existed well prior to the British Mandate; in fact, it was a keystone of the previous regime. The (godless) British may have perpetuated such sentiments - or even exacerbated them - but they were more than well founded when the filthy tea-drinkers arrived.

    I'm not sure what your cousin has to do with this, and your immediate connection of my comment about 'Islamic theocracy' with 'Islam' itself is worrisome. This kind of slide allows us to connect disparate entities. Or is it that you think Islam is thus Islamic supremacism, indistinguishable? I cannot agree with that sentiment.

    But above, you don't make such a distinction. Was that a slip?

    I don't know about 'bad religion' per se - it's a fine example of the dangers of theocracy. Frankly, I do think Islam is or has been more susceptible to this, because of the liturgical and traditional interest Islamic theology takes in the details of the lives of individuals of other religions.

    This is true, by and large. And a large proportion of the basis for this will be religious in nature.

    Then that could be said of any negative human impulse at all. Under such a view, there are no more immediate deformities of the human condition, so that every hatred and prejudice devolves in greed and the lust for power. Such apologetics are not helpful. If we subtract human will and higher-order motivation from every negative interaction, we are left in the ignorance of the causes of hatred. And these apologetics, based on the generalism of intent only seem to fly in this kind of example, IMHO.

    Regarding p-brane here:

    Well, that was just greed and the lust for power.

    Why is such generalization permissible for an incident propagated by a mob formed from one demographic group (Israelis) and not another (Pakistanis)?
     
  17. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    Because her cousin is Muslim, not Jewish, apparently.
     
  18. GeoffP Caput gerat lupinum Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,087
    Sigh.

    In fairness... that was an odd juxtaposition.

    I don't want to get off on the warpath here.
     
  19. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    You've handled it far better than I expected. I don't have patience for dishonesty, particularly the aggressive brand Bells employs.
     
  20. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,479
    Says the guy who can't admit his implied comments on islam
     
  21. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    If I implied any, I would have owned up to them. I told you what I think of Islam as a philosophy and as a force in this world, so why would I hide from it? Especially since I'm not making any bones about how I feel in this very thread?

    Honestly, you're just trolling. You've offered nothing to the thread other than calling me a bigot, so your opinion is of no consequence.
     
  22. p-brane Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    289
    I was referring to the greatest collective fear of the over two million Israeli arabs and not that of some tiny number of them who've been traumatized as a result of attacks by religious zealots they happen to live in close proximity to.
     
  23. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    You are comparing the burning of houses to marching millions of Jews, Romani and others to gas chambers?

    I am saying that without any absolute proof, I am neither here nor there. It is more than likely that he did, considering he was not exactly known for his tolerance of other religions..


    *sigh*

    I never said it did not. I am saying that under British rule, a sense of national identity arose in India amongst the Indians who wanted to rid themselves of British rule. The British, sensing that if all religious groups in India joined as a force, would end their rule, they deliberately set about splitting each group based solely on their religious beliefs. It was almost an encouragement of feelings of conflict.. Why do you think the British hated Gandhi so much? He was directly opposed to their attempt to divide India along religious lines, which later led to the partition.

    The point is that the religion itself is not bad. What is bad in the religion is the religious extremist who twist it to suit their own agenda. It happens in all religions. Every religion, well Abrahamic at least, has parts in their religious text and history to support religious supremacism.


    It is a perfect example of extremism and individual doucheness..

    How many millions of Christians are there in the world? Do you think the extreme brand of bible reading and interpretation the Westboro Baptists represents the whole and indicates that Christianity is prone to extremism? After all, there are Christian extremists who openly state that the bible says to kill gays and fornicators and have openly preached to hundreds of 'praise God' open mouthed, breather's who lap it up like it is mana from heaven and think that killing gays should be acceptable.

    Extremism should never be viewed as being the representative of the whole.



    'They are different to us'.. And breeding fear leads to hatred..


    I think deliberately agitating and saying 'it's the religion' or lines like 'the religion of peace strikes again' is hardly helpful either.

    But religious hatred is about wanting power over others and greed (jealous greed) and the thirst for power. 'They have more than we do'.. 'They shouldn't have more than we do or have as much as we do'.. This current incident in Pakistan happened because one rival faction in the local union election decided to use current blasphemy laws to ensure the other faction did not even get a foot in into the election and religion is a great tool to make the people rise up over perceived insults. The end result? How much do you want to bet that their side won the election because the opposition had to flee their homes?


    I never said it was not.

    After all, they want the land for themselves and the best and easiest way to get it is to try to drive them out..
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page