First thing: please, everyone, the guy's name is Pat ROBERTSON.

Secondly, it's going to be hard going to try to validate all the world's religious beliefs, no matter how good it sounds in principle. Because, as you saw, when you scratch the surface, many folks have fiercely protected beliefs in the literal truths of their respective religions.

It might be a good idea to have your child study with your mother, because then she would teach your son how all these mythologies embody certain ideas and concepts that humans hold to be important.

A story does not have to be literally true in order to contain wisdom. In fact, many myths and legends contain valuable truths precisely because they are free from being tied down to any specific factual event.

The study of comparative religions will not produce wisdom if the point is to believe all the religions. The point has to be find out what humans think is important - and how the stories illustrate these ideas. Even deeper (but probably not for children) is the question of why man uses myths and stories to illustrate truths, instead of strictly verifiable facts.

Finally, when your son is more mature, you can broach the question of how religion has been used for political purposes throughout man's history, and how it has been used as a means of imposing classes and other structures of society.

The stories do contain a lot of wisdom, and also, when analyzed, a lot of insights into human nature. But this is not because they are literally true.

I think religious mythology can be better taught to children by someone who understands that.

In your case, it seems grandma understands that, whereas the nanny is still attached to believing that one particular set of myths is factual, while all others are false.

Therefore, I don't think your nanny is the right one to study Bible stories with.

I know you want to bridge the different religions and accept them all, but at some point simply letting everyone think their stories are real is not the right way to do that.

Or, if you want your nanny to read the stories to your son, do it out of grandma's earshot.

What your son will pick up from that, however, is how it feels to be around a true believer. Maybe that's valuable also in its own way. But I would be careful about whether or not your nanny is using the time to try to convince the child that what she believes in is THE literal truth.

That's the risky aspect.

Aloha Kanlka

I saw a wonderful dvd that fits this thread.

After surviving the war in Yugoslavia, taciturn nurse Hanna (Sarah Polley) heads to Ireland for some rest and relaxation. But when she hears about an oil-rig accident off the coast, she agrees to tend heroic burn victim Josef (Tim Robbins). Personalities clash aboard the derrick as Hanna contends with Josef, a Russian soldier (Sverre Anker Ousdal), a lively Spanish chef (Javier Cámara) and other oddballs in this compelling character study.

You might find it interesting... love patty

oops the Movie's Name is: The Secret Life of Words.... yikes love patty

hmmmmm.. its all pretty sad... I wonder what happens to them when they die?

I mean, all these people, so convinced that their path is the right path... and then there must be many who 'know' that they're going to hell.. and as Deepak wrote in 'life after death' about materialization of intention even after death.. do they really suffer in hell?

coz if so, then its really sad that they're made to believe that in their lifetime... I hope its more like "oh wow, so this life on earth was THE hell" lol

"What I see here is a case of people looking for others to hate and blame - an outlet for their anguish and frustration. "Toxic Emotions" as Deepak Chopra calls them."

~Kanika
---------------------------------------------

By making statements as above, do you realize you might be adding fuel to the fire? And you know you are dragging someone else into it too?

I would suggest, whenever you refer to prophet Mohammad (PBUH), please be reverential by PBUH - Peace Be Upon Him.

If we do not show respect to others' religions, why should they pay respect to our religion?

"What I see here is a case of people looking for others to hate and blame - an outlet for their anguish and frustration. "Toxic Emotions" as Deepak Chopra calls them."

~Kanika
---------------------------------------------

By making statements as above, do you realize you might be adding fuel to the fire? And you know you are dragging someone else into it too?

I would suggest, whenever you refer to prophet Mohammad (PBUH), please be reverential by PBUH - Peace Be Upon Him.

If we do not show respect to others' religions, why should they pay respect to our religion?

Clearly the teacher is not the only one to blame in this. Twenty of those sinful little seven-year-olds voted to name the bear Mohammad. Even worse, the remaining 3 seven-year-olds were defiant enough to vote *against* Mohammad. I'll bet some of them even compounded their crime by being female. Fatwas all around!

I'm trying to joke, but the sad part is, it makes just as much sense to punish the children as the teacher. As Kanika Sethi points out, the name Mohammad has a history of being used for non-prophets. I could try and analyze the psychology of this latest outcropping of insanity - mass hysteria, presumably - but why bother? The point is, this is not justice, and this is sure as hell not sane behavior.

Religion and perspective - ne'er the twain shall meet.

This is no fair representation of the Islamic world. The vast majority of Muslims are tolerant and open-minded individuals, and are just as appalled by this incident as you and me.... So the "Voices of Reason" keep saying.... They conveniently ignore the evidence which indicates that "the vast majority of believers" are utterly warped and deranged by their religion.

"What I see here is a case of people looking for others to hate and blame - an outlet for their anguish and frustration. "Toxic Emotions" as Deepak Chopra calls them."

I suspect that's part of the problem. When life ain't so great, people are prime targets for demagogues. I've seen quotes from extremist leaders claiming this whole thing is part of some great plot of the West against Islam. The paranoia and thin-skinnedness of these idiots is amazing.

What I find funny anytime there is yet an other story about a mob demanding punishment over a slight to their big sky daddy is this; your all powerful big sky daddy is hurt over by a lowly human said and cannot defend itself? What a weak big sky daddy.

"As many of us now know (thanks to riots over Danish cartoons), Muslims consider it an offense to use the name of the prophet in an insulting manner." kanika

I wonder how they would feel to know I named my penis "allah". get on your knees before allah.

ok, ok, i will admit that in reality my penis is not impressive, but then i can say the same thing about the muslim god.

"If we do not show respect to others' religions, why should they pay respect to our religion?" kalat

Hey, now folks, calm down. We have to respect the beliefs of others. Be tolerant. It's disrespectful to deneg...

Ah, f@#$ it, what a bunch of god-ist psychos. Let's not let it happen here.

The 'offending' school has been closed until January. Sharia barbarism 2, rationality and education, 0.

"However, some protesters are rioting outside of her jail cell brandishing knives, swords and axes, calling for her to be executed by firing squad."

I read news paper reports terming them 'young men'....

Now, before you criticize these young men, remember that they are motivated by faith, just like scientists! Right?

This is far from being a display of barbarism from a society of religious lunatics. Nothing at all happened for months after the teddy bear was named, and it didn't occur to the teachers, the headmaster, the kids or their parents that anyone had done anything wrong. Then suddenly there's this big stink. And it turns out that the original outraged complainant to the police was not a teacher or a parent...but the office assistant.

One possible reason that it took so long for the authorities to do anything is that they needed time to assemble their crowds of "outraged Moslems" to make a nice protest in front of the cameras. This is NOT some backwards cultural norm being violated. This is a piece of political theater organized by a government fond of childish displays of inferiority complexes and not fond of exceedingly Western schools (although many of their top officials send their kids there).

This is NOT a problem of "religion." It IS a problem of "official State ideology." Whenever a state has one, it gets used arbitrarily to justify whatever horsecrap some official feels like doing that day. This particular ideology is religious. Other ideologies have been similarly (ab)used, including the thoroughly atheistic, nominally rational and scientific one of "Communism."
(And no, for those of you about to suggest it, I wouldn't place America's faithful adherence to Locke's ideas in quite the same category. For a start, 'fanatical Lockian' is an oxymoron. To continue, you really have to have an explicit State ideology for shit like this to happen. Some bad stuff of the same type has happened in the US but it just cannot build up to the same level.)

Adnan writes
"I request all not to comment any further on the topic of lord !! We are noone eligible to discuss or decide anything about it!!"

Perhaps you mean Islamic 'fundamentalist' Concept of God.

New Age concept of God can be understood by reading Deepak Chopra's "How to Know God"

The Xian bible says that

1. Disobedient children should be stoned to death at the city gates (Deuteronomy).

2. Witches should be put to death.

Neither happens very often these days. There are civil laws that keep them from murdering their kids or alleged witches. In a theocracy, both might be more common.

"Nothing at all happened for months after the teddy bear was named, and it didn't occur to the teachers, the headmaster, the kids or their parents that anyone had done anything wrong."

Yes, it had struck me too that this was perhaps a personal vendetta (waged by the disgruntled office assistant) that has now been blown into a huge global scandal by political opportunists. I've been reading opinions on news sites from readers, and pretty much every Muslim writer feels the whole brouhaha is nonsense as well. The Muslim Council of Britain has come out strongly against the arrest and conviction as well. It's pretty clear that the poor woman at the center of it all only ever intended to do good, that no-one directly involved with the incident back in September thought it was worth getting worked up about - or even objected to it as far as we know, and yet several hundreds of people were in the protest, maybe more, have been persuaded of exactly the opposite.

"I request all not to comment any further on the topic of lord !! We are noone eligible to discuss or decide anything about it!!"

Adnan,

At INTENT Deepak Chopra has provided a place where people have the right to feel they are "eligible" to "discuss", "debate" and have a dialogue about God, Spirituality and Science.

Remember IntentBlog is not Sudan or even India where Islamic fundamentalists bully and beat up noted author Taslima Nasreem(a guest of Indian Govt.)

In response to Kanika's post you say:
"If we really want to be good human being we first start respecting to others thoughts or sentiment !! No body has a license to say whatever he feels if we do so then the cream of goodness which you talking about should be wrapped out from statement !!
take care !!"

At INTENT it is not just about *respect* or *tolerance*, but what is encourage is *understanding*

What Kanika does is just that. Trying to understand humanely and rationally the core of this insane behavior of the Islamic fundamentalists in Sudan.

Sadly, the riots in Sudan show - once again - that humans, who can be rational, generous and kind in isolation or small groups, are often mad as rabid dogs in large groups.

As I see it, the problem is that the "average" person - here, there, anywhere - rarely stops to think about what they believe. Most people, most of the time (or should that be all people, most of the time?) operate on an almost purely emotional, instinctual level, rarely (if ever) asking themselves "Does this make sense?"

Whether it's religious leaders ("Hang the blasphemous bear-namer!"), political leaders ("My country, right or wrong!") or other demagogues ("Natural cures THEY don't want you to know about!"), it all comes down to the same thing: an appeal to emotion over reason.

Many of the woo-mongers (pseudo-scientific, "alternative" medical, spiritual, political) make this an explicit part of their argument. "We don't know how it works, all we need to know is that it works!" or "You have to believe!"

In my experience, when people in these mobs stop and think about what they're doing (or what they've done) - which is, admittedly, not very often - they usually are ashamed and remorseful.

Unfortunately, most people never think - they just feel.

#5 Adnan
"I believe in my religion Islam but it does'nt tell me to call other religion worthless because i dont have any rights to impose my comment on other religion. If we really want to be good human being we first start respecting to others thoughts or sentiment !! No body has a license to say whatever he feels if we do so then the cream of goodness which you talking about should be wrapped out from statement !!"

And I'm supposed to "respect" the religious beliefs of fanatics who want to execute a woman for letting children give a name to a Teddy Bear that happens to be the name of their Prophet exactly...why?

Adnan,

Since the topic is Islamic Fundamentalism, people will discuss it at INTENTBLOG, whether you like it or not.

Had it been Christian Fundamentalism, I have similar choice words.

Religious fundamentalists definitely have no sense of humor.

Western society is based on free speech and expression. I think you will take similar offense to books like "God Delusion", and if you had the power you wouldn't stop it from publishing. From your comments you seem to belong to a class of religious fanatic in your own right.

Boy, JeGodvAllah's got a thin skin. Perhaps He/She/It would feel a little more self-confident and a little less self-conscious if He/She/It stopped using so many aliases and prophets and started speaking for Him-/Her-/Itself.

My psychiatrist's been coaching me for years to just come out and say what I mean. Couldn't hurt for the Big Guy to join some sort of therapy group and learn how to communicate.

"Muslims consider it an offense to use the name of the prophet in an insulting manner."

but... but... teddy bears are great, surely? they wouldn't, for example, stone people to death? they're the very model of morality.

Ref. 26

Isn't Mohammed an extremely common given name among Muslims? Is everyone named Mohammed an insult to the prophet? I guess everyone named Mohammed needs to be killed, eh?

Why aren't the Christians rounding up all the latinos named Jesus? Religious fundamentalism is fun!

I'm thankful that at least when I eat Pasta, the Pastafarians won't come and try to kill me.

Adnan writes...
"If you understand so much then you should understand the difference between a teddy bear & a human being"

A teddy bear? Oh my aching stigmata! Will the wonders of stupidity never cease?

On the other hand...

Garry writes:
"Isn't Mohammed an extremely common given name among Muslims? Is everyone named Mohammed an insult to the prophet? I guess everone named Mohammed needs to be killed, eh?"

Well, yes, but... but no. It's critical to understand the subtle nuances of arbitrary religious symbolic boundaries. It's not okay to name a perfectly innocent child's cuddly toy after the prophet, but it's perfectly okay to name a mewling, drooling, pooping (tabula rasa) bundle of (sin) joy after the prophet.

I suppose I'll be stoned to death for naming my piccolo "Allah Breve".

Peace be upon you adnan - a prophet leading the blind. Thanks for your already-spent-time displaying your lunacy.

And adding to the lunacy: FOR A CHILD, the name of a teddy bear (even if it's Muhammad) is NOT an insult.

I remember that my mother had to wash my brother's teddy bear when he was sleeping, because he couldn't be separated from him. Whoever invented that idiocy sure is "a blind person"(unlike prophet adnan of course!) who has not ever seen an small child in his whole life.

Are moderate Christians just as crazy as Islamic fundamentalists? Well that's a good question, and I can't say I know the answer. What I do know, however, is that Islamic fundamentalists are much more stubborn, and infinitely more dangerous.

Thuglak Pasha writes(#12):
"They conveniently ignore the evidence which indicates that "the vast majority of believers" are utterly warped and deranged by their religion."

I would say "the vast majority of Muslims" are utterly warped and deranged by their religion. Muslims. Most Christians I know are relatively harmless. Most Muslims, on the other hand, as a mild example, believe that apostasy should be punishable by death. All the statistics indicate this.

I am serious when I say all who go about with Religious Fundamentalism upon their lips should be boiled in their own pudding and have a stake of the Olive Branch shoved through their hearts. I am sick and tired of hearing about the &^%&^$%#@^*&)&(&* Nutcase Muslims, when will they be forced to come out of the stone age and read their own Book of the Prophet, if that is what they want, the Stone Age, then I say let's bomb them back into it. All Muslims, thank GOD, are not Insane. Now that being said I believe that all Religion has ever done for the world is create lunacy and/or extremism. Mankind is not smart enough apparently to live it's existence without a crutch.

"she avoided a more severe punishment of 40 lashes or six months of jail time. However, some protesters are rioting outside of her jail cell brandishing knives, swords and axes, calling for her to be executed by firing squad. It seems that this innocent mistake will cause her immediate deportation back to the UK once she is released from jail. (Hopefully, that's all.)"

The millions Britain pays/paid to get her out of this should be spent on sending a rapid reaction force there to slaughter these stupid bastards at the same time, and make the Sudan a protectorate again. Or dig a Vulcan bomber out of a museum somewhere and use it to rain twenty thousand pounds of teddy bears down on the place. Take your pick.

It's a trumped up charge against an innocent woman; proof that even those who go to a place solely to do good cannot escape the wrath of the Islamist Extremist Society. (As if the beheading of left-wing aid workers in Iraq wasn't proof enough.)

If I were an imam, I'd have put out a fatwa on these bloody idiots already. Or on the teddy bear.

Adnan wrote:
"If you understand so much then you should understand the difference between a teddy bear & a human being too !!"

If you understand even a little, you would understand the difference between a normal human being and Prophet Muhammad(PHUB), then you might begin to understand the roots of... those who were offended and perhaps your own, lunacy too.

"So a British school teacher working in Sudan has been jailed for 14 days for allowing the seven year old students in her class to name a class teddy bear Muhammad"

I don't know why they're blaming the teacher. Clearly, all of those 7-year-olds need to be hauled out of their homes and stoned to death.

"So a British school teacher working in Sudan has been jailed for 14 days for allowing the seven year old students in her class to name a class teddy bear Muhammad"

I don't know why they're blaming the teacher. Clearly, all of those 7-year-olds need to be hauled out of their homes and stoned to death.

"As many of us now know (thanks to riots over Danish cartoons), Muslims consider it an offense to use the name of the prophet in an insulting manner. However, if Muhammad is the most popular name in the Muslim world, how is an English (and Christian) school teacher to know that naming a teddy bear Muhammad would cause such rage? Was she actually trying to insult Islam?"

Sounds like the boys down in Sudan just want to stone a Xian teacher for old times sake. Must not be much else happening there.

FWIW, the Sudan is one of the few theocracies left in the world. They could be blazing a trail for the USA, if the theocrats have their way.

"Most Muslims, on the other hand, as a mild example, believe that apostasy should be punishable by death. All the statistics indicate this."
Gary Kirsten #35

The Christians believe that too, and it says as much in their book. We just have a society of laws that forces them to behave. As soon as that isn't there, they're at least as gleeful about killing heretics as the Muslims are.

"Most Muslims, on the other hand, as a mild example, believe that apostasy should be punishable by death. All the statistics indicate this."
Gary Kirsten #35

The Christians believe that too, and it says as much in their book. We just have a society of laws that forces them to behave. As soon as that isn't there, they're at least as gleeful about killing heretics as the Muslims are.

"Most Muslims, on the other hand, as a mild example, believe that apostasy should be punishable by death. All the statistics indicate this."
Gary Kirsten #35

The Christians believe that too, and it says as much in their book. We just have a society of laws that forces them to behave. As soon as that isn't there, they're at least as gleeful about killing heretics as the Muslims are.

" I don't know why they're blaming the teacher."
sarcástico #40

She's a foreigner. In some places that makes her fair game for all blame (especially various Arabic and Islamic places, from which I've heard of previous such legal injustices before). It's probably also particularly damning that she's a female. Again notably applicable in the same places but hardly unique to them.

These are all out-of-balance symptoms. Several months ago, Bonnie and I intimated that a joint Ron Paul/Dennis Kucinich ticket would be a dream come true.

Evidently, Dennis Kucinich feels the same way:

http://www.236.com/news/2007/11/26/dennis_kucinich_wants_to_hook_1_2536.php

Happy, happy, happy.

"These fanatics have committed genocide in darfur but have enough time for this crap."

waylay,

You would known there is a country where the most extreme form of Islam (Wahhabism) is the official religion: Saudi Arabia, that country so important in the oil business that its religious extremism, exported all over the world, is ignored, together with royal bribery and other scandals. Do you know there are Muslims seeing Wahhabism as a threat just as well?

So why ignore that in Wahhabism, the only good Muslim is a Wahhabi and other Muslims are infidels? Which countries are most supportive of Wahhabism, ignoring the export of indoctrination? Which country funded the victory of Wahhabis over the Soviets in Afghanistan by giving them and sponsoring their military training? Any idea that Wahhabism is the official religion in Sudan just as well?

How the Saudis used oil money to export a hardline ideology that fuels Islamist terror:

http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/article3109870.ece

I would like to qoute Carl Marx in order to sum up what my point of view is on this entire thing.

"Religion is the opium of the masses.Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of the soulless"

Karl Marx

How true.

The sooner mankind sees religion for what it really is and dumps ritualistic nonesense for a selfless belief in equality and self realisation the better off it shall be.

Really if I could speak out of tone for a moment, people who preach religion, or try to convince others to follow their religion or state that their beliefs are exclusive to the world should be locked up for premoting the most deadly propeganda ever known to man. Which is Religion, whatever form it may come in, religion is dangerous, it is explotational and it only serves mankind not the Divine creator.

Religion has no place in the modern world. Learn to know and love thyself and through thyself will you know god and will love all things. This is the only devotion one needs.

Regards

Thanks for sharing Kanika, as I enjoyed hearing a little bit about the Muslim beliefs. And if I could share how many times that I have been attacked by a fundamentalist Christian, including my family, it would probably fill up my bank account ... well, joking on the money part.

I believe that you handled that conflict so very. When someone gets that upset about a belief, they will not be changing any time soon and it is a little scary to experience an extreme show of faith in a threatening manner. I am so very sorry, as I am a Christian and that's not way someone should share love. But you did it well.

The fear in that person's response is the clue, as there is no fear in love. However, when I first received Spirit more strongly about 6 years ago, as I needed and prayed for comfort and received comfort, I did only what I knew to share my experience. So I initially started out that way, ever so briefly, as I was told by Spirit, "That is not my way."

When a child is given something very powerful and does not listen to the teacher or is still learning, that child can hurt many other children by ignorance.

The name of Jesus Christ is very powerful, as it is truly a gift of love by God. To believe and have faith is beautiful. The Holy Spirit is very real and extremely loving and is a representation of God or is God and Jesus Christ combined from what I have been told.

So the way I see it, especially if we ask, Spirit will teach us all those beautiful things (love, compassion, kindness, gentleness, patiences, joy, peace, meekness, etc.) about God and show us how to do be those things step by step.

Deepak knows a lot about God and he is one of the great human teachers that my Lord gave to me. I often wonder why God gave me a Hindu teacher, but it does not seem to matter as Deepak knows Spirit. So I've got so much to learn. However, since I am a Christian and I do believe in the story of Jesus Christ, I started from there as I continue to expand. The story is true, but so misunderstood. Deepak seems to know more about Jesus Christ than most Christians. Anyway, I cannot wait until Deepak's Jesus books come out!

Well, I'm sure I have not said anything new, so I looking forward to reading all the responses to Kanika's post.

BTW: The truth is the same everywhere and the Holy Spirit never changes, i.e., God has always been pure and whole. So we are the ones growing and growing and growing :-) as I look forward to my journey to know myself and our God.

Well...my 2 cents for the moment.

Love, Char

PS: God truly loves all the children and is not a separator.

PPS: I apologize for putting Deepak in a box, but I cannot go back and reword my post. I believe that Deepak has said on several occasions that Buddha did not call himself a Buddhist, nor did Jesus call himself a Christian. Therefore, Deepak would probably not call himself a Hindu, even though that was part of his upbring from what I have read. So if I offended anyone, I am sorry as I am still learning and seeking.

My father said in his eulogy, "Do not but me in a box, but bury me in the ground." We did not understand what he was saying at the time, as we tried to figure out how to put dad at rest. Since he was cremated due to no other options, we put that box in the ground, as the law would not allow us to bury the ashes and one of my sisters would not permit anything but burial in the ground. It was a messy situation ....

Love, Char

#54 Char4

"Deepak has said on several occasions that Buddha did not call himself a Buddhist, nor did Jesus call himself a Christian. Therefore, Deepak would probably not call himself a Hindu."

-------------------------------------------------

Char4, sorry. Your logic is wayward.

Jesus and Buddha started new religions. Deepak did not. Deepak is well known all over the world for his mind-body connection medicine. Even President Clinton eulogized him during his trip to India and it's well documented at the Chopra Center Site. So did President Gorbachev.

Deepak does not teach Hinduism or any other religion, even though he his upbringing is Hindu and he copiously quotes Vedantic philosophy and Buddhism. He has deep insights on the human consciousness that is part of the universal consciousness, through which we all are connected. This theory has yet been embraced by many except few people like me who see in it the grandeur of creation. Perhaps time will tell how this original concept - I think it is original, because even in Vedas, the merging of souls with God is mentioned, and all individual souls are considered as separate entities, and not connected through consciousness as Deepak postulates. I may be mistaken in understanding Deepak fully well. In that case I'd like to ask Deepak to clarify this concept to us all.

Thank you Deepak, in case you read my comment.

Qoute:
PS: God truly loves all the children and is not a separator.)

The very nature of reality shows even the most hardened religious nutter that God does not give a toss about Children or goats or squirrels or the blue whale or the polar bear or the ice sheets for that matter.

See it is this method of chloroformed aspect of god that gives rise to the countless dillusions of God in its true essence.

Let me tell you something and this comes from many years of spiritual surrendering and years of mediation and denial of the ego. God is much more than the love for the children. God is the greatest miracle that you can possibly concieve and then some!

In this lifetime we all can Die, fall in love, become bankrupt, win the lottery, go scuba diving and so on and so on.... Why can we live and do these things?

Through the grace of god we are concious of the world and also we live within the universe of endless choice, of endless possibility. God is the unmanifested potential of all that can be, that will be and has been all at the same time.

Including Cancer, Including fire, Including poverty and rape and murder.

God is not some seperate entity that is some how out there sitting on a cloud watching over your life and making notes. God is the very potential of every day. God is the potential of every breath that you can take, might take or could take. He is the potential of everything and at the same time is nothing.

You can put god in a box with all the fancy trimmings as much as you want when it comes to religion but I am still not buying it from you.

Through the endless potential of God we may be able to save the children and the polar bears, but God is not out there wanting to do this. God is the fuel that has started the fire and if we want to do something about anything then he already gave us the power to do it when he became life and became conciouse through us.

Being alive is to be a wittness to god

you have the power to use him in your life if you want to.

every child that is ever born is a profit of god

That is not a good comparision. The experience of the British teacher was a terrifying one. Problems of Islam are beyond comarision with Christanity.

If there is any such thing as 'group inferiority complex', a large number of followers of Islam must suffer from it a lot. Any negative comment about their religion, prophet or Koran can arouse violent reaction by some for sure. And those who are not violently reacting are unable to condemn it. What is going on? Perhaps, deep down in their hearts they do'nt like their religion, or they think it is so fragile that it needs to be guarded against even a tiny intrusion.
Morris

Enjoying the posts. It would be nice if I could put down in words what I mean, meant, etc. and to be able to have it change, as I try to express myself to whom it may be concern at a specific time. I guess it depends on what we are referring to and at what level and how we are personally relating to a thing/person/place at the moment. However, I am a believer in Jesus Christ and God, but I just cannot seem to be able to share it in a positive way or put it into words from level 1 to 10 - like God might if s/he was before each of us 1:1 or in us or whatever way one might relate to their Higher Self. Anyway, as I said, I'm still learning, so that's my best :-) and it's my personal story.

Once I was told by Spirit that love was made for us, so I can understand the above comments on love. And I can see oneness if we unite with God, but that's another story for one would have to be a god and I don't think I will ever be the GOD. Because if I were really united with GOD, I think I would not exist. I personally I don't think anyone will ever be the GOD Almighty and that's my religious beliefs, even though I believe God is very humble and would not mind little gods or children, but one had better be as great as God to be God and what I've read in the Bible and what I see in the material world, I cannot imagine any of us creating all that. Even Jesus still had reverence for God, when at times, Jesus did not seem to deny the oneness he felt. But, of course, my comments are from an unenlightened being, so what can I say.

So ... it was good food for thought and thanks! Well time to go home.

Love, Char

Religion is a subset of irrationality, a concept that strives to limit in our day to day lives.

Good news...

She is finally freed...

what more? she has oly good things to say about Sudan...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7126162.stm

"Mrs Gibbons said she was treated the same as other Sudanese prisoners and that the Ministry of Interior sent her a bed, which was "the best present".

"I wouldn't like to put anyone off going to Sudan"
Gillian Gibbons

She is a bit deranged, I think, actually.

A bed is an exceptional gift to a prisoner? She was sentenced to prison for naming a teddy bear? Mobs were howling for her execution for that "crime"? And she says, "I wouldn't like to put anyone off going to Sudan."

Too late. I'm quite put off, and think the Sudan is a hell-hole for lunatics.

Yeah, to call a teddy bear Mohammad is very insulting, to all teddy bears. What a screwed up religion they got in Sudan.

I just bought a Teddy & named it, "x sucks my wang."

I deeply hope x's worshipers are not offended...

Ref. 60 BBC News Report

Thats all she has to say?

I mean ...who cares if it was a Muslim woman in the same situation who might have been silently executed or stoned with no international outcry. This woman got a bed.

Damn Shakti, didn't you ever think it might have been a very nice bed with a flower print or something?

This has been in the news constantly for the past week. Generally accompanied by the phrase, "Well they have made their point, but enough is enough."

W.T.F.?

What point? That they are thin-skinned, fundamentalist nutjobs? Since when has it been okay to 'make a point' out of a primary school teacher? One who is thousands of miles from home doing good work in a country that needs help? She named the teddy in September but it took over a month for someone to get offended, obviously a slow day.

And all she can do is say thanks for them giving her a bed? I would be so ANGRY if I were her! Not in the least because it was those children that named it, and they should be the ones getting lashed. Honestly!

Clearly, if they were not religious they would have made her sleep on the floor without a mattress, so this is yet another example of the way religion improves people's behavior! Wait, what's that you say? Without religion she wouldn't have been jailed for an imaginary "crime" in the first place? Oh.

She was sentenced to prison for naming a teddy bear?

She didn't even name that @#$%@$ bear: She only allowed her students -- who, as local Muslims, should have known better than she, what was or was not insulting -- to name the bear.

When I read her undeservedly gracious comments upon her release, I was actively angry. If I were her, I'd be suing the government of Sudan for roughly the country's gross domestic product. Not that she would collect a single penny, of course, but somebody needs to stand up and shout to the world that imprisoning (and threatening with flogging and execution) someone for being an innocent bystander to somebody else's accidental blasphemy is outside every norm of acceptable human behavior!

Iago, from what I have heard, this Mohamed guy was into little girls. He must have really hated women - look at the misogyny that his religion practices, that's done in his name. Islam seems to be even worse than Christianity three hundred years ago.

"She is a bit deranged, I think, actually."
Gary Kirsten 61

Possibly. Or she might have been thinking about the safety of her colleagues at the school, and making damn sure she doesn't give ammunition to anyone to retaliate against the ones still there--not that they apparently need a reason or anything, though.

The sad thing is that incidents like this, and like the Tripoli Six (Bulgarian Nurse's Affair in Libya), deter (and rightly so) others from going in to work afterwards. So the people who need health care and teachers the most are that much less likely to get them, as a result.

There is another way to interpret this. For "I wouldn't like to put anyone off going to Sudan", read "there are other foreign teachers in the country, and I wouldn't like to put them at risk by saying anything which could set off the hair-trigger nutjob element of the population".

If Sudan had supported the right to arm the bears, none of this could have happened.

Sure, she should better publicly criticize the Sudanese Laws. Because we have no reason to think that in such a democratic country there would be no reprisals for the whole school including the kids.

Wrong chosen target. Shame on the Sudanese dictatorship, not on the English teacher. We can criticize them, she cannot.

Presumably she was told to keep her mouth shut about the subhuman barbarism from which she has just been rescued as part of the terms of her release?

Iago, Maxi, I think that Shakti's point was that a Muslim woman would have been treated worse, and worse yet, no one would have known about it, there would've been no international outrage, the Sudanese government wouldn't have seen to her being kept alive, and so on.

In short, as outrageous as this was, it would have been worse for someone of a different religion. In my opinion her race and socio-economic group spared her worse treatment that, again, was horrible enough to begin with.

Yes, I would've liked to see her directly speak out against the government and the lunatic mobs that wanted her executed. As I think would most of IntentBlog readers. She's not us.

Oh, and Gary (#61), doesn't this sound more like a heaven for lunatics and a hellhole for the rest of us?

Lets not get this one too much out of perspective. Most Muslims I have seen expressing their view on this matter considered it as ludicrous as the rest of us. The teacher was reported to the religious authorities by a disgruntled secretary who had just lost her job at the school and had threatened to get the whole place closed down. None of the children's parents or the Muslim teachers in the school thought it to be a problem until the religious police turned up. There is a political rift currently between the UK and Sudan over the Darfur issue - the radical Muslims want the west to disengage - and it looks like this was at least partly behind the street protests. There were some Muslims protesting outside the Sudanese embassy in London asking for the teacher to be released - although the protests were tiny compared to those against the Danish cartoons, Salman Rushdie or the most recent Bangladeshi writer Taslima Nasreen. Most western Muslims seem to be of the opinion that this matter is dangerous for Islam because it causes everyone to laugh at it.

Re. 69

Ricky, are you saying something was wrong with Mohammad? I mean really now, what normal guy looks at a nine year ol' girl and doesn't say, "I need to get me some of that!"

I mean, that is not like creepy or anything like that, right?

I am not just angry at her, I am angry at all the fellow liberals who won't criticize Islam, no matter what, out of some misguided reverence for multiculturalism: E.g., apparently Fox News asked the National Organization for Women what their official line was on all this, and they said that they weren't "taking a position." How can any rational person not take the position that this is all lunacy?

I'm experiencing a severe case of cognitive dissonance when I find myself agreeing with right-wing nutjobs who seem to be the only ones outraged by the lunacy of Islam -- yes, yes, I know very well that their agenda is strictly political and that they'd support the same sort of lunacy if it came from Christian or Jewish sources. But still...

And we have no word from Deepak Chopra on this yet, as usual? I haven't seen him criticize Islam in any manner.

Aquol @75

I am under no illusion that a Muslim woman would have been treated far worse than a western woman. I also realize that this has been blown out of all proportions as it also brings the Darfur issue to the surface again.

But the fact remains, one single disgruntled secretary can call the religious police about the possible misnaming of a stuffed toy and be taken seriously. There is no excuse for something like that. And it does cause a lot of people to laugh at Islam, which causes even more trouble.

There is a political rift currently between the UK and Sudan over the Darfur issue

Yes, the point has been made by various people that this was merely a diversionary tactic to cover up the fact that the Sudanese are slaughtering many innocent people in Darfur. But of course they are poor black Sudanese people and not a rich white UK person, so everyone issupposed to pay less attention to them.

http://www.miafarrow.org/

Iago, just think about all the trouble, death, rape, and torture caused by that illiterate camel trader, Mohamed, piss be upon him, and you ask, "are you saying something was wrong with Mohammad?". A heck of a lot worse than creepy.

The solution to all these tensions is to let Sudan and the rest of the Islamic countries continue to import their excess populations over here and in every other western country - then we would all be Moslum and happy! Except for the women of course!

"I wouldn't like to put anyone off going to Sudan."~Gillian Gibbons

Everyone know this is Britspeak for "DO NOT GO THERE, EVER!"

The Brits are famous for understatement, don't you know.

She's probably just being overly polite for politeness sake.

"Iago, from what I have heard, this Mohamed guy was into little girls. He must have really hated women - look at the misogyny that his religion practices, that's done in his name. Islam seems to be even worse than Christianity three hundred years ago." #60 Ricky
**************

300 years ago, Christians were burning thousands of people at the stake (including women accused of witchcraft) and murdering each other in the millions in the wars of religion which at that time were probably the bloodiest conflict in human history.

But we are much more civilized and advanced now, unless, for example, you consider the Christians in South Africa who continue to murder women accused of witchcraft.

Gee, it's almost as if poverty and ignorance had more to do with people being savage moronic arseholes than the particular version of religion they ascribe to.

But that can't be right. After all, it's the specific and exceptional barbarism of Islam that makes it okay for the US to slaughter Muslims by the hundreds of thousand.

I agree with Shakti #78. Islam is seriously whack. You know she may be afraid of some fatwa coming her way in Britain. Will she ever be safe again. These people are nuts.

"Iago, from what I have heard, this Mohamed guy was into little girls. He must have really hated women - look at the misogyny that his religion practices, that's done in his name. Islam seems to be even worse than Christianity three hundred years ago."

Yes Ricky-the prophet married an 11 year old girl-
that may explain a lot of things

But anyplace/religion where men can get away with the crimes their devious minds fantasise about will always exist

Lets not forget the number of cristian/western tourists who flock to the far east where child prostitution/peodophilia is rampant
If their country bans it they simply find any other goegraphical location that allows it.
So its not only the religion-its the mentality of the male mind and the enviornment that allows them to get away with it that makes them do it again and again.
After all when the need is so great there is always a way.
What is it that creates such a perverse need?
That is something you must question

Not Christian or Jew or Muslim, not Hindu,
Buddhist, sufi, or zen. Not any religion

or cultural system. I am not from the East
or the West, nor out of the ocean or up

from the ground, not natural or ethereal, not
composed of elements at all. I do not exist,

am not an entity in this world or the next,
did not descend from Adam or Eve or any

origin story. My place is placeless, a trace
of the traceless. Neither body nor soul.

~ Rumi (Great Sufi Master, i.e., Muslim)

Jesus Christ!

Reading some of your comments about Sudan... maybe this woman (unlike me, or you -- I assume) actually knows people in Sudan, and the lunacy of the Sudanese government notwithstanding, she actually sees those people as individuals and not some monolith of lunacy. I sure wouldn't want anyone to judge all Americans by George Bush's actions. The prosecution and sentence were monstrous, and sure there were some lunatics calling for her execution, but to condemn all the Sudanese people for that is, among other things, just illogical and not worthy of a rational person.

All the Christians and New Agers who pretend that there is just the one god being worshiped by believers should immediately convert to Islam in order to facilitate that Muslim take-over and consequent "peace" (and suffering for all, especially women).

Or they could start being honest for a change. Nah - that will never happen. Not without them first ceasing to be Christians or New Agers and, at most, reducing their religiosity to the weakest modern form of Unitarian (wanting to believe but knowing full well they haven't got a shred of evidence and thus no right to claim any) if they can't manage to go the whole way to being atheistic.

"Ricky, are you saying something was wrong with Mohammad? I mean really now, what normal guy looks at a nine year ol' girl and doesn't say, "I need to get me some of that!"" #77 Iago

"Yes Ricky-the prophet married an 11 year old girl-that may explain a lot of things" #87 swag
*********

Right because he obviously wasn't thinking "She's the daughter of a powerful leader and I need to cement an alliance with her family."

Sure all the thousands of European nobles who were betrothed at that age or earlier over the centuries were thinking that but if people don't constantly repeat that Muslims are vermin, scum and perverts they are guilty of "misplaced multiculturalism".

So let's nuke those fucking camel jockeys then take a big old shit on the rubble where the Kaaba used to stand and wipe our arses with the last copy of the Koran - in the name of peace and tolerance.

Just goes to highlight the ridiculousness of laws which make it illegal to insult someone (be it a religious leader, the founder of a country, the royal family, etc.) - it comes out making people look silly.

In any case, if I ever become some great leader, let me have it on record now that I would be far more deeply offended for being known as that humorless bastard who would have you executed for naming your teddy bear after me, than having the teddy bear named after me.

"Sure, she should better publicly criticize the Sudanese Laws. Because we have no reason to think that in such a democratic country there would be no reprisals for the whole school including the kids."
Sarcastico #73

I understand there would be innocents at risk; not only the kids but also other international aid workers and volunteers. But the thing is, the utter capriciousness of this case demonstrates that those people are already at risk, in ways that are essentially impossible to forecast or mitigate. If the government of Sudan were behaving even marginally acceptably, there might be some point in not poking them in the eye... but they're acting like freaking lunatics, and it's not clear to me that the rest of the world would be making anything worse by calling them on it. Frankly, I think every other country ought to pull their nationals out of Sudan (which is to say, encourage them to leave in the strongest terms allowed by each country's law). If the rest of the world concludes that such action would precipitate renewed/increased genocide, I say that would justify international military action against Sudan.

It's one thing for aid workers to take some calculated risk in support of their humanitarian missions; it's another thing entirely when the choice is between subjecting yourself to arbitrary imprisonment, flogging, or summary execution or leaving the locals to famine and genocide. And it's yet another thing when that horrifying choice is created/propped up by a localized theism so nutty that even its nominal co-religionists around the world can only shake their heads in wonder.

One of the saddest of the many very sad legacies of the current U.S. administration is the way their behavior has totally discredited and undermined military force as a tool of international relations. There really are times (e.g., genocide) when the international community can legitimately decide that a particular regime cannot be permitted to remain unchastened.

"Wrong chosen target. Shame on the Sudanese dictatorship, not on the English teacher. We can criticize them, she cannot."
Sarcastico #73

Yes, I agree that the shame properly belongs to the government of Sudan, but it's hard to "prosecute" the case if the victim refuses to testify. Your prescription here is equivalent to saying a rape victim or someone being extorted by the mob should keep quiet, in case the bad guys do more bad stuff. The bad guys are going to do more bad stuff anyway; the only hope for the good guys is to stand up to them... even when that entails a risk.

PS: I realize that the above appears easy for me to say because I don't have any actual "skin in the game," but it's how I honestly feel. I hope I would have the courage to say the same thing even if I were a 22 year old British infantryman, and thus first in line to be a member of any multinational force.

@84

LOL

I had forgotten about Britspeak.

Where is the outrage over the flagrant hatred of women in Islamic countries like Sudan? It's so clear that all the marching in the streets calling for death is just sexism hiding behind a cloak of hateful, murderous religious dogma. When will we stop "respecting" and "tolerating" religion which so clearly helps people rationalize their sexism, racism, classism and homophobia?

I'm sure this teacher is just relieved to be home with her family, but I would start thinking of ways to take action against an ideology that showed nothing but contempt for someone who was helping educate the children of a war-torn country like Sudan.

"I am not just angry at her, I am angry at all the fellow liberals who won't criticize Islam, no matter what, out of some misguided reverence for multiculturalism:"

Amen, Shakti. I am all for multiculturalism, but how in the world can a person be liberal and not believe human rights trump culture? If you applied the logic of apologists consistently across cultures you would have to believe liberals were on the wrong side of the civil rights movement for Christ's sake.

"I sure wouldn't want anyone to judge all Americans by George Bush's actions. " NickM

Yah, but if (when?) it gets to the point where W can sweep us up off the street and threaten us with public flogging over what we name our Teddy bears, I hope people will speak the fuck up about it, and not keep mum in the vain hope that it will get better by itself!

"I sure wouldn't want anyone to judge all Americans by George Bush's actions. " NickM

Yah, but if (when?) it gets to the point where W can sweep us up off the street and threaten us with public flogging over what we name our Teddy bears, I hope people will speak up about it, and not keep mum in the vain hope that it will get better by itself!

@95

Newsflash: MOST religions persecute women, and the worst thing is that women let them.

While flying into 'save' Muslim women would be ideal, I doubt half of them would take kindly to it. Change from the inside is needed. Not some ballistic attack on Islam and the women thereof.

Reminds me of the bit from "Life of Brian" where they are stoning the old guy for blasphemy:

"All I did was say "This meal's good enough for Jehovah"!"

Someone please tell me why religion is viewed as a positive?

my personal opinion of islam is that they will fight tooth and nail to keep their women in bondage. as soon as they let control slip just a little bit by modernization they will lose the fight. muslim men have such an inferiority complex it is unreal. and huge chips on their shoulders.

Arrested for allowing Teddy Bears to be named?
Sentenced to lashing after being raped?
People being stoned for being gay or sleeping with someone?

WARNING! DO NOT watch the videos on Youtube of people being stoned. They are very, very, very, disturbing.

i mean what woman would want to stay with an abuser if she learned she could be with a nice guy who would treat her like an equal human being. that's what they are afraid of -abandonment.

Preity: There are many reasons why abused women stay with the men that abuse them. It is not a simple issue, and not one limited to Islam.

yes maxi i know that however islam has ingrained it into their religion and society. it is so pervasive that it is virtually inescapable.

yes maxi i know that however islam has ingrained it into their religion and society. it is so pervasive that it is virtually inescapable.

Clarification: In my previous post (#93), I did not mean to be saying the world should invade Sudan over the Teddy bear incident, per se. Rather, I think the proper response to that is for all outside aid workers (and foreign visitors generally) should leave, both because they are not safe and because they are propping up an awful regime by "helping."

Anticipating, however, the argument that pulling out aid workers would be immoral because it would subject innocent people to starvation and genocide (those who aren't already subject to starvation and genocide, that is)... well I was simply saying that if that is in fact true, it amounts to an argument that the government is both illegitimate and so evil that the rest of the world ought to consider removing it by force.

I will deftly sidestep the Godwin pitfall by referring to Pol Pot instead of that other fellow, but the point is the same: There are some governments whose actions are so far outside acceptable human norms that they must not be permitted to remain among the community of nations (i.e., they are of orders of magnitude worse than garden-variety dictators). I don't personally know the Sudan situation well enough to make that judgment... but the suggestions here that someone as ill-used as this teacher dare not speak even mildly unkindly about her abusers, for fear of the consequences to the innocent masses, strongly hint in that direction.

They are a bit touchy of western interventions, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Omdurman

"I am under no allusion that a Muslim woman would have been treated far worse than a western woman."

You know I just searched through several years worth of Human Rights and Amnesty reports on Sudan and couldn't find evidence of ANYONE being executed for blasphemy.

But that's obviously just proof that those freedom-hating Dhimmi appeasers at those organizations are out to cover up the truth: all Muslims are the spawn of Satan and should be killed.

Surely they reported on the atrocities in Darfur but that's obviously just a cover for their true agenda.

fun fact: Sudan (population ca, 40,000,000) executes slightly more people per year than the United states (population 300,000,000).

But, you know, the people executed in the United States were all guilty, well mostly guilty. Well mostly poor, black and probably guilty of something?

The government of Somalia are bastards and murderers.

That's a fact.

"The government of Somalia are inhuman monsters without matching in human history and its all because they are Muslim".

That's crap.

The majority of Muslims (and the most populous Muslim countries by the way all lie outside the Middle East - Indonesia, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkey)are no more responsible for the actions of a few hundred idoit demonstrators in Khartoum than the average Americans is responsible for the actions of the Westboro Baptist church.

"my personal opinion of islam is that they will fight tooth and nail to keep their women in bondage. "

Tell that to a Javanese Santri woman some time.

Arrgh! #107, "the proper response to that is for all outside aid workers ... should leave" ought, of course, be "the proper response to that is for all outside aid workers ... to leave"!

Oh, for an "edit" button on these comments!

salman you are forgetting those 400,000 unfortunate souls in darfur

"an ideology that showed nothing but contempt for someone who was helping educate the children"- Nitasha

But that's nothing unique to Sudan. It is common to religious power freaks all over. The education of children is one of the things they are most seeking to prevent - because better educated people become less religious and also less prone to falling for similar ideologies and thus less easy to control through fear and ignorance. Hence Texas and other large tracts of the US. Hence also the religious nutters in the UK damaging education whenever they are in positions of power (eg Tony Blair and Ruth Kelly and their pal Peter Vardy).

Salman, in Merka, "mostly poor, black" IS guilty of something.

"salman you are forgetting those 400,000 unfortunate souls in darfur"

No, I'm not. Nor am I forgetting the estimated 650,000 estimated additional deaths in Iraq since the US invasion of that country.

Unfortunately the world as a whole is a long way off from (freedom) from "toxic emotions".
Remnants from a more primitive time they flow freely in the Universal Consciousness fighting to defend and protect (The Sense of Separation).
I find myself still dealing with these Akashic memory patterns of primitive emaotional consciousness. What you describe is just an extreme version or manifestation.
Peace,
Todd

I don't think every person in Sudan is an Islamic fanatic. I do think that as an American, I am responsible for the actions of my country, and that includes the election of George W. Bush and the lunatics of Westboro Baptist Church.

If I want to take credit for the good that is done by the community of which I am part, I also have to accept responsibility for its evils.

--------
"fun fact: Sudan (population ca, 40,000,000) executes slightly more people per year than the United states (population 300,000,000).

But, you know, the people executed in the United States were all guilty, well mostly guilty. Well mostly poor, black and probably guilty of something?" Muhammad Salman Ali Khan
---------

Sure, I am painfully aware of the US's many hypocrisies, and I can't even blame all of them on Republican wingnuts. One of the worst things about my own country's bad behavior is that it robs us of moral force that might otherwise be used to help the plight of others around the world.

I am a fan of the TV show The West Wing, and there's a moment in the first season that has always resonated with me: Josh (Bradley Whitford) and Sam (Rob Lowe) are briefly tempted to resort to political dirty tricks to help a beloved mentor who's in trouble, and they go to a call girl of Sam's acquaintance to solicit dirt on the "bad guys." Her response is indignant: "You're the good guys; you ought to act like it!"

Without meaning to trivialize a serious discussion with a pop-culture reference, that's how I feel about my country: We are the good guys, and we ought to act like it... but I'm painfully clear about the fact that we often don't (especially recently). It doesn't mean, however, that we ought to give up trying. As you and others have pointed out, there's a difference between a people and its government or its religious leaders. That is as true of the U.S. as it is of Sudan or Iran.

--------
"The government of Somalia are bastards and murderers.

That's a fact.

"The government of Somalia are inhuman monsters without matching in human history and its all because they're Muslim".

That's crap."
-------------

For the record, I am not making the latter argument. I condemn them because of their behavior (to wit, they are "bastards and murderers"), not their religion. I think it's possible that they use fundamentalist theism to bolster their murderous bastardy, but to say that religious fundamentalism may make it easier for them to get away with their behavior is not the same as saying "its all because they are Muslim."

As to whether they are historically evil, I have already said I don't know. I only mean to say that if they rise to that standard of evil, the world has a right to do something about it, just as any human community has a right to police itself.

"I do think that as an American, I am responsible for the actions of my country," Gary Kirsten

I think that that responsibility is somewhat moderated when you are the citizen of a country where dissenters are routinely murdered by the government.

To clarify my position:

1. The people calling for the teacher's death are either very, very, stupid; mentally disturbed; violently bigoted; grossly misinformed or some combination of the above. Whichever way: f@#$ 'em.

2. The government of Sudan are a bunch of criminal thugs. Had the US invaded Sudan rather than Iraq in 2003 I would probably have applauded their action.

3. Neither the actions of the protesters or the Sudanese government are specific to Islam and implying some form of collective guilt to all Muslims for their actions is grossly unfair.

Question: what have individual Christian or New Age posters here done to prevent the atrocities carried out by the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army in the name of Christ?

Question: Do individual atheist posters here feel any responsibility for the crimes committed by the avowedly atheist governments of China, Vietnam and North Korea?

Preity, I hope like hell you are being sarcastic, because otherwise, that's the most stunningly ignorant thing I've read on the subject of domestic violence in a long, long time.

I certainly understand why she wasn't as critical as she could have been -- she doesn't want to endanger everyone else who's there, and she's probably feeling quite grateful that she got out of prison without being raped, rape being one of the major forms of systematic oppression used over there.

For those of you tuning in late, the reason Sudanese women, like other women, don't "just leave," why it appears that they "go along" with horrific abuse, is because the system's rigged. How do you leave if you have no resources, no skills, and nowhere to go? How do you leave if leaving means having to entirely depend on the kindness of strangers, especially in the middle of a civil war, when you can't.

If you try to flee, if you're lucky maybe you'll wind up locked in the house and raped three or four times. If not, maybe angry relatives of yours will stone you or set you on fire. Put up or shut up -- if those were your alternatives, you wouldn't be so quick on the draw about leaving.

i think you are misunderstanding me Aquol. IF muslim women didn't have misogynism so deeply ingrained in their culture then they would not be in abusive situations in the first place(eg not be with muslim men). like i said there is no way out for them.

"and she's probably feeling quite grateful that she got out of prison without being raped" Aquol @120

Aren't you merely assuming that she did? Isn't that yet another thing it probably wouldn't have been safe for her to mention?

"if those were your alternatives, you wouldn't be so quick on the draw about leaving." Aquol

And that has also applied to many women and children in Western countries, where the police and other authorities would traditionally return them to their abusers (certainly for most of the last century and the ones before that).

She didn't want to be tortured, raped and killed by many-who-flew-over-the-koo-koo's-nest...so she thanked them for the bed.

@121

Why would blogowner Deepak be offended if some blogposter wants to name his terrier after him?
Certainly we should not equate the fundamentalist Sudanese lawmakers with Deepak Chopra's blog administrators. But then IntentBlog is a private kindgom and they have every right to delete any 'unconfortable' comments (and ban the offender) without any explanation or justification whatsoever!(including this, & me)

I think it is about time we come up with a name for a trolish behavior that is employed more and more frequently in discussions that criticize the prevailing attitude, ideology or culture within a group:

Make any negative remark that identify the group as part of a nation (e.g. Sudan) or religious group (e.g. Muslims) or geographical area (e.g. the American South) and a couple of people will always show up and sidetrack the discussion by arguing that the criticism is nothing but an unfair and mean generalization.

Then anyone who agreed and expanded on the criticism has to make sure that caveats are posted explaining that, No, not every person in Sudan is an Islamic fanatic, No, not every Muslim is a potential suicide bomber, No, not everybody who lives in the South is a Bush-voting redneck, etc. etc.

Maxi@ #99, #104:

You are right to point out that sexism, etc. are also perpetrated and perpetuated by women in the community. Certainly "MOST religions persecute women". I am sure we can agree that sexism is where other forms of discrimination and oppression stem from. Maybe we can agree that religious indoctrination is at the root, persuading us to suppress ourselves and oppress each other?

------------
"2. The government of Sudan are a bunch of criminal thugs. Had the US invaded Sudan rather than Iraq in 2003 I would probably have applauded their action."
Muhammad Salman Ali Khan
-------------

Ahhh, on this point, at least, you and I are in what my engineer coworkers would call "violent agreement." ;^)

Though even there, I would prefer we work with true international consensus, rather than the virtually unilateral approach we took with Iraq. It's necessary but not sufficient to invade the right country for the right reasons; you must also do it the right way... which means (expect in the case of direst national emergency) with at least the consent, if not the assistance, of your like-minded neighbors.

-----------
Question: what have individual Christian or New Age posters here done to prevent the atrocities carried out by the Ugandan Lord's Resistance Army in the name of Christ?

Question: Do individual atheist posters here feel any responsibility for the crimes committed by the avowedly atheist governments of China, Vietnam and North Korea?
-------------

Speaking as an ex Catholic, a recent New Age believer and a newly minted atheist, perhaps I can address both of these: Nothing and no.

People are morally accountable for the actions of democratic governments that are at least nominally representative of their collective will; they are not responsible for the actions of a church hierarchy that claims absolute authority over them (or any local expression thereof). They are emphatically not responsible for the actions of other people who happen to not believe in the same things they don't believe in. There is no "command structure" within atheism (that is; maybe as a new recruit, I just haven't been briefed yet!).

There are a lot of comments here about problems with Islam. I would like to say my son set me straight recently when I was complaining about Islam: he pointed out the actions of Muslims in Rwanda during the massacres of the Tutsis. Muslim Rwandans absolutely refused to participate in the massacres, and probably prevented many deaths. This is in contrast to many Christian Rwandans (including clergy), who seemed to have no problem slaughtering their neighbors.

A couple of points.

(1) There is a wide diversity within Islam. Differences are as great as those between, say, Holy Roller baptists and Unitarians. Don't put them all in one pot.

(2) "Mohammed" is the most common first name in the world. It is easy to understand why Muslim kids might want to give that name to a favorite teddy bear. It is hard to understand why a Muslim adult would object to it.

(3) The teacher's comments are perfectly understandable. Captives, especially those treated badly, often identify with their captors. Hard to explain, but happens often. Remember Patty Hearst?

"Aren't you merely assuming that she did? Isn't that yet another thing it probably wouldn't have been safe for her to mention?" Alex @124

A friend of mine whose is 1/2 Arab and has the surname "Nasser" visited the United states recently. He was stopped at Customs and questioned.

He CLAIMS he was not held illegally incommunicado; waterboarded; sodomised with various foreign instruments and subjected to electrical torture to his genitals but maybe it wouldn't have been safe to mention?

Jeff Harris, you make some thoughtful, articulate points, from which I infer that you are not just a knee-jerk militarist idoit.

So, I have to ask just how you think that US military intervention in the Sudan - especially in light of the results of American invasion of two other Muslim nations - would improve the conditions of women (or other oppressed groups), or "chasten" the leadership, there?

"I think it is about time we come up with a name for a trolish behavior that is employed more and more frequently in discussions that criticize the prevailing attitude, ideology or culture within a group:" Shakti

Yes, it was obviously unfair of me to treat these posts as attacking Islam or Muslims in general:

"...this Mohamed guy was into little girls...."

"...that illiterate camel trader, Mohamed, piss be upon him,.."

"what normal guy looks at a 9 year ol' girl and doesn't say, "I need to get me some of that!"

"I mean, that is not like creepy or anything like that, right?"

Next thing you know "trolls" will be objecting to the description of Martin Luther King as an uppity nigger buck in the pay of Moscow and the New York Jew who couldn't keep it in his pants around white women.

Well, of course she is deranged. It's called "Stockholm Syndrome". It could be years before she comes to grips with the fact that she was imprisoned for nothing at all by a stone-age kleptocracy trying to appease a mob of savages.

" Had the US invaded Sudan rather than Iraq in 2003 I would probably have applauded their action."Muhammad Salman Ali Khan

Sure, because the oppressed always benefit when their oppressors are attacked by a foreign power. There is no instance in history where such an attack has triggered a firestorm of brutality and repression against the already-oppressed. Nobody ever uses such occurrences as an excuse to go on the rampage. Nobody ever accuses the oppressed groups in question of being traitors, of forming a "fifth column", or of "stabbing our boys in the back", and then uses all the other circumstances that inevitably go with being on the sharp end of an invasion (troops in the streets, martial law, the "fog of war", etc) as an opportunity for a pogrom.

Furthermore, people who feel under attack by an overwhelmingly superior enemy always become more politically and socially liberal, and they never look to the strongest, most authoritarian leader available to save them.

Well, I guess I'm all snarked out now...

Using a military invasion to improve human rights is somewhat like using a sledgehammer to fix a watch. Not only is it not going to work, it's almost certainly going to make the situation so much worse as to be effectively irreparable.

I promise I'll never own another pet that isn't named after a Muslim prophet or imam. I need to write the Sudanese embassy and let them know.

"Question: Do individual atheist posters here feel any responsibility for the crimes committed by the avowedly atheist governments of China, Vietnam and North Korea?" @119

Then by that logic atheists should feel responsibility for every crime EVER committed by anyone ANYWHERE, because atheists share with the perpetrators a disbelief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

Yo Salman, Non-sequitur much?

--------
"Jeff Harris, you make some thoughtful, articulate points, from which I infer that you are not just a knee-jerk militarist idoit."
Kieth A. Johnson
---------

Thanks... I think? I hope I'm not a jerk or an idoit... but people's self-evaluations on those points are notoriously unreliable. I am certainly not a militarist: I am about as far from it as you can be without being an outright pacifist. OTOH, I am not a pacifist, either, as I admit there are (hopefully very rare) occasions when the use of military force is not only morally acceptable but obligatory.

------
" So, I have to ask just how you think that US military intervention in the Sudan - especially in light of the results of American invasion of two other Muslim nations - would improve the conditions of women (or other oppressed groups), or "chasten" the leadership, there?"
-------

Sadly, I think U.S. military intervention in Sudan or anywhere else for any purpose other than clear-cut national defense has been rendered useless and counterproductive by our stupid and arguably criminal actions in Iraq. (Afghanistan is a whole another -- and much more complex -- issue, IMHO.) There may or may not be a general case for military intervention in Sudan, but any U.S. participation would immediately de-legitimize the effort, for the very reason you point out. When you have power and use it badly, or for evil purposes, you forfeit any hope of using that power for good. I opposed these bastards in every way I could, but nevertheless, I must bear the guilt of their actions... and that includes the "opportunity cost" of the good things we might otherwise have done on the world stage.

Mind you, I don't advocate invading sovereign states to "improve the conditions of women (or other oppressed groups)" unless said conditions sink to the direst sort of violations of human rights. I say the world has the right to intervene -- with force if necessary -- to stop mass slaughter, deliberate starvation, systematic rape or enslavement, etc., but I'm not calling for the tanks to roll in support of women's right to drive cars or show their ankles in public.

@135 Salman Khan: nice try tying this into MLK. I think that the prevailing attitude towards religion is pretty obvious here, and if you can't handle people badmouthing it you should probably find somewhere else to hang out.

I don't think MLK was any of the racist terms you are baiting people with, but I do think his religious conviction was delusional. Whatever else he did he had the flaw of talking to invisible men in the sky that don't exist, just like Mohammed and every other charlatan religious snake-oil salesman.

If you can't handle "attacks" on religion, get the hell out.

"Using a military invasion to improve human rights is somewhat like using a sledgehammer to fix a watch. Not only is it not going to work, it's almost certainly going to make the situation so much worse as to be effectively irreparable."
Daniel Mitchell (#137)

For the most part, I would agree; a notable exception is the Vietnamese invasion of Cambodia that deposed the Khmer Rouge. Not that I am a big fan of the Vietnamese army, but the rest of the world wasn't doing enough of anything about the situation, so Vietnam's power grab actually did somewhat serve the humanitarian goal it claimed to be operating under. It is notable as an exception, though; in general, you're right.

"A friend of mine whose is 1/2 Arab and has the surname "Nasser" visited the United states recently. He was stopped at Customs and questioned.

He CLAIMS he was not held illegally incommunicado; waterboarded; sodomised with various foreign instruments and subjected to electrical torture to his genitals but maybe it wouldn't have been safe to mention?" Salman Ali #133

Perhaps it wouldn't! Investigations have shown that far too many countries have been letting the US abduct and illegally detain citizens and will also comply with extremely one-sided extradition laws (ie the US typically refuses to reciprocate in handing over people that other countries want to prosecute). So your friend really wouldn't necessarily be safe once he had escaped US custody on that occasion (though I think it's possibly slightly less likely the US authorities would take it out on any relatives and friends etc still in the US).

As it happens though, I suspect the Sudanese authorities were pretty scared of damaging the UK teacher and it's not particularly likely that they risked raping her.

"(ie the US typically refuses to reciprocate in handing over people that other countries want to prosecute)"

Interesting developments lately. Our aMerkin Administration now claims the right to kidnap people we want, even if they are resident in our allies' countries. I can't wait to see the reciprocity on that BS.

The whole story of the teddy bear has most Westerners feeling enlightened and morally superior. I wonder though what would happen if kids in the American heartland named the class ferret or guinea pig "The Blessed Virgin Mary" or if some young 4Her came to the stock show with his prize Berkshire hog "Jesus Christ" or even "Billy Graham". (In Britain substitute Her Royal Highness, Elizabeth II and Diana, Princess of Wales in any of these examples)

Given that some see it as permissible to raise "crimes" like conducting legal abortions. or being gay to capital offenses, I would not be surprised to hear cries of "String 'em up!"

"There is no "command structure" within atheism (that is; maybe as a new recruit, I just haven't been briefed yet!)." ~Jeff

?

I don't know .... but one can never destroy God. We breath because God breaths thru us and is within us.

Love, Char

"In Britain substitute Her Royal Highness, Elizabeth II and Diana, Princess of Wales in any of these examples"

No, we would mostly laugh. There are already TV (and radio?) programmes dedicated to doing exactly that sort of thing. :-D (It is claimed by various insiders that the royal family even watch, allegedly approvingly, some of that sort of stuff poking fun at them.)

However, I can imagine that if enough of the current crop of idiots took over, the UK really could get as bad as you imagine (and presumably parts of America already are, given that you believe your account to be plausible).

post 119,
' Neither the actions of the protesters or the Sudanese government are specific to Islam and implying some form of collective guilt to all Muslims for their actions is grossly unfair.'

I agree, but the onus is on the rest of the muslims to denounce their actions as wrong and do so unhesitatingly. If you want public perceptions about islam to change, there needs to be a challenge coming from within islam to the perpetrators of these atrocities in the name of religion. All the other religious or political bodies you mention that have committed or are committing atrocities have vociferous opposition from within their communities. There are very strong antiwar lobbies in America and Europe that have always opposed the action in Iraq and have started changing the tide of opinion against their governments that were responsible. One sees a lack of that sort of freedom of expression in Muslim communities. It is not enough to find clever responses to all the allegations on this blog. It is more important for educated, moderate muslims to work within their communities to eradicate intolerance and ignorance. That and that alone will change the public perceptions about islam and bring it into the 21st century.

Neetu

For the most part, I agree with you. It seems though that the essence of the Islamic faith, that of loving acceptance and inner peace, has been perverted by jihad(religious warfare) by fanatics and characterized by paranoia and xenophobia.

So many muslims seem to be enamored with this militant fundamentalism, even in countries like Britain and the US, where they do not have to fear speaking out. Yet I do not hear many doing so.

Bonnie

I love when people try and compare the fanatics of the US to those of most Middle Eastern Islamic Nations. For those who suggest this comparison, let's do a small test. You run down the street in an Islamic nation yelling, "Mohammad sucks donkey ass!"..."And I'll run down in the US yelling, "Jesus sucks donkey ass!"

We can see how long you live as compared to how long I do,,Mmmm K?

Iago, since I only speak American English, I think my survival chances are actually better in the Middle East than yours are in East Bible Thump.

I prefer to look at this another way. What if a bunch of schoolchildren in the US named their teddy bear "Jesus"? Just because many Hispanic kids have that name doesn't mean that it's a good idea.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPCHN0ZQl2Y

Blasphemy !!!

"What if a bunch of schoolchildren in the US named their teddy bear "Jesus"? "

Non-Christians would think it was silly but harmless; Christians would think it was cute, and a sign of religious devotion; Hispanics would think it was just a name.

Nobody, not even the citizens of East Bible Thump, would call for public floggings of anyone, let alone executions. It's bad over here, but not *that* bad... not *yet*.

As to the issue that not all the muslims agreed that the teacher should be executed, I can only point out that there was no counter-demonstration demanding her release.

Or did I miss something.

Jeff-

Thanks for confirming my hunch that you weren't advocating moral edification by cluster bomb.

Though I must admit a small part of me was looking forward to an explanation as to how a US attack would contribute to greater chastity in the Sudanese regime...

"there was no counter-demonstration demanding her release."

There were a few Sudanese muslims interviewed who were saying it was probably a mistake etc etc (that journalistic balance thing for all the ones demanding ever harsher treatment and making even more ridiculous claims of it being part of some huge anti-Islamic conspiracy) but if there was any actual organised counter-demonstration in Sudan itself then I missed it too. Which doesn't mean there wasn't one of course. I don't claim perfect knowledge of all activity in Sudan (or anywhere else much).

"I don't know .... but one can never destroy God. We breath because God breaths thru us and is within us.

Love, Char" Char
---

Of course Char, as a former Catholic and a new age woomonger I understand and appreciate what you say and mean. Love.

"Though I must admit a small part of me was looking forward to an explanation as to how a US attack would contribute to greater chastity in the Sudanese regime..." Kieth A. Johnson
---

OK, so "chasten" wasn't the best word choice. Apparently sometimes I get a bit too "thoughtful" and "articulate" for my own good, eh? ;^)

"I love when people try and compare the fanatics of the US to those of most Middle Eastern Islamic Nations. For those who suggest this comparison, let's do a small test. You run down the street in an Islamic nation yelling, "Mohammad sucks donkey ass!"..."And I'll run down in the US yelling, "Jesus sucks donkey ass!"

We can see how long you live as compared to how long I do,,Mmmm K?"

I recently saw an episode of Top Gear where they tried to drive from Miami to New Orleans in cars that cost less than a plane ticket. Through Alabama, their challenge was to paint something one each others cars that would get them either arrested or shot at. I think it was the car with "NASCAR sucks" on it that nearly got them beaten up when they had to stop for gas. It wasn't just that one gas station, they got pretty harassed by passing cars the whole way.

So, the US has its religious zealots also, just have to attack their 'real' religion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kllacpg_OfA&feature=related

top gear video. yes we have assholes here.

I think you're mixing up the Manchester United types (as we all know how they suck ass as well) with a religious theocracy endorsed by the masses.

Per capita GDP of US:

$45,000

per capita GDP of Sudan:

$2,500

Literacy rate in Sudan is only around 60%.

Pardon my elitist white liberal guilt here. But you have to admit that it's pretty easy for me to be civilized and behave in an intelligent fashion when I grew up with frivolous amenities like, you know, food.

When I read stories like this I mostly feel grateful for having grown up with basic public education and 3 meals a day. Rather than hating the idiots who did this, I mostly feel sorry for them.

Okay, we still seem to have people who think poverty is driving fundamentalist thinking. Have we not been down this road a billion times now?

Every time someone claims poverty as the root of fanaticism, the Baby Sam Harris weeps...

Poverty may not be the root of fanaticism, but it certainly makes an excellent manure.

I see that only one commenter brought up the notion of Stockholm syndrome to explain the teacher's weirdly gracious response to being locked up and threatened with death over a blasphemous plush toy.

Give her a couple months to leave this whole crazy mess behind her, then see what she thinks about the Sudanese. I don't know how I would act in her situation, but I imagine I wouldn't be thinking too clearly for a while afterwards.

(Maybe if she'd named the bear Muhammad Ali? Put a couple boxing gloves on it?)

"But you have to admit that it's pretty easy for me to be civilized and behave in an intelligent fashion when I grew up with frivolous amenities like, you know, food." Chris

Nice sentiment, unsupported by evidence. Plenty of people who get three squares a day are uncivilized* irrational raving loonies (no offense, canucks), and plenty who go hungry are rational and civilized.

*whatever that means

It seems to me that fanaticism in all fundamental sects of religion is caused by the *distortion* of the original pronouncements of religions, which come from a high level of awareness, by those on much lower levels of awareness.

These distortions of the original teachings stress negativity and depict a god who is jealous, vengeful, and angry; one far removed from the God of mercy and love. This righteous negativity represents a glorification of the negative, and provides for a disavowal of personal responsibility through human cruelty and mayhem.

It is not poverty that causes fanaticism, although that may be a manifestation of fanaticism. It is not the religion itself, but the extreme negative energy that people get caught up in; negativity promulgated by extremists of all persausions, generally those who have been vested with 'authority'(sic) in order to control.

So, perhaps we should all be more aware of our own self-righteousness, even Baby Sam(who does have a few good things to say) :))

"Every time someone claims poverty as the root of fanaticism..."

I don't imagine poverty is the root of fanaticism, but I don't think it's unreasonable to hypothesize that poverty contributes to ignorance and hopelessness, which in turn help make ordinary people more vulnerable to fanatics.

It's no excuse for fanatical behavior, of course, but to Chris's point, it seems likely that it's easier to be rational and civilized if one is at least somewhat educated and one's material needs are at least minimally met... and poverty tends to mitigate against those conditions.

How many people that flew planes into the Twin Towers that fateful day were hungry and undereducated again? When are people going to stop grasping at non-sequiturs to explain away crap? Seriously, Mr. Harris(Sam) is cutting a vein as we speak. Please stop this before he bleeds to death!

Oh, tell Sam to get a tourniquet and sit down!

"When are people going to stop grasping at non-sequiturs to explain away crap? Seriously, Mr. Harris(Sam) is cutting a vein as we speak. Please stop this before he bleeds to death!"
Iago @167
------

I am not trying to "explain away crap," I'm trying to suggest that human behavior is more complex that a neat binary division of the world into fanatics and not-fanatics can account for. I am not denying that there are people who are just born fanatics (though I'd be hard pressed to prove that assertion, either)... but the world is not significantly populated with them. The signature characteristic of successful fanatics is that they are able to create popular movements by recruiting and "turning" ordinary people who were not previously fanatics. How? What are the factors that lead people to follow fanatical leaders, fill their coffers with donations, and fill the streets with mobs?

Well, no doubt some part of it is sheer charisma on the part of the fanatical leaders... but why are some people and some populations more susceptible than others? I don't claim to have done a study on the question, but is it really that outlandish to imagine that ignorance (owing to poorly funded or nonexistent schools) is a factor here? Or that it's easier to convince people to throw the rest of their lives away if they don't perceive the rest of their lives as having any value anyway? Or that people living in economically deprived countries harbor perfectly natural feelings of envy toward richer nations that fanatics can exploit for their own purposes? Which of these notions strikes you (or bleeding Sam over there) as implausible on its face?

Frankly, I think people who brush off all questions about root causes with a "they are just crazy fanatics" position are the ones who are really trying to "explain away crap." It's Bush-quality thinking: The president tells us the terrorists "hate us for our freedom," but if anyone asks why they chose us to attack, instead of any of the other Western democracies with essentially the same freedoms and social liberties, he accuses them of "making excuses for terrorism" or being part of the "blame America first crowd."

NO! Nobody's making excuses for terrorism (or crime or religious oppression). Evil behavior is evil, regardless of its causes. But if you refuse to even look at causes and motivations, if you won't consider any explanations other than that they're just born lunatics, you leave yourself no remedy other than to kill 'em all!

And that, my friend, is precisely how we got our collective balls caught in the wringer that is Iraq.

You'll pardon me, I hope, if I look for a better way.