It seems like Sir Rushdie irritates some people

[Winston]

Originally posted by Heresson
I think the ones who didn't read the book shouldn't comment. I did not, so I can't really tell if it was a defamation, or not.

Defamation, schmefamation. What does it matter?

As usual, this is about the new cultural imperialism, power greed and pitiful feelings of inferiority, all in a ready-made bundle. Whether sneaking or explosive, we will have to face it, fight it and deflect it. Or this civilization will end.

[Ramo]

It was much better then I had expected. An excellent book that I couldn't stop reading . Hilariously funny and thrilling at the same time..

It has a lot of cultural references a Westerner might miss.

It's a good book, but "Midnight's Children" is much better (and one of my favorite novels)...

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Heresson
I think the ones who didn't read the book shouldn't comment. I did not, so I can't really tell if it was a defamation, or not.

You write as if defaming Islam was a bad thing.

Islam needs to be mocked till Muslims realize their silly religion isn't sacrosanct, or their heads pop from the elevated blood pressure.

[Zkribbler]

Isn't religion by definition sacrosanct? Where else would the "sacro" part of the word come from?

BTW: This doesn't mean that, if someone offends your sense of religion, you kill them. Didn't God, a.k.a. Allah, say sometime like "Thou shalt not kill"? I'm pretty sure He did.

[CrONoS]

There have been some street protests but only by small numbers of hard line Islamist activists.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
BTW: This doesn't mean that, if someone offends your sense of religion, you kill them. Didn't God, a.k.a. Allah, say sometime like "Thou shalt not kill"? I'm pretty sure He did.

Thou Shalt Not Murder. Not Thou shalt not kill. Small but signifigant difference.

[Last Conformist]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Isn't religion by definition sacrosanct? Where else would the "sacro" part of the word come from?

Etymologically, it means something like "ritually consecrated", which isn't applicable to abstractions like "Islam", "Christianity" etc.

But I meant it in the sense of above attack or ridicule. Religious people do not have a right to have their faith treated respectfully by other people.

[DinoDoc]

I would think that common decency would tend to lean in the direction of religious people being treated with respect though.

[Kuciwalker]

Nah.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I would think that common decency would tend to lean in the direction of religious people being treated with respect though.

When religions and religious folk all exhibit 'common decency' and respect for non-believers I'm sure that will come to pass.

Until then, we'll expect yet another round of book bannings, stonings, queerbashings, 'fatwas' et cetera, et cetera...

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I would think that common decency would tend to lean in the direction of religious people being treated with respect though.

I would think it would lead to treating all people with respect.

I certainly would not disrespect a muslim. Just as I expect him not to disrespect me. But when someone, an ex-muslim in this case, writes a book that critiques some aspects of Islam, I expect him to not be physically endangered for doing so. Even if he commits what, to muslims, is a blasphemy. Just as I accept that an apostate from, say Judaism, can write what they like about, without physical danger.

The only places I can think of today where an apostate from atheism could be subject to persecution, would be places like North Korea or China. But even China makes no claim to have the right to do so beyond its own borders.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Thou Shalt Not Murder. Not Thou shalt not kill. Small but signifigant difference.

According to this websit LINK, "Thou Shall Not Kill" is the 6th Commandment in the Protestant and Hebrew versions of the Ten Commandments, and the 5th Commandment in the Catholic version. There's no mention of "Thou Shall Not Murder."

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Zkribbler


According to this websit LINK, "Thou Shall Not Kill" is the 6th Commandment in the Protestant and Hebrew versions of the Ten Commandments, and the 5th Commandment in the Catholic version. There's no mention of "Thou Shall Not Murder."

the hebrew version is Lo Tirtzach.

This is normally read as "don't murder".

which is confirmed by the very site you linked to. Check the one to Rabbi Putzkohf.

[Heresson]

Originally posted by Last Conformist

You write as if defaming Islam was a bad thing.

defaming is a bad thing. I'm against punishing people saying islam is not a religion of peace - for me it is quite obvious it isn't and proofs are multiple. I am against punishing people for saying Muhammad was immoral or even paedofilic - because he did immoral things, and while one should remember the context, he did marry a little girl and have sex with her at very young age. ETC.
Mocking, criticism etc is OK, as long as it has some basis. I am against mockery for mockery, a mockery that comes out of pure hatred.
The truth is that it may be hard to distinguish between the two and that perhaps the only sollution is to let all mockery legal, but one should not fail to try to distinguish between these two and morally condemn the latter.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

Originally posted by Zkribbler
According to this websit LINK, "Thou Shall Not Kill" is the 6th Commandment in the Protestant and Hebrew versions of the Ten Commandments, and the 5th Commandment in the Catholic version. There's no mention of "Thou Shall Not Murder."

the hebrew version is Lo Tirtzach.

This is normally read as "don't murder".

which is confirmed by the very site you linked to. Check the one to Rabbi Putzkohf.

Self-pwn