Tag Archives: islam

Nigerian cross-dressers face possible execution

Posted on by
Reply

A group of 18 men in Northern Nigeria are facing a possible death sentence for taking part in a gay wedding. The men were dressed as women, and were promptly arrested for alleged sodomy. Unfortunately for them, the town of Bauchi is under Sharia law, and so the men face the possibility of being stoned to death.

For those of you unaware of what Sharia law is, in Arabic it translates directly to the way. It is the legal system bound by Islamic dogma. Their obvious and violent aversion to homosexuality makes it a crime punishable by death, and failing that, there is a real possibility they could face torture or even amputation for their alleged crime.

It seems almost impossible that in this day and age, the biblical traditions of the 1st century are still being practiced, and yet, in Nigeria, it’s not uncommon for people to be flogged for drinking, or have their hands cut off for adultery. Most of the citizens there support this. In fact, they’re down right confused about why we make such a big deal out of it. They mistakenly assume our morality must somehow be inferior to theirs, since they derive their laws from sacred texts, while we foolishly base it on precedence, and habeas corpus.

Obviously, there are some people in the US who actually support similar laws like the Sharia edicts. It’s not surprising these same individuals are highly religious. At the same time, many of us in the West feel it is important to respect other cultures, and their way of doing things. I, on the other hand, feel that it’s necessary to remind people that simply because it is culturally acceptable to do something, does not make it right. There are many different ways to live a good life; but there isn’t an infinite amount. If your laws and morality reflect the habits and mores of the Bronze Age, the level of sophistication of your moral development will reflect this fact. As the world becomes smaller, we can no longer take the attitude of live and let live, particularly when it comes to violent offences against our fellow human beings. We should take these kinds of issues very seriously, and not allow relativism to confuse the important issue of human rights.

The Mickey incident, Part 2

Posted on by
Reply

Some of you may recall a story I featured a few weeks ago about a children’s television show starring a high pitched voiced Mickey Mouse rip-off, who encouraged children to fight Israel. Amid international pressure, the producers finally decided to drop the character, but not before adding their own little psychotic twist by martyring him.

We’re all aware that there are organized indoctrination campaigns all across the Middle East designed to create generations of suicide bombers. To succeed, they rely on two important tactics in their efforts to turn human beings into walking bombs: (1) they target the weak, young, vulnerable, and uneducated to do their bidding, and (2) they rely on the mechanism of blind faith as a tool for mindless obedience. What better targets than children, since they have all the necessary requirement?

Violent rhetoric doesn’t rely on subtlety to be effective. In the case of Farfour, the creepy mascot of religious intolerance, his final skit involved an Israeli soldier beating him to death while attempting to usurp him from his land. His teenage co-host, a young woman whose soft smiling face belied a cold and calculating grin, explained how Farfour’s demise was the result of his defending Palestine, a clear message that a peaceful compromise in Israel was not on the mouse’s mind.

Luckily, not everyone in Palestine was content with the show’s violent and malicious message. Many segments of the population are peaceful individuals, desperate for a compromise that would allow them to live in harmony and peace with their neighbors. It’s difficult to imagine, however, how such a thing is possible when characters like Farfour are given access to young and impressionable minds. The future of both Palestine and Israel will forever be compromised so long as zealots are allowed to incense children to violence and murder. I can only hope that unlike his North American counterpart, he will fade into obscurity, a forgotten memory of a desperate and turbulent time.

Suspected terrorists watched too many action movies

Posted on by
Reply

As the plot thickens after the arrests of 4 men suspected of trying to blow up fuel tanks at JFK airport, a number of experts have come forward explaining their terrorist plot would not have had the desired effect they were seeking: the complete destruction of JFK Airport. At best, these men could have set off a dangerous blaze, though nothing that would have endangered the lives of JFK’s daily commuters.

If you’re new to the story, here’s the recap: four Trinidadian Muslims, of some advanced age, had begun surveillance work on the airport allegedly in an attempt to ignite and explode the giant fuel tanks, as well as the pipeline. Although this may certainly sound both impressive and frightening, according to most experts, producing anything more than a fire would have been next to impossible.

I can’t say I’m entirely surprised, considering the fact that many of the suspected terrorists had lived for quite a few decades in America. How else could they possibly think a simple fire or a small explosion could create the necessary chain reaction to destroy an entire airport? It’s conceivable that the plot had been devised while watching Die Hard 2, or some equally far-fetched action movie (although in this instance, they would probably have rooted for the bad guys). One has to wonder why, out of the many different violent fantasies they undoubtedly had, they picked that one. Presumably, they wanted a big show.

This act is yet another example of the murderous impulse of faith; it is no coincidence these men were counting on the righteous hand of God to punish those they considered to be infidels. So willing were they to accept this fantasy that they felt the arrival of a 5th member (in actuality an informant) was an act of God. It never occurred to them that their actions were wrong, evil, and disgusting. To them, there was no greater show of piety than the destruction of innocent human lives.

I’m glad none of these men took the time to read a physics book, or even just watch a few documentaries instead of the show 24. Religious fundamentalists are incapable of duplicating the refined works of science; instead, their violent sectarian minds can only use these tools as a blunt instrument of destruction. In this case, they engineered a terrorist plot out of the contrived writings of B-movie scripts. It then only seems fitting that the ‘good guys’ stopped them in time; one good cliché always deserves another.

Iran encourages temporary marriage licenses

Posted on by
Reply

For most Orthodox religions, sex is tricky business. They struggle so hard to suppress it, especially outside the confines of marriage, it’s a miracle that most of these people actually manage to reproduce. But each particular sect develops their own individual loop holes that allow for a little breathing space. In the case of Islam, ‘temporary’ marriages offer a solution for the lonely and sexually frustrated young Muslim.

Although the practice is still mostly shunned, there is resurgence in its popularity, now that Iran’s Interior Minister Mostafa Pourmohammadi openly encourages it. The move is motivated almost entirely by the growing political pressure coming from the country’s youth, who now make up over 50% of the population. Often too poor to afford houses and expensive dowries, young men under the age of 30 pine for the ability to relieve their sexual urges in a way that does not violate their religious traditions. Critics however argue that the practice is no better than prostitution, since the marriages sometimes last no more than a few hours, with a dowry being paid to the bride as part of the marriage contract.

Personally, I’ve never objected to prostitution; even if I did, it wouldn’t stop people from engaging in the world’s oldest profession. Why it should be illegal for two consenting adults to engage in an activity that is legal when it’s free is beyond me. Still, in this case, it seems to me nothing more than silly religious placating. Do any of these pious young men really think their God is so naïve as to be fooled by the intentions of the groom? One wonders how they reconcile the fact that a loving God, who forbids sex before marriage, would make the young life of any adolescent entirely focused on the idea. Such a tease!

All kidding aside, my concern lies with the poor women involved in these mut’ah, who may not get their fair shake in the transaction. It’s no surprise women are often victims in the unregulated and dangerous world of the sex trade. Would proper protection be used? How would they treated, if they were known to take active parts in these marriages? Would their lives be at risk?

This is but a small example of the conservative elements of Islam trying in vain to adapt to the growing needs of its practitioners. As much of the rest of the world enjoys the ability to engage in pre-marital sex without the danger of being imprisoned or punished, the Muslim religion continues to struggle with how to maintain its orthodox values amidst other competing ideologies. In the case of mut’ah, critics who insist the practice is nothing more than glorified prostitution are not wrong in their analysis. Although it may benefit young couples who want to experiment with sex, it will undoubtedly create a dangerous and possibly violent new sexual trade in a country that often considers women to be second class citizens.

Crippled by fear, UK schools strike events from history class

Posted on by
Reply

By now, we’ve all heard of cases where religion has tried to insert its alternative, often deleterious, truths into science classrooms and textbooks in the US. If this hasn’t confused students about the facts, it certainly has presented a perplexing message about how to uncover truths. On the side of evolution, we find an appeal to relentless observation and questioning, whereas on the side of creationism, we find an appeal to ignorance (ex: life is so complex, how can we possibly understand its origins without introducing a supernatural cause?). However, this time around, religion is rearing a different, quite divisive head in the UK.

Unlike what is transpiring in America, the topic of history is now the latest member of the list of things we can’t talk about civilly due to a dire need to appease all religions at once. According to Daily Mail, a recent government report uncovered a group of high-school teachers who instituted a self imposed ban on classroom discussions of the Holocaust of WWII, and the Crusades of the 11th Century. The decision was motivated out of fear that certain Muslim students would continue to, or begin expressing strong anti-Semitic views, potentially offending other students. These two topics were expressly omitted because they ‘would have challenged what was taught in some local mosques,’ said the report.

It’s never a surprise when religion interprets history in a way that portrays its faithful in a more favorable light than non-followers. Some would call it a perk for joining the club. But should a religious interpretation of events really override a secular discussion of the facts in a public classroom? For a school to stand down, sweeping these truly world-shaping events under the carpet, it does everyone an enormous disservice. Not only will these teens be more likely to harbor aggressive world views into adulthood, never quite working out their differences during their formative years, but being taught by a teacher who was afraid to share these important lessons will likely doom them, and perhaps many of us, to repeat history.

An appeal to reason

Posted on by
Reply

A comment appeared in one of my stories which deserves some attention, and I would like to take the opportunity not only to clarify my position on the matter, but also to address many of the points brought up in his arguments. I thought it would be a good opportunity to discuss what my opinions are concerning the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, lest my audience assume I am one sided on the issue.

We’ll begin with the letter itself, which reads:

One side of the story isn’t it [referring to the comment I wrote on the video featuring ‘Mickey Mouse’ enticing children to violence]? The Israelis have their own programs that put out propaganda against the Arabs, Muslim or non [sic]. In areas of Palestine, where the Jews have illegally claimed possession of land, Jewish children are to go to school before Palestinian kids, and when the Palestinian kids head off to school, they and their families get ridiculed and have rocks thrown at them by the Jews living there.

They live through this every day, IN THEIR OWN COUNTRY! The UN has put out many resolutions and many documents that ask for the removal of the Israelis from Palestinian territory, but it hasn’t happened in decades! DECADES! From 1955 to 1991 alone, there have been more than 60 UN resolutions against Israel due to it’s [sic] treatment of Palestinians and their territory. So much violence! Even the small things that Israel does, is unimaginable! The Palestinians get stuck in traffic for hours if Israelis want to move and use the roads. The Palestinians have to pay fees and fines to use their own roads and streets and this right to use part of their own infrastructure is determined by ISRAELI soldiers! They have to have papers and permits to travel, live, worship and shop in their OWN COUNTRY!

People need to realize who owns the news and what restrictions are on the news that is being fed to the mainstream public. The diplomats that go into Palestine come out shocked and once they try to shed light on what is really going on, they are declared anti-Semitic, and have to work hard to remove that association from themselves and just quietly back down from the issue. When Israel invaded Lebanon, just some months ago, and bombed innocent civilians and residential areas and UN buildings with their PRECISION MISSILES, what in the world were you people watching?! They precisely hit the right targets. There was a documentary on PBS not too long ago that claimed that the propaganda, Jews against Arabs and Arabs against Jews, was being taught to kids and there were shows out there trying to reduce this. When are people going to realize that when people in that country live in so much poverty and chaos and daily violence and disruption, why would these citizens have attacks and more violence on their minds, rather than keeping their kids and families safe and trying to live out each day at a time?

If everything was peachy keen in their own lives, why would anyone go against a peaceful neighbor? Why would they risk retaliations on themselves, from a much, much more powerful, organized and well equipped Israeli military force, if everything was fine? Palestine doesn’t have an army. Who would go mess with someone much more advanced and powerful and definitely economically richer, when they have families to think of? Some people, whose families have been lost and died in this chaotic, nonsensical violence, get really angry. They want to retaliate, because they have nothing to lose anymore. That’s a hard thing to understand. These children’s programs against one group or the other are everywhere in that region; in Israel, as well as Palestine.

Don’t just believe that there is only one side to the news you hear about the middle east. Most of it people don’t get to hear. Surely, everyone who thinks critically can understand and respect that. You hear of one Israeli death and it’s publicized with as much sympathy as possible. Name the person or soldiers and their family members. Showing their family members on national news. Showing their grief. When several Palestinians die, each day due to conflict with Israeli soldiers – these are just civilians I am talking about – they are mention briefly and told in a way that no one remembers or cares. In fact, more often than not, it leaves the viewer with the message that somehow, it was the fault of the civilians, everytime, everyday?

Obviously, Ash here is very passionate about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He brings up a few points I would like to address, particularly in regards to the propaganda he was referring to. First, I would like to indicate that Ash did not condemn the video itself, and jumped straight to the fact that Israel has its own children’s program to indoctrinate them against Muslims. Even if that were true, it does not diminish the sheer horror and vileness of the program itself. The children’s show was designed not only to create anti-Semitism, but to entice the very young to violence. I feel sympathy to anyone who has such restrictions placed upon them. No doubt Palestinians must feel like second class citizens within their own home. But their struggle does not justify the brainwashing of little children, nor should anyone believe for an instant that the violent assaults made on Israeli citizens is somehow justified as a consequence. Violence is never the answer, and the impoverished and desperate conditions of the Palestinian people will never be advanced by such actions.

This brings me to the second point. Ash asked why anyone would attack a stronger, richer, and more organized country. As the video demonstrated, so long as you begin to indoctrinate people at an early age, you can hope for an endless supply of radical followers who are motivated not by self interest, but by blind hatred and martyrdom. Are there any secular suicide bombers? No. The reason is even people hurt and angry at the loss of their family members are hard-pressed to take their revenge out on the innocent. They may hurl stones, insults, or far worse at the military, but few would strap bombs to themselves and attack a group of teenagers at a roller disco. For this to occur, a powerful mix of religious indoctrination, xenophobia, and complete surrender to people of authority is required. Anger and resentment is not enough; their enemies must be perpetually dehumanized, while simultaneously convincing young recruits that they will be given a special place for themselves and their families in heaven.

This brings me to my third point; that the peace process is impossible, so long as both sides believe the conflict is religious in nature. Over the years, many secular countries have attempted to resolve the conflict by proposing a number of measures to establish an official Palestinian state, all of which failed, not because of the lack of interest on the part of the Palestinian or Israeli people, but because their leaders refused to make the necessary concession needed for peace. Palestinian leaders, heavily influenced by various mullahs, felt that allowing Jews to live on their holy lands was completely unacceptable, while extreme Zionists argued that their holy text gave them historical rights to control all of Palestine. Israel’s claim to Palestine, based primarily on the Bible, and on little or no archeological evidence, is erroneous. We cannot, however, turn the clock back, and forcing millions of Jews to leave the area would be disastrous. Religion created the problem, which is why it must be eliminated from the discussion.

The level of indoctrination of Jews in Israel is light compared to the religious hatred inculcated upon the Palestinians by extremist religious organizations, such as Hamas. Still, Israeli politicians use fear to control their population into adopting measures that are far more conservative than they would otherwise hope for; a majority of Israelis want peace with Palestine, and support the idea of it becoming its own country. However, they simultaneously fear that such a move would create a totalitarian theocracy bent on their destruction, a fear that is not altogether unjustified.

So long as religious zealots on either side continue to use the conflict to further their own political and religious goals, Palestine will continue to be a miserable place to live. A strong secular movement must be put in place to eliminate the fear mongering and extremism each respective religion ensconces. It is my belief that such a move would drastically improve the situation for both Palestinians and Israelis, and would be a historical achievement in the peace process in the Middle East

Church reinstates Islamic department

Posted on by
Reply

Tensions are running high between the Islamic world and the head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI. In order to avoid further alienation, and to improve relations between the two faiths, the Pope has re-instated the Vatican’s Islam department, according to BBCNEWS.com. The move means everyone can breathe a sigh of relief, since he will now have a little more perspective as to the sensibilities and grievances of the fragile and easily offended Islamic faith.

Although I do applaud the move for its sheer strategic purposes, I can’t help but feel the department itself is a testament to the need to placate a faith that has become dangerously reactive. It seems these days that everyone is walking on eggshells, lest we invoke the ire and anger of the Muslim world. The realities of such actions are clear and obvious; many fundamentalists are not afraid to resort to extreme violence at any provocation, and as such the Vatican has re-instated the one department that has the power to directly advise the Pope on the matter (probably reminding him that the two faiths have been at each others throats for a long time, and quoting any manuscripts from past eras is bound to contain anti-Muslim rhetoric).

Why can religions make the privileged claim that their philosophies and beliefs are beyond questioning and reproach? Why are we all muzzled or browbeaten when any word of protest is uttered? Are religions really that frightened of opposition? You would think their own aspirations to being the ultimate and universal truth would make them immune from the cries of others. Why should they care what we think if they alone hold a privileged place in heaven?

On the other hand, the Pope should be the last person to throw rocks, considering he lives in the world’s biggest glass house. Perhaps he has recognized that the last thing the fractured and continually waning power of his institution needs is a long drawn out religious fight. In either case, let us hope the department can keep Ratzinger from putting his holy foot in his saintly mouth.

Death before naptime

Posted on by
Reply

I’m no fan of tyrannical dictators, particularly men like Saddam Hussein, even so, I can’t help but feel a certain regret that Iraq is now far worse in his absence. A scary story appeared on CNN.com today concerning the growing trend of violent rhetoric being expressed by kindergartners in Iraqi schools. One child was quoted as saying “I’m going to bomb, bomb, bomb the school with everybody in it,” while another claimed her father had given her a machine gun and had inducted her in the liberation army.
The problem is not merely that the Bush Administration horribly mismanaged the war; the very fact the conflict started in the first place only demonstrates how obviously distorted the perception of war in America is compared to its gruesome reality. For many Americans, they see conflict as the act of renewal; their very nation was founded on the principle of dissent and revolution. But the war that lead to their independence was nothing like modern wars, fought not on battlefields but in streets, libraries, and playgrounds. The children born and raised in this turbulent and violent environment become corrupted by it.

The victims of war, when they grow up, become the perpetrators of the same violence inflicted upon them. The option of peaceful coexistence is a concept lost amongst the sound of gunfire and smoke. Although it isn’t too late to turn the tide in this conflict, it seems as Americans increasingly demand to pull out of the mess they created, the opportunity to rectify their error becomes completely lost. What matters now is not whether the war was justified or not; the children of Iraq do not need vitriolic polemics. Instead, what they need now more then ever is the support of the very nation who launched them down this dark path. The question remains: will Americans own up to their mistake and fix it, or retreat, leaving these poor children to face the prospect of death before naptime?

Standoff in mosque

Posted on by
Reply

More trouble in Pakistan, as Islamic fundamentalists kidnapped two police officers and are holding them hostage in a mosque in Islamabad, asking that the government impose ‘Islamic rule’ in the country. The standoff continues, as the military is hesitant to take any action for fear of creating a volatile situation in a country that seems poised to become another fundamentalist state.

The rhetoric that spews out of the poorly educated mouths of these so-called students is an obvious sign that negotiations are not going well; they claim no responsibility for the crime of kidnapping, and instead accuse the government of being kidnappers themselves. How they see the logic in this is beyond me. It only illustrates negotiation is a useless endeavor with fundamentalists; they are interested only in the Islamification of Pakistan (and eventually the world), and any successful negotiation is simply a tactic on their part to allow more time for them to consolidate their power and plan their next move.

Pakistan is in a bad situation. On one side, if they intervene with the military, it may create even more attention and support to the cause of Islamic fundamentalists (which is highly undesirable for a nation with the atom bomb), on the other they cannot hope to meet any demand on the part of the kidnappers. It’s next to impossible to negotiate with individuals so deluded that they believe the kidnapping and (most likely eventual) murder of two innocent men is but a few broken eggshells on the way to heaven.

Forced conversion fears in Pakistan

Posted on by
Reply

A recent article on BBCNEWS reports a tiny Christian minority in Pakistan is facing dire threats to convert to Islam or face annihilation. The group has asked the government to provide protection, though it feels not enough is being done to keep them safe. I just feel the need to ask: just what exactly is the point of converting these people? Evidently you cannot force someone to believe what you do, particularly with the use of force. It always surprises me how fundamentalists believe that their religion will eventually reign supreme, but somehow are too insecure to allow others to practice their own traditions. Surely, if God is on their side, all of this posturing is unnecessary.

I deplore violence, particularly on tiny defenseless minorities. Although I do not believe what they do, I would certainly never consider the use of force to try and make them share the same cosmological beliefs. My sad prediction is that the government will choose to turn the other cheek and allow tragedy to befall this poor group. I can only hope those in power see reason and recognize why such a minority needs the protection they so desperately seek.