7 Baha'is sentenced to 20 years in Iran

[S.A.M.]

China has only limited religion freedom, so your example doesn't work.

Actually my example makes the point very effectively. If separation of state and church is better, then China should be better at religious freedom than Iran. Its not. Its not even very good at individual freedom [ever try to have a political/religious discussion with a native Chinese person? Compare that to a similar discussion with a native Iranian]. Even the French lacite is such a joke. A President who has no respect for the institution of marriage and throws his wife over for a younger model bans the burka to liberate women. Thats like the Australians banning porn and alcohol for aborigines to help them in self determination. Now the Australians want to ban the burka to aid women in self determination [or whatever reasoning they've cooked up to excuse their xenophobia]

These are all examples of countries where there is separation of church and state and still, there is a ban on religious freedom.

 

[spidergoat]

China doesn't have separation from anything. They are a totalitarian regime that barely tolerates any religion.

 

[S.A.M.]

No religion in the state, right?

Whats the difference between the Chinese desire to have no public expression of religion and the French desire to have no public expression of religion?

Why don't the French want people to publicly express their religion?

 

[spidergoat]

Both strawmen.

 

[superstring01]

Compared to which state? Who has a better record than Iran?

Why do I need to "compare" it to someone. Can we not just a country by its sordid history. You don't seem to struggle with this when it comes to Britain or the USA. Why is it so hard for you to swallow your pride and admit that Iran is in the hands of Iranians and what goes wrong for them is largely a construct of their own making.

~String

 

[Light Travelling]

China doesn't have separation from anything. They are a totalitarian regime that barely tolerates any religion.

Burma is a country that seperates state from church, it is broadly speaking secular in that multi religions are openly practised.

Its human rights record is APPALLING..........

 

[spidergoat]

Consitutional protection for religious freedom does not exist in Burma. (wiki)

 

[superstring01]

Both strawmen.

BINGO!

~String

 

[Light Travelling]

I think a lot of what goes on under the current Iranian regime rightly deserves condemnation.

We also have innocent hostages held by FARC for decades (FARC being non religious)

Dissidents falsely imprisoned and mis-treated in Cuba (non religious state)

Burma terrible human rights record over decades (non religious state)

Zimbabwe terrible human rights record over decades (non religious state)

China the same

Angola the same

Yes it is a terrible persecution that these 7 people are facing, but there are so many more around the world. It is the same focus upon the middle east that we had with the Iraq war, which was (apparently) a human rights mission to save the people of Iraq (secular at the time). But why is it we don’t see American planes charging in to save the people of Zimbabwe??????

 

[spidergoat]

Even without religious states there will still be human rights abuses for purely secular reasons. That does not contradict the dangers of political Islam (or political whatever religion).

 

[Light Travelling]

Constitutional protection for religious freedom does not exist in Burma. (wiki)

Human rights abuses in Burma aren’t especially focused on religion.


Your statement was separation of church and state was the important factor. Now you are changing that to constitutional protection of religious freedom? which is it..

Constitutional protection of religious freedom, does not require separation of church and state.

There is a country called Great Britain, the head of state, the Queen, is also the head of church. We have religious freedom...

Burma and others have separation of state and church and have bad human rights records, either way your aruments do not stack up..

 

[spidergoat]

I said you need both religious freedom by law (constitutional protection) and separation of church and state. Religious freedom does require separation of church and state. Great Britain is not a shining example of religious freedom.

Burma might have separation of church and state but there is no religious freedom under the law, and I don't know what that has to do with human rights abuses, I'm talking about persecution of people for their beliefs.

 

[S.A.M.]

Both strawmen.

You said:

I think Michael is just pointing out what happens when there is no separation between church and state.

So here is China and France. What happens when there is separation of church and state.

Why is a ban on religious expression "different" if it happens in a state where the church is not a part of the state?

For example:

After unanimously passing the Assembly June 22, the legislation drew a storm of protest from human rights groups, mainstream churches, and even the US government, which has criticized France for creating "an atmosphere of intolerance" toward minority religions.

Among the more draconian provisions of the bill are:

• The dissolution of a religious corporation if its managers have been convicted for offenses such as fraud, illegal practice of medicine and other crimes. Lawsuits to ban a group can be initiated not only by a government prosecutor but also by private parties including anti-cult groups.

• A three-year prison term and a 300,000 francs ($40,000) fine for any person who participates in the reconstitution of a banned corporation.

• A fine of 50,000 francs for a banned group’s actions "intended for young people," the fine being applicable to both individuals and associations.

• The creation of a new crime of "mental manipulation," with a penalty of two years in prison and a fine of 200,000 francs. Not only human rights groups and countries such as the United States have gone on record to express their concern about what the initiative portends. Mainstream religious groups in France itself have also expressed concern.

and again...

An indication of the intolerance of French officialdom toward new religious groups was evident this October. The Foundation for Religious Tolerance, which is run by Scientologists, was denied a permit to march in Paris, despite such permits for the same march route having been granted to Palestinian groups and others wishing to express their right to freedom of speech.

Organizers were forced at the last minute to move the event to a private park on the outskirts of the city, out of public view. At a press conference at Bastille Square the same day, scores of riot police arrived to break up a small crowd of supporters who had gathered to cheer movie star Kirstie Alley and musician Isaac Hayes, who decried the government’s policy toward religious groups.

The next day, members of several minority religions testified about problems they had experienced due to government discrimination at a public hearing cosponsored by the US Friends of the United Nations and the French human rights group Omnium de Libertes.

Sandrine, a member of the Hare Khrishna movement and mother of two children, testified that because of her religious affiliation, the government removed her children from her custody after she returned to France from Mexico. She said that social welfare agencies refused to return her children to her unless she promised not to attend the local Khrishna temple. Only after several months and the intervention of a concerned human rights lawyer were her children reunited with their mother.

http://www.religiousfreedom.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=467&Itemid=399

Is this religious oppression? Does separation of the church and state in France make it different?

You want long sordid history of religious oppression?

July 16, 1942, Velodrome d'Hiver [coll: Vel d'Hiv], Paris [in]famous location of the Rafle du Vélodrome d'Hiver when French police rounded up all the Parisian Jews and shipped them to Auschwitz for extermination.

Dannecker declared: "The French police, apart from [malgré] a few considerations of pure form, have only to carry out orders!"[3]

The roundup was aimed at Jews from Germany, Austria, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Russia and those whose origins couldn't be determined, all aged from 16 to 50. There were to be exceptions for women "in advanced state of pregnancy" or who were breast-feeding, but "to save time, the sorting will be made not at home but at the first assembly centre".[4]

Separation of church and state make that better for you?



Note that the 7 Bahai were not imprisoned for practising their religion but:

The defendants were accused of espionage, propaganda activities against the Islamic order, and the establishment of an illegal administration, among other allegations. All the charges are completely and categorically denied.

http://news.bahai.org/story/786

How about closer to home? In the United States [along with separation of church and state]:

Not much is known about the new federal prisons called Communications Management Units (CMUs), that house primarily Muslims and political activists, except that they are located in Terre Haute, Indiana and Marion, Illinois. Although the US government refuses to disclose the list of prisoners to the public, inmates include Enaam Arnaout, founder of Islamic charity Benevolence International Foundation, Dr. Rafil Dhafir, physician and founder of Iraqi charity Help the Needy, Ghassan Elashi, founder of Holy Land Foundation and CAIR Dallas, Randall Royer, Muslim civil rights activist, Yassin Aref, imam and Kurdish refugee, Sabri Benkahla, an American who was abducted the day before his wedding while studying in Saudi Arabia, and John Walker Lindh, an American convert to Islam who was captured in Afghanistan, plus some non-Muslim political activists. Most of these prisoners were falsely accused of terrorist offenses and then imprisoned for lesser charges but given sentences meant for serious terrorism-related crimes.

http://muslimmedianetwork.com/mmn/?p=4426

Whats the difference between this and what is being done to the 7 Bahai?

 

[Giambattista]

But SAM, let's be reasonable. The difference is that the Bahai are in prison. The people you mentioned are all in Communication Management Units.
It's all about communicating, and fostering a healthy dialog, not incarceration.

It's all about presentation!

 

[Giambattista]

Especially considering this full page ad in the NYT



Who do you think the "foreign oil" is that the Israel lobby is referring to?

Reminds me of a VoteVets ad I have seen before. I got a chuckle out of them.

For Your Viewing Pleasure!!

They plug for the war with Iran AND get out some Global Warming/Cap-and-Trade propaganda at the same time!

Who's Richard Silverstein? Any relation to LARRY Silverstein of WTC fame?

 

[Giambattista]

Here's another beauty.

Notice in the ad how Saudi Arabia is listed.
But I thought they were our FRIENDS?!?!

Didn't our Dubya go walking hand in hand with the King?
Whatever happened to the love?

 

[Light Travelling]

I said you need both religious freedom by law (constitutional protection) and separation of church and state. Religious freedom does require separation of church and state.

Well actually there is constitutional protection in Great Britain of religious freedom this is given by Britain signing up to the European convention of human rights, which gives;

Article 9 - conscience and religion

Main article: Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights
Article 9 provides a right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. This includes the freedom to change a religion or belief, and to manifest a religion or belief in worship, teaching, practice and observance, subject to certain restrictions that are "in accordance with law" and "necessary in a democratic society".

Great Britain is not a shining example of religious freedom. .

Well compare it to America, Britain is far less influenced by religion. There is far less political influence in Britain from the Christian fundamentalist right, in fact virtually none. America has a greater Christian influence on everyday life than there is in Britain. America has a huge Jewish influence on politics especially on foreign policy.

You will never find any debate in Britain about teaching evolution in schools as there is in America, as fundamentalist Christianity isn’t an issue here. And when I hear atheists complaining about undue religious influence in their lives and discrimination at work etc it is usually from those living in America.

There is a much greater freedom of speech to talk against religion in Britain, for comedians to ridicule religion and for profanity in the media, because there is far less religious censorship in Britain than America. Americans that visit Britain are often suprised by how much freedom of expression is allowed in the media.

 

[spidergoat]

In British education, parish schools from the established church of the relevant constituent country formed the basis of the state-funded education system, and many schools retain a church connection while essentially providing secular education in accordance with standards set by the government of the country concerned. [wiki]

 

[Michael]

CNN

Seven Baha'i leaders in Iran have each received 20-year prison sentences. The Baha'i leaders–two women and five men–have been held in Tehran's notorious Evin prison since they were arrested in 2008. They are considered the nation's top-ranking Baha'i. The Baha'i faith originated in 19th century Persia, but the constitution of today's Islamic republic does not recognize it as a religion and considers the followers as apostates. A U.N. State Department report released earlier this year blasted the Iranian government for its treatment of those practicing the Baha'i faith. The report said Iran's government prevents Baha'is from gathering in homes to worship and bans Baha'is from public schools, universities, the social pension system and government leadership posts unless they conceal their religion. "The government repeatedly pressured Baha'is to recant their religious beliefs in exchange for relief from mistreatment," the report said.

One True God
One Last Prophet
One Final Revelation

Break the rules, go to prison. Welcome to the Islamic Republic of Iran.



It really depends on your POV whether this says something for or against Muslims and Islam. For conservative Iranian clerics, the ones who think that Bahai' are heretics and infidels that "sow discord in the land" and feel this needs to be stopped, those clerics who do not favor liberal notions of freedom of religion, who want to control thought around that space, and who support using all State resources to promote Islamic ideology while at the same time legally banning other forms of religious thinking - well, they may read this post and think: yup, that's absolutely right - and Godly.

Putting those old men and women in prison is doing the work of Allah.


The reason why Iranian Muslims legally discriminate against Iranian Bahai (the WHY of things) are the same reasons WHY Pakistani Muslims wrote a law that legally discriminates against Pakistani Ahmadiyya. It's the same reason why 80% of Indonesian Muslims support legally discriminating against Indonesian Ahmadiyya. It's the same reason why non-Islamic religions are legally discriminated against in KSA. It's the same reason why non-Christian religions were discriminated against in Medieval Europe. Hell, its possibly the reason why we had a middle ages Europe (which followed closely behind Justinian's closer of Greek Philosophy academies).

One True God
One Last Prophet/Messiah
One Final Revelation

The problem IS the ideology.
I'm simply making a note of it. Take a good long look at all the thousands of minority religious people, women and children and old men, who have been imprisoned, harassed, beaten, legally discriminated against and even murdered for breaking the rules and daring to think there exists new Prophets, new Revelations in Islamic countries.

and SAM has the gull to suggest these people were actually imprisoned for attempting to overthrown the State? Pull your head out. Actually you don't think that. Why you pretend to is beyond me. I don't even think you're really disagreeing with anything.

The disease IS the ideology.
The cure is education.

Most of your posts are red herring. Does the USA have problems? Yup. Is China perfect? Far from. Are the French screwy? Sure are.

As for the reason why China bans Falun Gong its because they are seen as a political threat. Until Falun Gong held a political rally in Beijing the Chinese government fully supported Falun Gong and encouraged poor peasants to take up the religion. It's possibly one of the main reasons why Falun Gong became so popular with the poor in the North and North West. Unlike in Iran, Pakistan, KSA and Indonesia - Falun Gong are not religious heretics, but political heretics.

Banning Scientology Theists from holding a march in Paris supporting their Religious views is morally wrong.

I don't see anything wrong with the Communication Management Unit - if anything it makes sense. My only worry is if it's too broad, but, when I read about Mafia Kings running drug empires in Prison, including putting hits on officers and judges, yeah, I think the system is broken and needs fixed anyway.



That aside, SAM, you spent a whole two pages and I've read everyone one of your posts and in my mind you're running around this issue. You go from Germany and France to China and the USA Prison system, but, you fail to address the issue, the WHY of things. WHY were these Bahai' rounded up and imprisoned? Well? Do you want to address the OP now, or are we going on another trip around the world?


Lastly, I don't target Muslims. I target the ideology or religious superiority. Religious superiority is similar racial superiority. A lot of overlap. Racial superiority used to be moral. Common too. But now, no one seems to think targeting racist ideology as incorrect is wrong. People can see the negatives far outweigh any positives. The same will be true of religious superiority. Not religion. But religious superiority.

I know WASP White Supremacists. I see them as people who are uneducated and in need of correct information. Similar to religious people I find it amazing at their resilience to listen to reason. I almost wonder if it's genetic. Not being racist - that's a meme infection they were taught. But, I'm wondering if they have a problem with neural plasticity?


Now: Why are Bahai' being legally harassed in Iran?

 

[Light Travelling]

In British education, parish schools from the established church of the relevant constituent country formed the basis of the state-funded education system, and many schools retain a church connection while essentially providing secular education in accordance with standards set by the government of the country concerned. [wiki]

Religious education in British schools consists of 1 hour per week where all the worlds major religions are taught in equal measure. Contrasted with a minimum of 6 hours science per week. The balance of which I totally agree with btw.

Yes there is still a loose connection between primary schools (pre 11 years) and the parish in rural areas, but this is more a quaint throwback to Victorian heritage then anything actively pursued in current times and not continued in more multicultural inner city areas. Hardly counts as religious persecution…