Muslim magazine journalists pretended to be Roman Catholics :D

[quadraphonics]

I don't see it as a big deal. I don't think Malaysians should either. Now if they start melting Christian children with white phosphorus because of ideological disagreements that is an issue.

But spitting out wafers?

What if they start sending covert operatives into Catholic services in the hopes of publicly "outing" illegal converts?

What if the state makes it illegal to convert to your religion in the first place?

The goal of this sting operation was the public shaming and legal prosecution of people for practicing the "wrong" religion. Is that not something that you consider offensive?

Else why the repeated attempts to minimize the situation to the isolated question of the disposition of a couple of wafers? This also is looking like intellectual dishonesty, in the service of trolling.

Do you think we do it by being sensitive? Or politically correct?

To the extent that "you" actually "do it:" yes.

 

[S.A.M.]

Why?

You seem to think the custom of snorting water up your nose and blowing it out again when you perform Wudu is rational. Not to mention the lifting of your arse in the air as you bow to the West rational to you. Why is Catholic or any other religious custom less rational to you?

Yeah I think cleaning your nose is rational, its even more so when you live in the desert and tend to get much of it in bodily cavities

And if you have seen geriartric Muslims who pray, you'll understand why the rakats are extremely rational, they do wonders for flexibility and muscle strength.

But, if you don't like it, there is always the option to not look. Kinda like women breastfeeding in public.

 

[iceaura]

I don't see it as a big deal. I don't think Malaysians should either.

But the Malaysians do. In fact, given the apparent current situation in Malaysia, it's something of a physical threat - a sort of secret police or informant operation, at least in prospect, with a considerable number of potential victims who appear to feel safer when not exposed, for some reason.

So should we discuss the matter in a vacuum of abstraction, or consider its nature in the real world ?

 

[Bells]

I don't see it as a big deal. I don't think Malaysians should either.

Well!

Sam has spoken and the Malaysians must do as you say!

But seriously, you are not Malaysian and the matter is a concern for them and you really don't factor into it. It is a big deal to the Malaysians who felt insulted and wronged by the actions of those journalists.

Now if they start melting Christian children with white phosphorus because of ideological disagreements that is an issue.

What part of can the rhetoric was that hard for you to comprehend? What is happening in Malaysia is important to Malaysia and Malaysians. They are burning churches and mosques and the religious violence is escalating.

Do you think we do it by being sensitive? Or politically correct?

About the issues in your country. Malaysia is not India.

 

[S.A.M.]

iceaura:

They are journalists, right? If the news of conversions is of interest, should they not report it?

 

[S.A.M.]

OK, Tiassa: what to do about this shit?

Are we to give up on any discussion of these kinds of issues on this forum?

No not at all. If Swedish reporters are concerned about the number of minarets or if American reporters are concerned about the number of madrassas and if the countries concerned pass laws making them illegal, one does not blame the reporters for going undercover to investigate them.

And yes, there are consequences to breaking laws of the country. Shouldn't there be?

 

[Bells]

And yes, there are consequences to breaking laws of the country. Shouldn't there be?

So you support sending spies into churches to report on those who have apparently illegally converted and for those individuals to face lengthy jail terms and possible lashes? Should it be a crime to not be Muslim in your opinion?

 

[iceaura]

Are we to give up on any discussion of these kinds of issues on this forum?
”
No not at all. If Swedish reporters are concerned about the number of minarets or if American reporters are concerned about the number of madrassas and if the countries concerned pass laws making them illegal, one does not blame the reporters for going undercover to investigate them.

I deleted the post.

I'm out of here. This is feeding my bigotries about the effects of institutional religion on the intellect too directly.

 

[S.A.M.]

I deleted the post.

I'm out of here. This is feeding my bigotries about the effects of institutional religion on the intellect too directly.

No no, carry on. I want to read your response. Its always interesting how the circles are drawn.

So you support sending spies into churches to report on those who have apparently illegally converted and for those individuals to face lengthy jail terms and possible lashes? Should it be a crime to not be Muslim in your opinion?

Who were they spying for? Yeah, I totally support free press. Even when there is bigotry, you need information to process what is going on.

After all, thats how we finally figure out exactly what we are dealing with. Journalists and their reports are after all, a mirror of the society they come from.

 

[Bells]

Who were they spying for? Yeah, I totally support free press. Even when there is bigotry, you need information to process what is going on.

But how do you think this information would be processed in Malaysia under the present climate of religious intolerance? I support free press as well, but I support responsible reporting more. Ie, not pretending to be Catholic and then spitting out the wafer and taking photos of it and publishing those images.

What point do you think they were trying to prove? How is that even valid reporting?

After all, thats how we finally figure out exactly what we are dealing with.

What do you think we are dealing with here? The conversions themselves or the feeding of the religious intolerance in a country already rife with it at the present time?

Journalists and their reports are after all, a mirror of the society they come from.

Which is the exact core of this whole issue. Is it a mirror of Malaysian society to desecrate a belief that is so valid to Catholics? What society are they actually mirroring?

 

[S.A.M.]

But how do you think this information would be processed in Malaysia under the present climate of religious intolerance? I support free press as well, but I support responsible reporting more. Ie, not pretending to be Catholic and then spitting out the wafer and taking photos of it and publishing those images.

What point do you think they were trying to prove? How is that even valid reporting?


What do you think we are dealing with here? The conversions themselves or the feeding of the religious intolerance in a country already rife with it at the present time?

I think the fact that its important enough an issue that journalists are being assigned to it, is a reflection of what is going on there. But I'd like to see what we are dealing with exactly. What happens to those who are outed? Whats the law? How many people arrested and convicted over it last year?

We had homosexuality as illegal in India until last year and while by and large most people overlook it, some homosexuals did get arrested and beaten in custody. Not sure if it ever went to court, I highly doubt it, but the reporting on homosexual abuse is what finally got the law off the books.

 

[Michael]

tiassa:

I believe the new term mangled in sciforums is "Intellectual dishonesty" or the advocacy of an argument known to be false.

IOW, when we piss on Christ its freedom of expression, when you spit on him, its intolerance

So let me see if we have this straight, pissing on a $2 statue of Christ that you bought at the store, and own (as in it's your person item) and presenting that as art to some coked up New York socialites is equivalent to sneaking into a Catholic church for the express purpose of finding "illegals" and outing them to the Muslims public. And doing this just after some Christian churches were burned to the ground for using the Arabic word for god - these two events are, in your mind, equivalent?

And wiping your arse with pages from the Qur'an - this is OK with you as well? I mean, it's just paper and ink. Right?

See, because I agree that if you own a statue of Chris, you have the right to piss on it. You have the right to wipe your arse with a bible, the Qur'an, an American flag or the constitution of the US. If you have a wafer, you can photograph yourself spitting it out and laughing about how irrational Catholics are. Post that up to Youtube if you feel like it.

Now, things that are in the public, such as the Kaaba, well, you don't own that, so you aren't allowed to shit on it. Or burning down someone's church.

Now, this where the fine line is, what about walking into a public church, pretending you're a Catholic? That's the question here isn't it? Is this legal? Well, seems like it. And at least Scifes isn't pussyfooting around. It's difficult and even illegal for a Muslim to convert to Christianity. Ex-Muslims are hunted down and murdered for this crime. This has always been the case. Pressure the non-Muslim. Kill them even - make an example of them. 1400 years of this crap and it's starting to stink.

That's the issue here. Outing illegals.

"I thought this was rather funny, until I realized they were looking for illegal converts - also known as traitors or turn coats (turn yarmukle?) if you will. I wonder? And if they happened to find a group of Jews that dated Muslims? Then what? Were they there to share their joyous stories with their readers or going to turn them over to the Orthodox Gestapo? Reminds me of medieval Europe."​

footnote:

Maybe make your point a little more obvious.​

Because I don't see a problem with pointing out discriminatory laws. Whether it be illegal converts in Malaysia or preventing Africans, Asians or Indians from joining an Orthodox Synagogue​

Why?

You seem to think the custom of snorting water up your nose and blowing it out again when you perform Wudu is rational. Not to mention the lifting of your arse in the air as you bow to the West rational to you. Why is Catholic or any other religious custom less rational to you?


I would be more concerned with the fact that it is urine and thus, unsanitary.

Well, you see Bells, turning to pray towards the Scientology building is a... is a ... is a.... I know! it's a form of yoga - not irrational at all to pray to Holiwood!. Oh, and stepping out of the Scientology-loo left foot first like Ron Hubbard (pbuh) did, this isn't irrational either, it's to prevent you from falling backwards and hitting your head if you happen to have a heart attack just at that moment.... you're for some inexplicable, yet very very rational reason, fall forward....


AKA: Are you really attempting to have a rational discussion about THOSE sorts of things??? You did see the 5 pages of layers of waves splashing about discussion and why that turn of phrase is a deep philosophical insight proving the existence of Allah and the "miraculousness" of the Qur'an.

What if they start sending covert operatives into Catholic services in the hopes of publicly "outing" illegal converts?

What if the state makes it illegal to convert to your religion in the first place?

The goal of this sting operation was the public shaming and legal prosecution of people for practicing the "wrong" religion. Is that not something that you consider offensive?

Else why the repeated attempts to minimize the situation to the isolated question of the disposition of a couple of wafers? This also is looking like intellectual dishonesty, in the service of trolling.



To the extent that "you" actually "do it:" yes.

Point made and quite succinct.

 

[S.A.M.]

As I understand it, there is a political anti-apostasy movement in Malaysia which has come up against the Malaysian constitutional guarantee to freedom of religion.

Like most Asian countries [e.g. India] people are registered by religion. Getting de-registered and re-registered due to legal problems [like intermarriage] is what the issue is here. Some converts have filed legal cases to enable being de-registered and re-registered and this has been taken up by political parties.

But I predict, that like Europe, Asia will also move towards more well defined intolerance of minority ideologies and attempt to beat them down to reflect the majority narratives.

In all of this, what is the role of the journalists? Same as that of the journalists in France who want to find out exactly how many women wear a veil or in Sweden where they calculate how many terrorists are Muslims. They feed the political movements. The fact that the church reacted with a civil suit over their impersonation is something to think about. How would that work out in a western country? In Malaysia, the newspaper apologized. Personally, I don't think they should have, its their job to report the news within the legal framework of their own country. Its not illegal to take communion and spit it out. Its not illegal to find out how many Muslims convert to Christianity.

Censorship of the press will not create a better society.

 

[Bells]

I think the fact that its important enough an issue that journalists are being assigned to it, is a reflection of what is going on there. But I'd like to see what we are dealing with exactly.

So what kind of report would you expect from journalists who spit out the communion wafer and take photos of it and publish it? How would you see what we are dealing with exactly with that kind of reporting?

It was reported that two journalists from the 'Al-Islam' magazine in Malaysia entered a Catholic church in 2009 to spy and joined the Holy Communion or Eucharist only to spit out the wafer and wrote a rumour in the magazine saying that there had been some Malay girls were being converted to Christianity.

(Source)

So what is going on over there and how is their reporting it in such a fashion going to give a valid understanding of the issues?

What happens to those who are outed? Whats the law? How many people arrested and convicted over it last year?

I don't know to be honest.

We had homosexuality as illegal in India until last year and while by and large most people overlook it, some homosexuals did get arrested and beaten in custody. Not sure if it ever went to court, I highly doubt it, but the reporting on homosexual abuse is what finally got the law off the books.

I take it the reporting in India was not alike that in Malaysia and what these two buffoons referred to as journalists have done?

 

[S.A.M.]

So what kind of report would you expect from journalists who spit out the communion wafer and take photos of it and publish it? How would you see what we are dealing with exactly with that kind of reporting?

I take it the reporting in India was not alike that in Malaysia and what these two buffoons referred to as journalists have done?

Not on that particular issue no, most Indians care as much about homosexuals as most Malaysians do about conversion. But you might want to take a dekko at any issue of the Saamna in the last 20 years

But I doubt we'll see a point in time where all the Christians in Malaysia have had their homes demolished or are being bombed on a daily basis because they don't fit the religious profile that the majority wants. Their history doesn't support it.

The reaction to these journalists in the Malaysian press I think, is more significant then their reporting

 

[Bells]

Censorship of the press will not create a better society.

Nor will said press making up lies and rumours to inflame an already volatile situation. I honestly do not think that making up rumours will make a better society, do you?

The magazine apologised because the Church threatened to take them to court. Money talks after all.

 

[S.A.M.]

Nor will said press making up lies and rumours to inflame an already volatile situation. I honestly do not think that making up rumours will make a better society, do you?

The magazine apologised because the Church threatened to take them to court. Money talks after all.

That says a lot about the legal system, I think. Otherwise Malysians could put all the Christians in some concentration camp and torture them to death and call it patriotism

Then no one would even need to apologise for it.

 

[Tiassa]

Nothing new here

IOW, when we piss on Christ its freedom of expression, when you spit on him, its intolerance.

I remember this specifically because it had to do with communion, and Rep. Jolene Unsoeld (D-WA) was presiding that evening: In the early 1990s, some independent filmmakers put together a polemic against Catholicism. They demonstratively took communion, walked outside, and spit out the wafers on the sidewalk. Dornan ranted against this film for at least a half hour. As insults go, I don't really see the problem with spitting out the wafer. Sure, it's crass, but there is also a strange (I think unnecessary) theological argument for it; I would have to survey the relevant literature on Muslims making religious demonstrations outside Islam. But there are far worse reasons to spit out the Body of Christ.

So the phenomenon is nothing new to me.

A flip side can be found in Piss Christ, which you mentioned:

The infamous Andres Serrano work Piss Christ - a photograph of a crucifix submerged in urine was attacked in two separate incidents on the consecutive days of the opening weekend. In a move almost as controversial as the work and the attacks themselves, the director of the gallery, Dr Timothy Potts subsequently closed the exhibition in order, he claimed to protect the safety of the gallery and its staff.

The first incident occurred when 51 year old John Allen Haywood took the photograph from the wall and kicked it. Haywood received a one month suspended jail term. After his court appearance he is quoted as saying "You can go so far with taking the piss, you understand....It riles me, it really gets me very upset." And when asked what he would say to the artist who's work he damaged, he eloquently replied "I wouldn't like to say nothing to him. I'd just like to punch him on the nose."

Haywood's actions caused only slight damage to the photograph's framing.
The next day however, two teenagers, aged 18 and 16, were to have considerably more success in their endeavor. In an orchestrated attack it was reported one teenager acted as a decoy, kicking a print on the opposite wall which distracted the guards who rushed to subdue him while the other smashed Piss Christ about 8 times with a hammer. When the guards overpowered the perpetrator the hammer fell and struck a security guard on the knee ....

.... The exhibition was thereafter shortly closed ....

.... The closure of the exhibition effectively awarded the attackers a victory in removing the work from public view and caused much debate about censorship and freedom of expression. Prior to the closure the Catholic Church (lead by Melbourne Archbishop George Pell who years later would be accused of covering up cases of sexual assault in the Church) unsuccessfully attempted to procure an injunction to stop the show going ahead on the basis that the work was blasphemous. The closure of the exhibition also preceded the axing of the Sensation exhibition which was to be held two years later at the National Gallery of Australia. Sensation contained Chris Ofili's The Holy Virgin Mary which was also perceived as blasphemous by some quarters and the subject of an attack.

(Art Crimes)​

Andres Serrano, Piss Christ (1987), and Chris Ofili, The Holy Virgin Mary (1996)​

____________________

Notes:

Art Crimes. "Piss Christ". (n.d.) ArtCrimes.com. March 8, 2010. http://www.artcrimes.net/piss-christ

 

[quadraphonics]

Who were they spying for?

The newspaper in question is a subsidiary of UMNO, the largest political party in Malaysia and one openly committed to the predominance of one particular race and religion.

Yeah, I totally support free press.

What I think of as a "free press" would typically exclude media arms of political parties. That's not an example of "free press," but rather something that is often tolerated as a price of having an actual free press.

Likewise, the employees of such organizations cannot be counted as "journalists," because what they do is not journalism. They are an arm of political power, not an independent check on it.

Even when there is bigotry, you need information to process what is going on.

In the first place, information can be counter-productive to figuring out what's going on. What's needed is reliable, pertinent, adequately-contextualized information. Other types of information can be detrimental to "figuring out what's going on," such as shotgun blasts of context-free misrepresentations, which can have the effect of drowning out productive information and so debasing the public understanding. Which is why you'll so frequently see partisan press using exactly such tactics, when it comes to issue where reality doesn't favor their position.

The global warming "debate" is a good example: the huge investments into "reporting" on this issue mostly represent coordinated, successful efforts to reduce public understanding.

Your statement would be correct if you replaced "information" with "legitimate journalism."

I think the fact that its important enough an issue that journalists are being assigned to it, is a reflection of what is going on there.

And when you consider the fact that we're dealing with a partisan newspaper - a subsidiary of a political party - you get a better idea about what agenda that assignment was important to, and so a clearer reflection of the situation as it is.

But I'd like to see what we are dealing with exactly. What happens to those who are outed? Whats the law? How many people arrested and convicted over it last year?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Malaysia

the reporting on homosexual abuse is what finally got the law off the books.

And if these guys had been reporting on abuse of converts, in service of an independent media, you probably wouldn't have heard many complaints about them. They probably wouldn't have gone under-cover in the church at all.

But what we have here are paid employees of a political party with a racist, confessionalist agenda infiltrating "enemy" religious institutions in order to "out" converts, who will then face oppression by the state and society at large.

And let's also note that you're out in front of the actual newspaper in question here. They've recognized this stuff as wrong and apologized.

 

[Bells]

But I doubt we'll see a point in time where all the Christians in Malaysia have had their homes demolished or are being bombed on a daily basis because they don't fit the religious profile that the majority wants. Their history doesn't support it.

Firstly, you should not dismiss the concerns of the Malaysians simply because it is not as bad to you as what is occuring elsewhere.

The matter of religious intolerance is vitally important to Malaysians.

And secondly, they don't target the homes, just the houses of worship and extreme censorship as well as making life for them difficult.

The reaction to these journalists in the Malaysian press I think, is more significant then their reporting

If they were making up rumours, I would expect the reaction to be bad.

That's the part that you seem to be forgetting.

Malaysia is rife with religious tension and these two intrepid reporters pretended to be Catholic, yes, took the wafer and spat it out and photographed it but also then went on to possibly make up stories about young girls being illegally converted.

That says a lot about the legal system, I think. Otherwise Malysians could put all the Christians in some concentration camp and torture them to death and call it patriotism

Again, different countries and different issues. You seem a tad obsessed and cannot seem to discuss any other issue without bringing your pet issue into the discussion.