Draw Muhammad contest Taxas!!! WHY?? - Page 11

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

A lay example in favour of this would suffice: A decade earlier, people would balk at any mention of homosexuality. Post the success of the movie "Dostana" which eased the idea into the minds of the masses through a hunorous take, the topic gradually evolved into non-taboo for discussion.

I think I made a point earlier in the thread that change has to come from within and your above point works to my advantage. Prior to Dostana, Hollywood made dozens of movies on that concept but if Dostana worked (I am not sure it did but let's assume for a minute that it did, for arguments sake) for Indians because an Indian made it, then it makes sense to think that when a Muslim or a group of Muslims start satirizing their religious figures and books, or better yet, bring about free speech laws, then it wold have make a real impact in their part of the world, than when a foreigner, worse a Jew or a Christian, does it.

An Indian criticizing India would be more palatable to Indians than, say, an American or an NRI criticizing India, you would agree.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Though you're correct on one point. The "Rammohan approach" (re-defining the texts to nullify any excuse in favour of Sati) is preferable to the "Young Bengal" one of publicly making a show of eating beef and desecrating the Geeta.

I don't know who or what this young Bengali is but If someone were to desecrate Bhagavad Gita, I may forget that I am a law-abiding citizen, and a responsible family man :)

On "change from within":

Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, Wafa Sultana, Ayan Hirsi Ali, Washiqur Rahman are a few names to mention. What they did, and what was done unto them.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

On "change from within":

Taslima Nasreen, Salman Rushdie, Wafa Sultana, Ayan Hirsi Ali, Washiqur Rahman are a few names to mention. What they did, and what was done unto them.

Well, change is not easy, especially in the Muslim world, especially in those that have authoritarian regimes. A couple of outspoken individuals here and there that one could count on fingers simply wouldn't do. They need to have demonstrations, boycotts, strikes, petitions, civil disobedience, whatever it takes to bring about a social change. They need to hold themselves accountable for the state they are in. If it is a medieval book that is responsible for their overall "backwardness", then it is they who should shun medieval practices that are making them regressive. The burden is on them. If they are too impotent to rebel, then no amount of outside "support" will help; definitely not taunts.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33039815


Ideally, you want rational Muslims around the world to protest vociferously against this "judgment", with the same intensity they protest against Muhammad cartoon drawing contests, but likely you would see them keeping quiet. Yet again.

Silence is consent.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Well, change is not easy, especially in the Muslim world, especially in those that have authoritarian regimes. A couple of outspoken individuals here and there that one could count on fingers simply wouldn't do. They need to have demonstrations, boycotts, strikes, petitions, civil disobedience, whatever it takes to bring about a social change. They need to hold themselves accountable for the state they are in. If it is a medieval book that is responsible for their overall "backwardness", then it is they who should shun medieval practices that are making them regressive. The burden is on them. If they are too impotent to rebel, then no amount of outside "support" will help; definitely not taunts.

Nope, it takes one individual to start a movement. But the thing is, the legal machinery in most Islamic nations is stringently anti-atheist and ultra-vigilant towards the slightest sign of rebellion or subversion towards the entrenched norms. Which means a civilised, organised "mivement" is hardly possible in a State like, say, Saudi Arabia where blogger Badawi get 100 lashes and possibly a death sentence for his atheism.

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

Nope, it takes one individual to start a movement. But the thing is, the legal machinery in most Islamic nations is stringently anti-atheist and ultra-vigilant towards the slightest sign of rebellion or subversion towards the entrenched norms. Which means a civilised, organised "mivement" is hardly possible in a State like, say, Saudi Arabia where blogger Badawi get 100 lashes and possibly a death sentence for his atheism.

Nobody's saying every Muslim is to be held accountable for the ghastly deeds of taq'firi elements. In my last post I pointed out how and why the "moderate" Muslim's voice is largely subdued in a society governed by the Sharia law and its guardians, the mutawas.

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

QL, you may have a point here. I am getting systematically desensitized to these psychoanalytic, behavioral therapy advancing esoteric posts so much so that I have very little resolve left now to "fight back" anymore. It is working!

Murders and Rape is as common as Sex all over the World Now.
Just like a Boy of only 17 told me the other day that Doing the Deed and Keeping the Good boy image infront of parents is more easy than i think.
Now,I've been friends with this boy and his Whole group for more than 4yrs.But never wanted to fit in the Group because i detest their Filthy ways of Popularity.
So,they assumed i didn't join them in their Wild Parties was because i was Scared to ruin my 'Good girl Image'...So,what happend to them?
they are,in your words,desensitised
This is what they see all over the TVs,Listen in the Radios,On their Mobiles...hell,even Ads nowadays promotes promiscuous Sex!
Now tell me if you think we should keep quiet about this And let half the world die with STDs!
Because ppl might have been "Desensitised" but Mother Nature is Not.
Likewise,the amount Rape and Murder cases are Rapidly increasing and are all over the News,
Are You Desensitised?Doesn't it Matter to you anymore?NO.It matters and we are still finding ways to stop it,because we know its wrong.
Logically, if 1.7 billion ppl picked up a Gun and started shooting Everyone and Anyone that population the would Decrease to perhaps 4 Billions in about a Month.But we are not doing this are we?Now because Of 7% of Muslims who have now dedicated their life to Terrorism more than Allah,we 93% percentage of Muslims have to keep quiet and Watch you Desensitise us?
7%of Muslims Represents our Religion and not the 93%?
And did you Ever,just once,thought that if Muslims were so strict and Powerful and Dangerous then why is It that Children in Gaza,Syria,palestine and so many other places Have to Beg for Help and just a Piece of Bread and not get anything other than Humiliation?
Where are Al-Qayda,Isis this and that Now?
Aren't they suppose to protect us if they are protecting Islam?
Dont you see the truth?Or have you been desensitised to our Pains?

I refuse to be desensitised by Blind People and Media.
I will Speak when i see something Wrong.
I will Go against Them.
And i will Say 'You're Wrong,You cant make me agree with you'
And i will protest However i can.
I will fight them with Logic and Word,because this is My_Freedom of opinion and Expression and
FREEDOM.OF.SPEECH

Originally posted by: QuietlyLoud

In your rush to learn about desensitization,you looked into the wrong area.I talked about the desensitization which occurs as a natural process among healthy humans and what you have been reading about is the deliberate desensitization to treat phobias.

To spare you the trouble of finding examples of it on your own,here are some.

But the cartoon drawing contests are attempts at deliberate desensitization, isn't that right? Isn't that the whole reason you brought up this "therapy" in the first place? So why are you talking about "natural process desensitization" now and accusing me that I was researching the wrong area?

And healthy individuals don't have phobias?

Originally posted by: QuietlyLoud

The only thing that would work is what worked with Catholic church, which was as bad.

I asked for evidence. Instead I get the usual runaround. So tell me, how many times should one repeat this mantra ("systematic desensitization worked for Catholic church") in their head, for it to become "fact"?

Originally posted by: QuietlyLoud

Once you're desensitized to something,the change of mindset will never happen from within the population. The pressure to change should come from outside

OK, since it is a "fact" now (that systematic desensitization worked for Christians of yore), who exactly applied this pressure to change the Christians (Catholic church), what steps did they follow to desensitize Christians (Catholic church) and where is/was this "outside" that you speak of when it came to desensitizing Christians (Catholic church)?