Malaysian jailed for 10 years for "insulting Islam"

[Diarcesia]

No fruitful discussion has ever come about from someone insulting the other.

Ok so someone says an insult right? Most people would either ignore him or insult back. What if you ask him why he thinks that? Learn his perspective and reasonings? Attempt to persuade him your side, allowing him to come away from potentially extremist views. Congrats, you just solved the problem, gained an ally and probably a friend.

Or we could go your way, beat the shit out of him, allowing the other party to then have the right to hit back and lead to escalation. Or just straight up imprison him. Yeah, such fruitful discussion and problem solving. Not hiding or oppressing an issue at all.

One thing that begs an explanation is... why would someone have an overriding desire to insult a religion, especially in front of a practitioner?

[Handecanistan]

And your logic allows the Nazis to maintain their power by giving the government justification to take someone out for "re-education". Which gives more damage, a rally/protest, or the government "re-educating" people?

If a totalitarian regime has already taken power, then speech won't bring them out of power.

The idea is that controlling freedom of speech allows a government to reach this point, then what happens when you make a criticism of the government, like "why are you so mean to the Jews" and they imprison you for going against the people's view, they label the other parties as wrong or radical, and any that vote for them are exactly that, and are dangerous to the state.

Totalitarian governments don't happen when the society is intelligent enough to notice it, allow a group to hide it and it'll slowly grow. Let them speak out and you can use evidence and reason to shut them down

[Eglaecia]

This isn't a bad thing. Blasphemy is EVIL and I don't care about Free Speech as long as there are blasphemers. However, Islam is false so I would only want this in the west so that it is used to punish those who insult Catholicism.

So basically we can't say anything bad about your religion now?

Ideally you wouldn't be allowed to.

This isn't a bad thing. Blasphemy is EVIL and I don't care about Free Speech as long as there are blasphemers. However, Islam is false so I would only want this in the west so that it is used to punish those who insult Catholicism.

If you're being satirical you should know that it's usually more Protestants who think like this, not Catholics. At least in my experience.

I'm not being satirical, and I'm aware - sadly. There are far too many self described Catholics that care more about being accepted by society than promoting the truth. Blasphemy is a moral evil.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

So basically we can't say anything bad about your religion now?

Ideally you wouldn't be allowed to.

If you're being satirical you should know that it's usually more Protestants who think like this, not Catholics. At least in my experience.

I'm not being satirical, and I'm aware - sadly. There are far too many self described Catholics that care more about being accepted by society than promoting the truth. Blasphemy is a moral evil.

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

[Handecanistan]

Yes and if I lashed out physically or had you jailed I would be in the wrong. Getting offended at something is not a good reason to jail someone.

This is not merely a matter of people being offended; it is a matter of maintaining social stability. The good of society as a whole outweighs the the selfish whims of the individual.

You ok there Lenin?

[Diarcesia]

Ideally you wouldn't be allowed to.


I'm not being satirical, and I'm aware - sadly. There are far too many self described Catholics that care more about being accepted by society than promoting the truth. Blasphemy is a moral evil.

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

Oh but you see, my religion is objective truth and yours is not. If I am wrong, I will go to hell!

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

Oh but you see, my religion is objective truth and yours is not. If I am wrong, I will go to hell!

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

[Eglaecia]

Ideally you wouldn't be allowed to.


I'm not being satirical, and I'm aware - sadly. There are far too many self described Catholics that care more about being accepted by society than promoting the truth. Blasphemy is a moral evil.

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

If anyone understood Catholicism they wouldn't be able to criticise it because there is nothing to criticise.

Oh but you see, my religion is objective truth and yours is not. If I am wrong, I will go to hell!

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Yes an eternity of suffering is so rad. Keep going the way you are and you'll be blessed with the experience!

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

If anyone understood Catholicism they wouldn't be able to criticise it because there is nothing to criticise.

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Yes an eternity of suffering is so rad. Keep going the way you are and you'll be blessed with the experience!

There is indeed everything to criticize about all religions.

I’ll see you there!

[The South Falls]

Oh but you see, my religion is objective truth and yours is not. If I am wrong, I will go to hell!

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Feel like it would have somebody playing some metal track.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Feel like it would have somebody playing some metal track.

Either that or slow jazz. Elevetaor music maybe? On Mondays.

[Heloin]

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

If anyone understood Catholicism they wouldn't be able to criticise it because there is nothing to criticise.

If you can't think up even one criticism of Catholicism then you don't really understand it.

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Yes an eternity of suffering is so rad. Keep going the way you are and you'll be blessed with the experience!

Eh, I've been through worse.

[Diarcesia]

Feel like it would have somebody playing some metal track.

Either that or slow jazz. Elevetaor music maybe? On Mondays.

Satan sure likes to sniff that V A P O R W A V E as sinners moan and groan in the lake of fire.

[The South Falls]

Feel like it would have somebody playing some metal track.

Either that or slow jazz. Elevetaor music maybe? On Mondays.

Nah, the first few levels of hell have mild irritations, like ballsack itch put to elevator music.

[Andsed]

Why? Your beliefs are not and should not be above criticism.

If anyone understood Catholicism they wouldn't be able to criticise it because there is nothing to criticise.

Hell, if it were an actual place, sounds super rad.

Yes an eternity of suffering is so rad. Keep going the way you are and you'll be blessed with the experience!

Oh there is a lot of stuff I can criticize about Catholicism. And no it is not a moral evil to criticize religion.

[Bienenhalde]

You didn't make an argument, what is there to respond to?

I did make an argument. I made the argument that I think it is wrong to escalate things to violence and jail time because you are offended by what someone said. This just seems to me you don't have a counter argument.

Part of the problem here is that you are only understanding "violence" in terms of physical violence. Words can in fact be a form of emotional and psychological violence. And besides that words that incite physical violence are a problem.

[Central Asian Republics]

Yes and if I lashed out physically or had you jailed I would be in the wrong. Getting offended at something is not a good reason to jail someone.

This is not merely a matter of people being offended; it is a matter of maintaining social stability. The good of society as a whole outweighs the the selfish whims of the individual.

You act as if you're the one who gets to decide what the good of society actually is. If your collectivist poison does one day reach the minds of those in power, there's nothing stopping a maniacal dictator from deciding that your existence is not for "the good of society" and unperson you completely.

[Bienenhalde]

You act as if you're the one who gets to decide what the good of society actually is. If your collectivist poison does one day reach the minds of those in power, there's nothing stopping a maniacal dictator from deciding that your existence is not for "the good of society" and unperson you completely.

I do not think anyone should be "unpersoned". I think that people should be held responsible to face the consequences for their words and actions.

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

Each country is a banner of its own culture.

Just like Americans, despite liking free speech, would find it highly unacceptable as a group to denigrate veterans/armed forces/the flag/the pledge/jesus and whatever else americans orgasm over.

None of those would get you imprisoned however. Americans protect free speech, even that which we disagree with.

I still know a few people who would not oppose the death penalty for that (or confederate monument vandalism...), so not always.

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

Yes and if I lashed out physically or had you jailed I would be in the wrong. Getting offended at something is not a good reason to jail someone.

This is not merely a matter of people being offended; it is a matter of maintaining social stability. The good of society as a whole outweighs the the selfish whims of the individual.

Nuking all of humanity into extinction would also greatly decrease societal instability.

[Central Asian Republics]

I do not think anyone should be "unpersoned". I think that people should be held responsible to face the consequences for their words and actions.

And what should those consequences be? 10 years in prison for speaking mere words? Don't even start on all that "inciting violence" nonsense, humans will always be influenced by the words of others, just because some words will be banned doesn't mean that humans will suddenly become worker ants and do as you say and think as you think.

Your words have the possibility to inspire a brutal dictator to rise to power in the future, but that doesn't mean that you don't have the right to argue against me, unless you actually want it that way judging by your previous posts.

[Erythrean Thebes]

I do not think anyone should be "unpersoned". I think that people should be held responsible to face the consequences for their words and actions.

And what should those consequences be? 10 years in prison for speaking mere words? Don't even start on all that "inciting violence" nonsense, humans will always be influenced by the words of others, just because some words will be banned doesn't mean that humans will suddenly become worker ants and do as you say and think as you think.

Your words have the possibility to inspire a brutal dictator to rise to power in the future, but that doesn't mean that you don't have the right to argue against me, unless you actually want it that way judging by your previous posts.

You also didn't insult him. This has nothing to do with the principle under dispute lol. The question is: if you were just flinging off insults against him, at the very least, there would obviously be no point in speaking with you, and it would be a reasonable inference that there's probably no reason for others to try and speak with you either. But more importantly, what if you were going on and on with your insults, harping them at him, but even though he wouldn't say anything or he wouldn't indulge you, you didn't stop firing off your insults? What are people supposed to do with a person like this unless they enforce some penalty. Even on this very forum they ban you for insulting people! because of exactly the problem just illustrated.

[Diarcesia]

And what should those consequences be? 10 years in prison for speaking mere words? Don't even start on all that "inciting violence" nonsense, humans will always be influenced by the words of others, just because some words will be banned doesn't mean that humans will suddenly become worker ants and do as you say and think as you think.

Your words have the possibility to inspire a brutal dictator to rise to power in the future, but that doesn't mean that you don't have the right to argue against me, unless you actually want it that way judging by your previous posts.

You also didn't insult him. This has nothing to do with the principle under dispute lol. The question is: if you were just flinging off insults against him, at the very least, there would obviously be no point in speaking with you, and it would be a reasonable inference that there's probably no reason for others to try and speak with you either. But more importantly, what if you were going on and on with your insults, harping them at him, but even though he wouldn't say anything or he wouldn't indulge you, you didn't stop firing off your insults? What are people supposed to do with a person like this unless they enforce some penalty. Even on this very forum they ban you for insulting people! because of exactly the problem just illustrated.

10 years in prison is still too much, however

[Erythrean Thebes]

You also didn't insult him. This has nothing to do with the principle under dispute lol. The question is: if you were just flinging off insults against him, at the very least, there would obviously be no point in speaking with you, and it would be a reasonable inference that there's probably no reason for others to try and speak with you either. But more importantly, what if you were going on and on with your insults, harping them at him, but even though he wouldn't say anything or he wouldn't indulge you, you didn't stop firing off your insults? What are people supposed to do with a person like this unless they enforce some penalty. Even on this very forum they ban you for insulting people! because of exactly the problem just illustrated.

10 years in prison is still too much, however

More generally prison is ineffective by itself and in America it's done almost as badly as possible

[Duhon]

Filipino liberal democrat and (probably the only) ASEAN booster here.

Anyway, the key to understanding Malaysian society is the intense ethnic feeling among members of the Malay majority, and corresponding, if at present low-key, hostility to its minorities, most prominently the Chinese. Put in Western terms, the Malays, like Tarrant and his ilk, fear a great replacement, but with Malays the ones getting the boot and the Chinese getting to call the shots, instead of Christian white males and everyone else respectively.

In other words, the blasphemy laws are there not so much to protect Islam from the slings of the kuffar, as they are there to protect what is viewed among themselves as an integral part of the Malay identity from the reproaches of the not-Malay.

If this feels weird to Westerners reading this, trust me, this feels weird to me too; simply put, tribalism is almost a nonexistent current in my part of the world.