China confiscates Bibles from American Christians (4 guys need 300 Bibles?)

[elehhhhna]

China confiscates Bibles from American Christians
By GILLIAN WONG Associated Press
Aug. 17, 2008, 9:22AM
1Comments 0Recommend Share
Print Email Del.icio.usDiggTechnoratiYahoo! BuzzBEIJING — Chinese customs officials confiscated more than 300 Bibles on Sunday from four American Christians who arrived in a southwestern city with plans to distribute them, the group's leader said.

The Bibles were taken from the group's checked luggage after they landed at the airport in the city of Kunming, said Pat Klein, head of Vision Beyond Borders. The group, based in Sheridan, Wyoming, distributes Bibles and Christian teaching materials around the world to "strengthen the persecuted church," according to its Web site.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/world/5949001.html

[mr_hat]

1. I know guys who have that many guns.

Same guys, maybe.

[Retired AF Dem]

8. I have almost that many guns

no bibles in the house though.

[stray cat]

2. Is it ok to outlaw books you disagree with - in some countries it certainly is.

[Vickers]

3. "the persecuted church"

How awful!

:rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

26. Yeah, it's hilarious when governments imprison people for thinking the wrong way.

Grade-A comedy, that is.

[Deja Q]

4. What if they brought in 300 Qu'rans instead?

:popcorn:


:hide:

[stray cat]

6. probably also confiscated - just like the Internet is restricted in China

Do we really want to support restrictions on books, speech and the internet?

[hendo]

17. apparently some people here do nt

[Sal Minella]

22. What if four Moslems were bringing 300 Qu'rans through U.S. customs?

I somehow doubt the D.H.S. people would offer a hand with the luggage on that one.

[Occam Bandage]

24. They'd be perfectly allowed.

[Sal Minella]

31. I am glad you feel so perfectly assured of this perfection, Dr. Pangloss.

Must be a lovely, lovely world that you live in.

[Occam Bandage]

32. Do you have a link to

absolutely anything suggesting that any members of any religion have had their religious materials confiscated by the Federal government?

[Sal Minella]

40. That link would probably be found in Aljazeera or Asia Times or other sites

that I do not regularly read, so no. Our U.S. media would certainly not cover such a story if/when it occurred.

[dems_rightnow]

85. In other words

"I totally pulled that one out of my ass".

[QC]

112. The Anal Archive is one of the most popular resources on DU. n/t

[QC]

116. The Muslim Student Association hands them out regularly at my college,

which is hardly a hotbed of liberal decadence.

None have been sent to GITMO.

[Zhade]

122. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Tell us another one!

[ProdigalJunkMail]

125. find me one situation in the last 20 years

where US gov't types stopped a group of proselytizers of any religion at the US border and seized their wares for any reason except tax/duty on the items...

sP

[ProdigalJunkMail]

159. yeah...that's what I thought

you got nothing... amused by the thought that it wouldn't happen? simply stated, "I am pulling stuff out of my butt and now have to act as if I am SHOCKED...SHOCKED, I tell you, that anyone would disagree with me...in hopes that my glorious debate style will win me points..."

sP

[Occam Bandage]

147. Find me one instance of a Muslim being stopped by the government from proselytising. One.

And don't say "well they're too scared to do it," because I have a nice collection of pamphlets and tracts at home saying otherwise.

(Yes, I do save religious pamphlets. I find them fascinating.)
(I also have two full Bibles, a New Testament, an English Qu'ran, a Platform Sutra, a Lotus Sutra, and a Bhagavad Gita, all bought for under $5 or accepted as a gift from proselytisers. I like people who try to make people think.)

[Zhade]

153. I'm amused by the assumption that it WOULDN'T happen.

I'm not asserting that it HAS happened.

There's a difference.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

176. Would you equivocate about it if it did?

Or would you condemn it?

And, if the latter, are you willing to condemn these Chinese actions?

[Occam Bandage]

186. Why the hypothetical words "wouldn't" and "if?" Plenty of Muslims come here to proselytise.

None, to the best of my knowledge (and yours) have ever been detained. Yes, it's possible that someday some jackass DHS agent will overstep his bounds, try to detain them, and end up the center of a huge lawsuit. It's also possible that someday a pack of racist mimes will go on a well-choreographed silent killing spree, but we're not discussing that or laughing at people who say that is not the expected result.

[AngryAmish]

178. A Lotus Sutra sounds like an English sports car from the early 80s

[Codeine]

69. Go to any bookstore in town.

You can buy a Quran there, probably several different editions and translations.

[JVS]

83. Why would they need to? The Koran is published here as well and easily accesible.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

84. i saw a guy with a Quran on MARTA last Saturday

it was in ARABIC!!! He was reading out loud (well, not loud enough to be a bother...it was quite melodic at times)! We should have him arrested and deported along with his book! People could have been listening...someone might have converted. He even had brown skin...

sP

sarcasm tag assumed and NOT needed

[Dorian Gray]

108. They wouldn't be confiscated.

Quarans are perfectly legal in the USA.

[jmowreader]

124. No one would ever need to bring 300 Qurans through US Customs

It would be less expensive to buy them from Barnes & Noble than to pay the excess-baggage charges.

[Spouting Horn]

150. "Moslems"

bring thousands of Qurans (and preachers, and money) into this country, funded largely by Saudi Arabia and other Gulf "ally" Salafists, at the invitation of the Bush White House and State Department.

[CreekDog]

5. they were going to hand them out, either to Christians in China to give them out

or to others who wanted them.

i think such activity should be totally legal, everywhere.

don't forget that Christians in China (that live there) can use extra bibles too.

[MiniMe]

7. I wonder what language they were in?

[NNN0LHI]

9. Remember when the US used to raise all kinds of hell about priests being imprisoned in China?

I think we have more priests in prison for various things than they do now so we don't bring that up any more.

Don

[tburnsten]

219. HA! IMprisonment for criminal actions

and imprisonment for being a priest of an unauthorized religion are not even close to the same thing. Sorry dude but you missed the boat on that one. Repression of people for choosing a religion the state doesn't sanction is a horrific civil rights violation, while imprisoning far-out whackos like the different polygamists/child abuse instigators we have been nailing lately is a public service.

[AndyTiedye]

10. If You Bring That Much of Anything Through Customs Anywhere

they are likely to question a claim that it is all for "personal use".

[Occam Bandage]

25. Of course. The problem is that China bans proselytization.

[Sal Minella]

35. The problem is that proselytizers exist. imnsho. nt.

[Occam Bandage]

37. I'm not one to applaud government restriction of speech and thought,

no matter how much I disagree with the thoughts and words in question.

[Sal Minella]

38. No one I know of on this board is applauding government restriction

of speech and/or thought, so I cannot determine what you think you're talking about.

[Occam Bandage]

44. So you take the side of the proselytizers, then?

That doesn't seem to square with the tone of your previous statement. Usually people don't claim the people they agree with are "the problem," to the exclusion of the people they disagree with.

[Zhade]

123. Since there's no right to proselytization, I'm fine with that.

People have a right to believe what they wish, but there is NO corollary right to foist their religion onto others.

[Raskolnik]

132. You have it exactly backwards.

I believe human beings *do* have a right to put their ideas into the public sphere and let them succeed or fail on their ideas' merits. There is no logically consistent justification for banning religious proselytizing that can't be applied just as effectively against political thought, philosophy, or any other set of ideas a government doesn't want its citizens to be burdened with.

People have a right to disbelieve what they wish, but there is NO corollary right to ban speech with which you disagree.

[Zhade]

152. We may be operating on different definitions.

For example, believers have absolutely no right to come onto your property to preach. They do have the right to stand on a public street corner and express themselves.

They have no right to harass someone in public by following them and getting in their face to preach. They do have a right to offer - not force into someone's hand, offer - pamphlets expressing their views.

That make more sense?

(Oh, and a small correction: it's not disbelief. It's the lack of belief. The former suggests there's something in which to disbelieve - an unsupported assertion.)

[tburnsten]

220. So the fact that they could *potentially*

go out and follow/harass people is a perfectly legitimate reason to take their personal property (300 bibles aren't free) and put the clamps down on their ability to spread their materials/get the word out about their religion?

Sorry but if you think that "what if's" and "mights" have equal weight as reality and criminal behavior, I don't know, maybe you could move somewhere more restrictive. You "could" punch the cashier at your grocery store in the face, should you be arrested for it preemptively? By your statement you think that would be a perfectly acceptable event.



I am not religous and I dislike being preached to, but so long as the person trying to get the word out about their belief (absolutely nothing wrong with that, be a mighty boring planet if people kept everything to themselves) is respectful and doesn't press the issue when someone tells them they aren't interested or they are busy or they just don't want to hear it, they are doing nothing wrong and in any reasonable and decent society must be left to spread their word all they please. If people like what they hear, the idea will catch on, if it sounds :dunce: then it will wither on the vine. That is how the spread of non-factual ideas and beliefs work.

[TexasObserver]

11. ugh

Religious zealots are like flies. They eat shit and they bother people.

I'm guessing the Chinese communists would not be well received if they arrived in Anytown, USA with a gross of Mao's Little Red Book and wanted to hand them out on the town square.

[Sadie4629]

13. Think they'd be confiscated? n/t

[TexasObserver]

19. Yes. And they'd be arrested and deported, if not shipped to GITMO

[onenote]

94. sad that you live in such a delusional state

[tburnsten]

221. That is the most ridiculous statement I've heard today

Why the hell would you think that anything of the sort would happen? They would probably be totally ignored and find that no one really cares about their political system, except the odd 16-25 year old, and they would most likely quickly get discouraged at their total lack of success. I bet they don't have the know-how to deal with apathy, American-style, and probably wouldn't understand why they were being neither harrassed by government or individuals or listened to.

[hendo]

18. Mao's little red book is notirously hard to find

in China anymore. It took me 2 days of searching in Shanghai to find a copy.

And, I highly doubt that the little red books would be confiscated in America even if such an insane example ever happened.

After, all I have seen many people passing out Lenin's Imperialism, and they don't get arrest, or have thier books confiscated.

its all part of living in a free country.

[TexasObserver]

20. They'd be arrested and deported, if not sent to GITMO.

your fantasy of freedom in America notwithstanding

[Name removed]

28. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[hendo]

30. It is not illegal to have a quaran in the US

stop being paranoid.

[TexasObserver]

41. Please pay attention to the posited facts of the scenario.

Chinese communists come to Anytown, USA and start handing out hundreds of Mao's Little Red Books.

Stop being disingenuous, if that's possible for you to do.

[hendo]

46. or the little red book for that manner

which is also found in US bookstores.

in fact, amazon.com has 6 different versions.. you sir are full of it.

[TexasObserver]

48. And that is NOT the topic, is it?

I say 4 Chinese commununists come to the USA with 300 copies of the book, here on passports as non citizens, proselytizing Anytown, USA, and you attempt to counter that with "but we have them in bookstores."

Not in Anytown, USA you don't. Drive to the nearest town of 20,000 people. Go to the police station and tell them you intend to hand out 300 copies of Mao's Little Red Book, and you just wanted to give them a heads up. Then come back and report to us after Homeland Security debriefs you.

[hendo]

49. define anytown USA.

I believe that your version of anytown USA is more reliant upon some small southern town in georgia or alabama than anywhere else.

[hendo]

53. my local Barnes and Nobel has 4 copies in stock

The local college bookstore has 250.

The local Walden Books has 10.

[LanternWaste]

66. Is that due to the market forces at work

Is that due to the market forces at work, or because someone in the government is proactively denying Anytown's reading habits?

It seems to be a very relevant distinction to me...

[hendo]

56. I'll tell you what

you buy them and send them to me, and I will pass out 300 copies. I am not wasting my money on your ignorance.

[Hippo_Tron]

156. They might be harassed by local police, sent to GITMO is a little absurd

[tuckessee]

51. But having a World Almanac & duct tape means you might be a terrorsist. n/t

[hendo]

54. damn straight

we cant trust those people with a World's Almanac. They should all burn. Same with duct tape. that sh*t does anything. I could have sworn MacGuyver has even made a bomb out of it.

[TexasObserver]

55. They refuse to acknowledge the impact of foreign agents with passports and anti govt. propaganda

We don't treat foreigners any better than China does if our government thinks they're in the country to foment trouble.

[tburnsten]

225. Could you please back up ANY of your

absurd statements? I'm sorry but we do not behave in the way you are describing, I think your loathing of the current administration (rightful as it may be) is causing you to hallucinate that we are vigorously suppressing any "distasteful" speech. It isn't happening.

[Occam Bandage]

34. This is what happens when people mistake DU caricatures for reality.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Dorian Gray]

109. Bull

Crap:

http://www.amazon.com/Little-Red-Book-Quotations-Tse-tung/dp/B0017HZW1C/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1219016607&sr=8-3

Can buy it on Amazon. Nobody is deporting them, or those who import the book!

[TexasObserver]

114. Horse

Apples

Try reading the scenario described again and see if you can figure out the importance of four people being in a foreign country, promoting opposition to the government and way of life, visiting on a passport, and subject to removal for reasons that would not result in any charges whatsoever against a citizen.

You can buy the book online. BFD. Irrelevant.

[ColbertWatcher]

160. What about this scenario instead ...

...4 Iranian students come to Topeka, Kansas, home of Fred Phelps, with 300 bound copies of transcripts of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's blog?

[pipoman]

164. Now you are in my backyard

The Topeka PD officer would roll his eyes and protect the person(s) doing the handing out from anyone who would do them harm. There would be no trouble as long as all local ordinances were adhered to. I am not sure what Phelps has to do with this. Are you suggesting that Topekans agree with Phelps? If so you obviously know nothing about Kansas or Topekans. I believe the same would be true in most any US city.

[ColbertWatcher]

208. "The Topeka PD officer would ..."

But, would the 4 Iranian students even get that far? With this administration and their fear-mongering and TSA?

BTW, I picked Phelps because he is such a reactionary and if the hypothetical 4 Iranian students were somehow able to sneak past the federal "protections", Phelps would make such a loud stink.

If only to get himself more attention.

[pipoman]

229. I don't think Phelps would have anything to say about it unless...

the 4 Iranians were GLBTG.. ;)

[ColbertWatcher]

236. LOL, true! n/t

[pipoman]

251. Ooops...

I forgot this response when asked about homosexuality in Iran:

'We don't have that in our country,' Ahmadinejad said. 'In Iran we do not have that phenomenon.'

I guess my scenario is an impossibility. :blush:

[TexasObserver]

169. We know this is true. They're risking harm and imprisonment, if they do.

I can't believe anyone here would pretend that foreign nationals with a bunch of religious/political texts and intent on disobeying US laws and rules could enter the country today and NOT face serious repercussions by US officials.

[ColbertWatcher]

209. Maybe people are hoping to return to being the US that we used to be ...

...instead of accepting the US the GOp has made us into.

[hendo]

237. it would not be breaking the laws to pass out

the text described. So long as they did it peacfully they would be following all of our laws.

[Dorian Gray]

171. I did read the scenario

and I still think that you have no evidence that would happen.

Do you think that people don't enter this country all the time with multiple copies of the Quaran? I'm talking through immigration at the airport.

Look, I know those people broke whatever rules in China, but I find those rules to be abhorrent. Not because I want the Chinese all to become Christians, but rather because I find
the confiscation and jailing of people for promoting any religion to be suspect. If this story occurred here, I would be just as angry. Actually, more angry. I'd do more than spout off
on the internet and actually contact my representatives.

And if you can point me to a place where this scenario has actually played out in the USA, I will gladly take action.

[Dreamer Tatum]

149. Fitting that your avatar is Dali

Enough said.

[TexasObserver]

167. You say that like it matters.

I change my avatar often, and my reasons, I assure you, are not whatever it is you infer from them.

Dali, for example, I chose simply because of the look of incredulity on his face.

I find most amusing those here who always try to read something into an avatar. It's a friggin photo, and if you want to divine its meaning, don't guess, because you'll be wrong.

This new avatar is just for you, and those like you, who overreact to everything they see.

[Dreamer Tatum]

203. It only matters to the degree that your post takes liberties with reality

But whatever. If you think you'd get tossed into Gitmo for bringing in books you can buy, oh, EVERYWHERE, heaven only knows what other ridiculous stuff you believe.

[TexasObserver]

210. Stop mischaracterizing what I've said.

I never spoke of any CITIZEN and their ability to buy any book they wish. I talked about 4 foreigners trying to enter the country with 300 plus of their cult or cause books, intent on distribution. I've mentioned 4 Chinese communists with 300 of Mao's book. Someone else mentioned 4 Iranians with 300 copies of the Quran. If you think those people would make it past our customs, you are truly delusional.

[Dreamer Tatum]

215. Go spend some time in the Bradley Terminal at LAX before you bleat

Iranians or Chinese with boxes of their favorite books would probably get the once-over...from drug-sniffing dogs.

The larger point, which has eluded you, is that the mythical four Chinese or four Iranians NEED NOT BRING 300 COPIES OF
ANYTHING INTO THE UNITED STATES, as said books can be (a) shipped here, (b) printed here, (c) downloaded here, (d) sold
at a fucking Barnes and Noble here.

I just stuck 30 copies of the Koran in my Amazon basket. They're offering me a credit card to facilitate the transaction.

I don't just think they'd make it through customs, I think they could set up shop at the Religious Bullshit Dissemination kiosk in
the airport terminal and start passing them out after they took a piss break and had a coffee.

[hendo]

238. I already told you, buy me the 300 copies fo Mao's book

or 300 copies of the Quaran, and I will pack them in my suitcase when I come back from Mexico next week. We shall see what happens.

However, as people here have repeatedly pointed out. you are missing the point. We don't need to carry them through customs when they can be purchased in this country.

I fail to see anywhere where you have addressed that. I have repeatedly pointed out where I can purchased the books we are talking about, both online and in local bookstores. If you want, I can call bookstores in other parts of the country. But something tells me that even if they don't have Mao's little red book in stock, they will order it for me.

You might want to believe that we are living in a facist state, but that does not make it true.

[tburnsten]

222. What's with your fantasy of america anyway?

Do you even live here? It doesn't look like it, since you clearly know almost nothing about the way this country operates and the way our people regard oddities such as people trying to hand out communist manifestos.

[Zynx]

170. I know for a fact you can get your hands on Mao's Little Red Book here if you want to.

No question at all.

[hendo]

235. in the US, yes

but I wanted it in Chinese, and being in China at the time, i had to search for it.

[Rage for Order]

63. Anyone who wants Mao's Little Red Book can get it

All it takes is a couple of http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=mao%27s+little+red+book&x=0&y=0">clicks and $6.39. But I'm sure these are only brought into the US one at a time, not 300 or more at a time. :sarcasm:

On edit: it's easy to pick up a copy of the http://www.amazon.com/Quran-Translation-Sayed-Razwy/dp/1879402297/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1218998494&sr=1-1">Koran too. Amazingly enough, these people aren't in Gitmo yet.

[hendo]

239. shush you..

you are poking holes in his argument.

Texas Observer does not respond kindly.

[QC]

254. You do him far too much credit by attributing an argument to him. n/t

[LanternWaste]

65. Political zealots are even worse

Political zealots are even worse. Not a day goes by during election season when some political yahoo wannabee who claims the high road on every issue starts forcing his own brand of secular zealotry down my throat.

[malaise]

113. Bingo n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

12. China is a totalitarian capitalist state.

By the way, our border guards can and do seize anything they feel like seizing and there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. For example, just recently, news stories were printed about DHS asserting that it can take the data off your laptops, iphones, etc. whenever they want to, and that this means that your data and the device it is on can wind up in their custody for as long as they care to keep it whenever you cross the border. It seems that in our country too you have few rights at all with respect to search and seizure when you are in a border transit area. They can subject you to body cavity searches and take your pc whenever they want to.

[Dogtown]

14. "China is a totalitarian capitalist state."

*As is* the USA.


No argument with your post, just wanted to add that this country is *NOT* the "Land of the Free".

[Warren Stupidity]

15. My point exactly.

We package our shit nicer than they do, but from the looks of the olympics, they are getting pretty good at the packaging too.

[Kansas Wyatt]

16. Yet American Christians keep pouring dollars into WalMart* to benefit China.

* WalMart = Made in China

[asteroid2003QQ47]

21. What are they complaining about, they're alive aren't they?

Sadly, they now get to peddle crazy somewhere else.

---------------------------------------------------
The most preposterous notion that H. sapiens has ever dreamed up is that the Lord God of Creation, Shaper and Ruler of all the Universes, wants the saccharine adoration of His creatures, can be swayed by their prayers, and becomes petulant if He does not receive this flattery.

Yet this absurd fantasy, without a shred of evidence to bolster it, pays all the expenses of the oldest, largest, and least productive industry in all history.
--Robert Heinlein
As spoken by Lazarus Long in Time Enough For Love

[Occam Bandage]

23. I believe in freedom of religion. This type of action is appalling.

[NNN0LHI]

36. Are you familiar with the fascinating past history of religion in China?

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

The Taiping Rebellion or Rebellion of Great Peace was a large-scale revolt against the authority and forces of the Qing Government in China. It was conducted from 1850 to 1864 by an army and civil administration led by heterodox Christian convert Hong Xiuquan. He established the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom (Chinese: 太平天囯;traditional Chinese: 太平天國; simplified Chinese: 太平天国; pinyin: Tàipíng Tiān Guó), namely Heavenly Kingdom of Great Peace with capital Nanjing and gained control of significant parts of southern China, at its height ruling over about 30 million people. They tried to institute several social reforms, such as strict separation of the sexes, abolition of foot binding, land socialization, "suppression" of private trade, and the replacement of Confucianism, Buddhism and Chinese folk religion by a form of Christianity, holding that Hong Xiuquan was the younger brother of Jesus, and troops nicknamed were the Long hair pinyin: Chan mao, different Queue (hairstyle) and provoked authority of the Qing clearly.

The Taiping areas were constantly besieged and harassed by Qing forces; the rebellion was eventually put down by the Qing army aided by French and British forces. With an estimated death toll of between 20 and 30 million due to warfare and resulting starvation, this civil war ranks as the second bloodiest conflict in history, behind the Second World War. Mao Zedong viewed the Taiping as early heroic revolutionaries against a corrupt feudal system. Today, artifacts from the Taiping period can be seen at the Taiping Kingdom History Museum in Nanjing.

[Occam Bandage]

39. Given that I spent four years of my life in China, yeah, I am.

The Taiping rebellion has little to do with modern Chinese attitudes towards religion. China has a long and illustrious history of intellectual and/or peasant revolts; the "Christianity" of the Taipings was more an interesting aside than a major factor.

[NNN0LHI]

43. Then you already understood why the government there is a bit touchy on this subject?

A lot of people don't.

Don

[Occam Bandage]

45. Yeah, I understand why they're touchy about any heterodoxy. Generally I take the side of

China in arguments regarding its government and society. I don't believe China is nearly as restrictive as the West likes to claim it is. However, that doesn't mean I approve of the restrictions it does possess.

Religion in China is somewhat free--it's not like you can't be a Protestant or a Muslim. On the other hand, you can't just buy a ticket, buy an empty lot, build a church, and hand out Bibles, either. China is pretty accommodating of individuals who want to believe things--but they're pretty harsh on people who want to lead a flock (though more in the red-tape-fines-and-eventual-imprisonment harsh, not the execution-type harsh...unless you start challenging the authority of the Chinese government, but I digress). And, as much as I don't like evangelical Christianity, I respect the right of people to be Christian, and it's hard to have churches without pastors...

[Jack Rabbit]

27. Four guys need 300 Bibles? you ask.

I suppose if they're handing them out, they need that many.

Now, what is wrong with that? One does not have to be a Christian of any stripe to feel some discomfort with the Chinese government's attitude toward the free dissemination of ideas and information.

To challenge one poster here, no one is threatening to send me to Gitmo because I have a copy of the Little Red Book on my shelf. It isn't the only Marxist text I have. I've even got a book by Leo Strauss. I also have the Bible (and the Koran, the Analects of Confucius, the Tao Te Ching, the I Ching, several Buddhist sutras, some Upanishads and the Book of Mormon).

I just happen to be a widely read individual. I think its a good thing. I also think free access to information is a human right, as is the right to worship as one chooses and not as the state chooses for him.

[TexasObserver]

47. You're not a non citizen, a visitor on a passport, with 300 copies of the book, either.

Your failure to distinguish between yourself, as a citizen, with a lone copy, and Chinese communists here with 300 and recruitment on their minds makes your example non applicable.

Do you really think 4 Chinese communists could come to Anytown, USA with 300 copies of the book, start proselytizing, and nothing would happen to them? Hell, they'd be lucky to simply have their books confiscated and be deported.

Which America have you been living in recently? Not the one where people are tased to death every other day by police. Not the one running torture camps and ICE camps where no rights are afforded.

[Jack Rabbit]

61. Of course, what you're syaing is that it isn't right for the govt to confiscate "subversive" books

Whether it's the Bible or the Little Red Book or Harry Potter.

I agree entirely.

While I also think you're exaggerating how much trouble your hypothetical Chinese Communists would find themselves for distributing the Little Red Book in Podunk, Idaho, I will also agree that America is looking more like a police state than ever. That is why I oppose Bush and will oppose the election of any yuppie fascist pledged to continue his policies, war hero or not.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

29. they brought them to distribute and China does not like that

[JBoy]

33. I think they got what they expected and wanted.

It would have been funny if they actually got their bibles through. "Shit, now what are we gonna do with these things?". Probably nobody in their group spoke any Chinese.

[alarimer]

145. Yes now they can whine about how persecuted they are.

I am torn on this though. I hate preachy Christians and people who want to foist their religion on others, which is all they were up to here. And it takes some nerve to go to some foreign country and try to browbeat the natives into your religion.

[pipoman]

165. Not necessarily

there are many, many Christians in China who cannot get Bibles. 300 is hardly enough to start a subversive movement. They were more likely going to distribute them to the believers who cannot get copies.

[KharmaTrain]

50. Imagine Someone Trying To "Smuggle" Korans Into This Country

Wanna bet they'd have a long day dealing with INS and TSA goons at one of our airports?

[ProdigalJunkMail]

52. that's the point...

you don't HAVE to smuggle them into the US...I have three here in the house that I have purchased legally...I don't THINK you can legally take them into China...can you?

The guys were nuts for trying to sneak them it...what did they expect?

sP

[hendo]

57. Exactly, thank you

you do not have to smuggle religious books into the US.

[KharmaTrain]

58. There Are Bibles In China

IRC, Beijing has a fairly decent size Archdiosese and there is a degree of religious tolerance in the country that didn't exist in the past. But I am sure the bibles they use are sanctioned by the Government and just like how the church operated in Poland for many years during the Soviet era, they were tolerated as long as they didn't make political waves (like Fulon Gong).

And, of course, when someone says "bibles"...my first question is whose? King James? Some version written by a fundie? The devil is always in the details on a story like this, but makes for great fodder on hate radio.

Yep, the guys were stupid for doing this...but maybe stupid like a fox...there's more PR in being a martyr than in any "harm" these bibles would do.

My point is that someone attempting to bring Korans into this country would also face a lot of scrutiny by our police state ...life's a bitch these days in America for anyone with an Arabic name. I think they call it the "Post 9/11 mindset"

Cheers...

[ProdigalJunkMail]

59. i didn't know it was legal to import them...

at least not in any quantity...and to be honest with you, i think the only scrutiny one would face trying to bring large numbers of the Quran into the US would be related to paying duty on them...and even then I am not sure a religious group would face THAT.

i agree these guys were looking to have them seized to be able to scream persecution...especially if there ARE legal channels to bring them in and they did not pursue them.

sP

[ColbertWatcher]

161. "The devil is always in the details on a story like this,"

The wisest thing said in this thread (except for what TexasObserver's posts)

What I'd like to know is: before they were given their visa, were they asked why they would be visiting China?

Were they asked if they would be proselytizing?

Were they honest?

[TexasObserver]

168. Indeed. That is what we do not know.

How does this story end if the same people arrive in Saudi Arabia with 315 Bibles, intent on passing them out and proselytizing? Or Pakistan? Or Yemen? Or the Vatican?

We do not know what rules or laws the Bible perps may have violated. And let's not forget, during the Olympics, the Chinese are on a heightened alert status. They might let it pass some other time.

As in all things worldwide, Americans tend to see all events as if all countries should By God do whatever the hell Americans - any Americans - want them to do.

You ask "were they honest?" when they filled out their paper work to go into China? If not, that will get a traveller in trouble in the USA or Canada, too.

[ColbertWatcher]

207. My question was really to point out China's anti-proselytizing law.

It seems everyone is forgetting that.

[hendo]

240. They probably did what I did the last time I went to China

I sent my passport to a service in DC, and they got my visa for me. No questions asked other than business or pleasure.

[pipoman]

166. I am not a "fundie"

but your post begs the question, what version is written by "fundies"? I consider Assembly of God and Four Square to be very fundamentalist and both denominations official version is New King James, which is old King James in modern English used by Methodists and Presbyterians too. Of coarse a modern English version may not be very useful in China.

[TexasObserver]

60. Imagine it's 4 Muslims who want to convert Infidels, here on passports

As you know, those who are acting outraged (and it is acting) refuse to acknowledge that the 4 proselytizers are foreigners on passports, there to recruit. The government considers them troublemakers and foreign trolls, just as our government would likely do the same.

It's not the fact that the Quran is available here. It's the fact that 4 Muslims from an Islamic country are coming here to recruit for their brand of religion, let's say for the Wahabbis.

Of course they'd be stopped. Of course they'd be deported. If they are lucky. If not, some other horrific ending.

[Raskolnik]

71. Could you please find an example of your repeated hypothetical happening in in the U.S.

If you know of an example of an analogous situation occurring in the U.S., you should point to it rather than speculating about what might happen.

[Occam Bandage]

82. So, which do you believe?

1. No Muslims have yet attempted to proselytize in America..
2. Muslims have attempted to proselytize in America, had their things confiscated and were deported, and the world news media / ACLU did not notice.

I can think of no other reason for you to be speaking in hypotheticals and not giving case examples.

[hendo]

242. in the hypothetical case of..

Abdul-Fattah Imagonna sneeka da koran een v the US Homeland Security it happened.

No, seriously though, this has never happened, and TO is just pulling random hypothetical points out of a hat.

[Bluebear]

62. "the persecuted church" - oh, let me up.

[TexasObserver]

64. What's the difference between the Church of Scientology and the Catholic Church?

About 1650 years.

[earth mom]

67. Good! I'm sick of bible thumpers pushing their religion on people.

:puke:

[Raskolnik]

68. Would you be similarly pleased if it was the U.S. confiscating religious literature?

Just curious.

[earth mom]

72. Those assh*les were pushing religion. That's different than owning a single book for personal use.

But of course you will defend this as some kind of bullshit freedom violation when in fact those asshole bible thumpers were intent on violating OTHER peoples freedom in the first place.

[Raskolnik]

74. You didn't answer the question, but I'll play along.

First, if the issue for you hinges on the single book vs multiple books intended for use in proselytizing, would you be similarly pleased if the U.S. government seized religious material from people if the government suspected the books would be used for proselytizing?

Second, what freedom does a religious person infringe upon when they proselytize? There is no "right" to live in an ideological vacuum and never have to be exposed to others' religious views. You may not like what he's selling, but a Christian has just as much right to put his ideas in the public sphere as everyone else.

[earth mom]

75. I would LOVE IT if it was illegal to proselytize. I am sick of the fundies and what their crazy

views have done to this country. Sorry, but the minute your rights infringe on my rights, your rights get kicked to the curb. And if you don't like that, too damn bad.

I will answer your biased question this way: If foreigners came to the U.S. with boxes of any religious material, I would NOT have a problem with the g'ment seizing their propaganda. Especially if those people were NOT citizens or legal residents of this country.

[Raskolnik]

77. Then you, sir or madam, have a fucked up idea of what free speech is about.

Again, you have NO right to live in an ideological cocoon. You might not like it when someone stands on a street corner and hands out Bibles, but other people's freedom's are not dependent upon your likes and dislikes.

You may not like proselytizing at all. That's your right. You have the ability to stand on a street corner and pass out leaflets explaining how ridiculous Christianity is, how foolish its adherents are, and how smart you are for knowing all this. What you don't have the right to do is prevent others from doing the same things to promote their ideas, just because those ideas offend your delicate sensibilities.

[MilesColtrane]

181. "If foreigners came to the U.S. with boxes of any religious material,...

..., I would NOT have a problem with the g'ment seizing their propaganda."

Fortunately most people still have a problem when the government violates the Constitution, despite those of you who don't.

[NeedleCast]

231. So you're not fan of the first amendment?

It's funny the dumb things people say when they disagree about a particular issue. In essence you're saying that it's okay to take away someone's right to free speech as long as you disagree with them?

[Codeine]

70. I hate religion

and even I can see what a stupid comment that was, sir.

[earth mom]

73. Sorry but those assh*les were violating other peoples freedom by pushing their religion.

Your comment is the stupid one. :wtf:

[ProdigalJunkMail]

76. violating their FREEDOM???

holy shite...what a pantload...heaven forbid someone should be able to choose for themselves whether the 'pushed' religion has merit or not.

your complete lack of logic frightens me...

sP

[gatorboy]

86. People's "freedom"?

We're still talking about China here, right? :eyes:

[onenote]

98. you need to learn to use the sarcasm smilie

unless of course you were serious, in which case...well, if you're serious then your idea of freedom is rather scary.

[City of Mills]

78. Agreed!

Look, I work at a college and every fall on opening day two men hand out small green bibles to anyone trying to enter the college. I would LOVE LOVE LOVE to see someone try to do that with the Koran just to see how fast the FBI is called. It offends me that this is even permitted on public property (in Massachusetts no less). Not to mention I find bibles shoved in every nook and cranny in the school for two weeks afterwards.

[Raskolnik]

79. Nonsense.

If it offends you that someone is allowed to put out ideas on public property that you don't care for? Tough. Other people's rights aren't defined by your personal tastes, as much as that clearly would appeal to you. Christians have the right to proselytize (in Massachusetts no less), Democrats have the right to campaign (in Texas no less), PETA has the right to protest (in front of KFC no less). You can be as bothered as you delicate temperament allows, but you don't get to tell other people what ideas they can and can't express.

If the FBI is preventing anyone from passing out Korans on public property, please let the ACLU know about it, because that kind of nonsense should not happen in this country.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

87. BULLSHIT!

Whether it's knocking on doors or pushing religious shit off on people in the street it's assault and in a just world the perps would be prosecuted!

---------------------------------------
Religions play bare-knuckle rough all the time, while demanding kid-glove treatment in return.
--Salman Rushdie

[Raskolnik]

89. Oh please. If you think it's "assault" to be exposed to ideas with which you disagree

You must be either perpetually outraged, very poorly educated, or some combination of both.

[Sanctified]

95. LOL...

"You must be either perpetually outraged, very poorly educated, or some combination of both. "

I will have to remember that one, that is classic.

[Dreamer Tatum]

204. Assault? In what, a junior high school court? nt

[QC]

119. The Muslim Student Association at my college hands out Korans.

I have one in my office. None of these students have been sent to GITMO.

The world is a big enough mess without fantasizing new evils to fret over.

[City of Mills]

197. ...

WTF are you talking about? Who's fantasizing? Who said anything about evil? Try not jumping to conclusions. These men are handing out bibles ON the college property, not on the sidewalk in front of it. Big difference. The ACLU has taken cases like this before, for example: http://media.www.dailytargum.com/media/storage/paper168/news/2005/10/12/University/Volunteers.Distribute.Free.Bibles-1017405.shtml

If you haven't picked up a bible by the time you're going to college, you probably don't need one. I watch this every year, these men make many students feel uncomfortable. We work to open minds here, not close them.

[QC]

230. My students distribute their Korans on campus.

The Muslim Student Association holds an open house every semester where they serve Middle Eastern and Pakistani food, show off arts and crafts, and tell people about Islam. That includes handing out Korans, brochures about the role of Jesus and Mary in Islam, etc.

I have no problem with this. Of course, I think of these people as my students, not wicked soul-stealers out to destroy me, so that's probably what makes the difference.

[hendo]

244. Thank you

someone with a concrete example of how stupid all these hypothetical claims are.

[QC]

253. Yeah, it's like life is not ugly enough, so the drama queens and indignation junkies

have to fantasize things to get bent out of shape over.

[hendo]

263. no doubt

i wish they would focus on issues that actually matter, rather than manufacturing their own out of thin air.

[Sanctified]

92. Yeah I bet they were going to force the people

to take the Bibles, then force them to read them and then force them to convert to Christianity. Good thing the Chinese have a government who cares enough to protect their citizens from forced conversions and gives them the freedom to choose for themselves.

[malaise]

80. Good

keep your propaganda at home

[Raskolnik]

81. Would you approve of the U.S. confiscating religious material at the border?

Should we as a matter of policy confiscate any religious materials at the border we suspect might be used to proselytize and justify it with the sentiment that "propaganda should be left at home?"

[asteroid2003QQ47]

88. Of course he fucking would,

he as much as said so already! I would too!
What the fuck ails you?
----------------------------------
"If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance 'God.'
-Jerry Coyne, geneticist, University of Chicago

[Raskolnik]

90. What ails me is people like you that cheer for authoritarian bullshit

as long as its directed at people you don't like.

[tammywammy]

91. Agreed!

[Dr. Strange]

93. Lots of people are for free speech...

as long as it's speech they agree with.

[QC]

120. Very true. Not all totalitarians are on the right. n/t

[MilesColtrane]

183. First Amendment

Try reading it.

[malaise]

110. I'm not a good person to deal with religion

I'd ban all religious propaganda. After what was done for nearly 600 years in this hemisphere in the name of religion, I sure don't blame the Chinese. Too many so called religious institutions are all politics looking for a way to divide, rule, loot, rape and plunder. Ask the indigenous people of this hemisphere. The Chinese have been doing fine without bibles for millennia. Everyone is not interested in Western propaganda.

[Raskolnik]

115. At least you're honest about the fact that you don't want people to have access to certain ideas

Not every authoritarian comes right out and says it, but I guess you should be commended for having the guts to make your position clear.

Are there any other ideas or speech that you would like to see the government ban as a matter of course, or is banning all religious material a good enough start?

[hendo]

243. you mean

as opposed to what has been done in the name of capitalism, oil, power, blood feuds?

So pretty much, anything that has been done for any reason?

Let's ban oil while we are at it? That will teach them.. Oh wait, that would kill the economy.

[BlooInBloo]

96. I'm shocked. Poor persecuted Christians can't go anywhere they like in the world...

proselytizing?

[Raskolnik]

97. So do you approve of the Chinese government's actions?

And would you approve if the U.S. government acted similarly?

[BlooInBloo]

100. "I am christian. Hear me whine."

[Raskolnik]

101. You didn't answer the question. Didn't even try.

Do you approve of the Chinese government's actions in the OP, and would you approve if the U.S. government acted similarly?

[BlooInBloo]

102. Hush, persecuted christian.

[Raskolnik]

103. You're being too cute by half.

As much as you would like this discussion to be about Christianity and its proponents, the real issue remains whether it's acceptable for an authoritarian government to confiscate literature (religious or not) that conflicts with its ideology.

And you still haven't answered my direct question, which leads me to believe you are uneasy with the answer. Either you approve of the Chinese government's actions or you don't. Either you would approve of the U.S. acting similarly or you wouldn't. Which is it?

[BlooInBloo]

105. Do I think alligators should bite? No - I really, really wish they didn't....

But as to the question of who do I blame if you stick your arm in its mouth and the gator bites it off, I blame the dumbshit who put his arm in the gator's mouth.

[Raskolnik]

106. What an intellecutally lazy answer. n/t

[QC]

128. Don't take it personally. That's all he ever gives anybody. n/t

[Occam Bandage]

104. I'm not remotely Christian. I think the idiot backwards Evangelical douchebags in question

are completely and totally in the right here, even if only accidentally. People ought have the right to think what they like, say what they like, and possess and distribute what books they like. China persecutes religions that are not part of the accepted five (Islam, Daoism, Buddhism, state-sponsored Catholicism (which has no links to the global RCC), and state-sponsored Protestantism); they therefore persecute thought, and are in that particular regard enemies of freethinkers.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

131. You've done it now, BlooInBloo.

Shaking Raskolnik's Delusions, shame.
Raskolnik won't eat for DAYS now. I hope you're happy. All that Sheep Chow gone to waste.

-----------------------------------------
"In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us, "Make us your slaves, but feed us." They will understand themselves, at last, that freedom and bread enough for all are inconceivable together, for never, never will they be able to share between them! They will be convinced, too, that they can never be free, for they are weak, vicious, worthless, and rebellious."
--The Grand Inquisitor, "The Brothers Karamazov"

[Raskolnik]

134. If you had actually read any Dostoevsky (as opposed to cutting & pasting quotes from the web)

you might know that using his words to support authoritarian policies that restrict people's access to ideas is rather silly.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

157. Silly!? You take this serious!?

The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate
-Noam Chomsky

Good bye, little one.

[Occam Bandage]

196. "Silly" is a nice way of saying "You just exposed yourself as a complete dumbass," QQ.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

206. Einstein and I across the chasm from your kind, I can live with that!

From your kind the "Silly Dumbass" label is a badge of honor.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weakness, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish."
--Albert Einstein, January 3 1954

[Occam Bandage]

211. If you consider it "honorable" to copy-paste quotes that do not mean what you think they do,

then in that regard you are a prince among men.

(On edit: I was unaware that Einstein also liked to quote books he had not read.)

[asteroid2003QQ47]

223. Your thinking, or rather what passes for thinking...

in your closed little mind, that the quotes I post do not mean what I think they mean, combined with your obvious inability to consider that they may mean exactly what I intend them to mean would be laughable if the ramifications for humanity weren't so tragic.
------------------------------------------------------
What is grand is necessarily obscure to weak men. That which can be made explicit to the idiot is not worth my care.
--William Blake

[BlooInBloo]

135. Maybe one of his christian soldier compadres will help him out.

[Raskolnik]

136. Where have I given you any indication that I was Christian?

Perhaps you are psychic, but I don't believe any of my arguments have mentioned (much less relied upon) whether or not I think a particular flavor of evangelical Christianity has any merit.

[BlooInBloo]

138. Maybe I am psychic.

[Raskolnik]

140. Or perhaps your argument depends on accepting authoritarian control over ideas

and rather than defend such a position, you'd rather make discussion about the relative merits of evangelical Christianity and score cheap points with the peanut gallery.

[BlooInBloo]

141. It's hard to discuss that which does not exist, so I'll settle for the cheap points. Thanks!

[Raskolnik]

142. I guess the fact that you are conceding that you have no actual argument to make

pretty much means we're done here.

[BlooInBloo]

143. Whatever makes you feel good, tiger.

[Raskolnik]

144. Do you always duck an argument by being like this?

Personally, I'd be embarrassed to be arguing in favor of authoritarian control over speech and ideas, and who know, maybe you've realized that's the case and are just choosing to act like a 14 year old that just lost his first grown-up argument because you're mildly embarrassed. For your sake, I hope that's the case.

Good night, BiB, I hope you never actually get what you pretended you wanted on this thread.

[BlooInBloo]

146. Tootles!

[anonymous171]

99. lol at the whole situation.

[Dorian Gray]

107. They admitted

they planned to pass them out.

So, the problem is that they were prosthelytizing. Annoying? Yes. Should be made illegal? Not in my opinion.

[asteroid2003QQ47]

126. Pass them out how? When the idiot backwards Evangelical douchebags

mentioned upthread enter my property uninvited, knock on my door attempting
to spread their message of hate they are assaulting me.
Their "pass out" methods would be every bit as offensive in China.
Am I for a total ban, no! People need to be able to access what religion has to
offer to become aware of it's absurdity.

------------------------------------------

Human beings are so made that the ones who do the crushing feel nothing; it is the person crushed who feels what is happening. Unless one has placed oneself on the side of the oppressed, to feel with them, one cannot understand.
--Simone Weil

[Raskolnik]

127. Do you think it's admirable to be a hyper-sensitive drama queen/king that thinks

being exposed to ideas with which he/she disagrees is "assault?"

[Dorian Gray]

173. Maybe they were going to pass them out

to a church that they organized. Who cares?

I can't support government actions that restrict the free flow of ideas. When China does it, I complain on the internet. When the USA does it, I take action.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

261. Of course they're not assaulting you.

Assault doesn't just mean "making me unhappy".

[TexasObserver]

111. When you enter another country, you have to be willing to accept their rules.

Whether the country is Saudi Arabia, China, or the USA, when you enter a country, you accept that your presence in that country depends upon obeying that country's rules for foreigners who are visiting.

To understand China today, one must understand the journey China has made the past 200 years, and the place it resides today because of that journey and its massive population. If they see these four people as troublemakers who ply superstitution, they are free to do so, and who's to say they aren't right?

We have our vision of life, and we applaud freedom of religion. A case can be made that freedom FROM religion is an admirable goal for a state. It's up to each culture to pick its rules, and they will seldom agree with ours. Even the UK and Canada have far more restrictions on free speech than the US does. During trials, for example, both UK and Canada can shut down all media coverage of the case. That's more like China than the USA.

I wouldn't want 4 Bible thumpers stopped in Texas, but China? That's entirely up to China.

[ProdigalJunkMail]

117. excellent and reasoned response...

for once :-)

sP

[Raskolnik]

118. Oh, so you don't have any problem with China cracking down on pro-democracy acitivists either?

After all, who are we to criticize China for severely restricting the speech of those advocating for political change? It's up to each culture to pick its own rules, and if China's government just happens to repress nearly all opposition, we should respect the fact that the China is on its own journey.

[Dreamer Tatum]

205. You are missing that the maintained hypothesis of MANY on this thread

is that religion is bad, and Christianity is particularly bad. Therefore, irrespective of context, China
has acted appropriately.

Democracy is more dearly held as a concept, however, so it might a little more fair play here.

[Zhade]

121. I don't approve of this - people have a right to read mythology if they so choose.

They even have the right to buy into the nonsense, the lack of evidence supporting it notwithstanding.

[npk]

129. I'm curious. If the situation were reversed

And lets say 4 Muslims tried to bring 300 copies of the Koran into the U.S. to distribute on the streets of New York city, and they had their copies of the Koran confiscated by U.S. customs agents, how many DU'ers would be on here screaming about what an injustice at the hands of the United States. Yet their is understanding on behalf of the Chinese.

[QC]

133. What if the Chinese had seized 300 copies of "The Audacity of Hope"?

Can you imagine the poutrage and melodrama that would ensue?

[npk]

137. Yes I can

The thread would be locked by now.

[QC]

139. Yes, there would be calls to declare war on China. n/t

[Dorian Gray]

174. They most likely would

confiscate the 300 copies of The Audacity of Hope, which is why THIS news story is so troubling.

They don't allow the free flow of information.

[QC]

193. I agree--it's the totalitarianism that's the problem.

Quite a few here, though, have no problem with the government trying to control information, as long as people they don't like are the target.

As I said above, not all totalitarians are on the right.

[Dorian Gray]

255. I don't even know

where you would place China's government on the spectrum of Right to Left. It doesn't fit neatly into any packaged notion we have in the US about conservative to liberal. Their "communism" is barely that.

[Throd]

130. This atheist thinks China's policy is pure bullshit.

I'm an atheist, not a vampire. Crosses and bibles don't faze me.

It is very disconcerting to see so many here support suppression of freedom of speech.

[Sal Minella]

148. I don't see anyone here supporting suppression of free speech.

I see people stoutly defending their right (and the rights of others) to avoid being told "Whatever religion you have, it's wrong, and our religion is right, here take this book which will cure your idiotic belief system! Now!"

Proselytizing is just bloody annoying, is what it is.

I am defending my right to not be hounded by people telling me my religion is not satisfactory to them. They can speechificate freely wherever and whenever they like, just not in my face.

As somebody (I forget who) said, your right to swing your fist stops where my nose starts.

My son says, "Don't ever try to teach a pig to sing. Your efforts will not succeed, and you'll just annoy the pig."

[Occam Bandage]

151. You do not have a right to avoid being told anything.

You have a right to not listen to them. You have a right to think they're wrong. You have a right to leave the conversation. You have a right to not be stalked. You have a right to disagree with them publicly. You do not have the right to silence people who you disagree with. You have the right to have your beliefs respected. That right does not extend to forbidding others from saying things you do not agree with. "Annoying" speech is just as deserving of protection as pleasant speech.

Nobody is defending people "hounding" you or getting "in your face." That is not the issue at question; the OP is not about people arrested for being disorderly or acting inappropriately. This topic is about whether a government ought have the right to prevent people from distributing literature that the party/administration/regime in power does not agree with. It's a pretty simple question, and talking about people "hounding" and "assaulting" is nothing but a juvenile method of changing the subject.

People here applauding the Chinese government are applauding the idea that governments have the right to confiscate speech for ideological reasons. No matter how irritated you get at that type of speech, if you support the Chinese government in this case, you are indeed supporting the suppression of free speech.

[Sal Minella]

187. Would you please be so kind as to provide a link to one post in this thread which actually

supports suppression of free speech? I find none, and most particularly, none supporting the Chinese government's action as described in the OP, which you seem to keep pulling out of thin air.

[Occam Bandage]

190. Sure. In the post I just replied to.

I see people stoutly defending their right (and the rights of others) to avoid being told "Whatever religion you have, it's wrong, and our religion is right, here take this book which will cure your idiotic belief system! Now!"

That is not a right. Saying "I have the right to not be told things" is a cute way of saying "I have the right to silence certain forms of speech."

[Sal Minella]

201. I am so grateful to have a sensorium that works so very, very differently from yours.

i.e. I don't see things that don't exist, and I feel no compulsion to distort and pervert plain straightforward statements.

[Occam Bandage]

212. That is to say, one that can honestly believe "freedom of speech" includes

"the right to not be told" things.

[Posteritatis]

163. That's not a right

Freedom of speech includes bloody annoying things, which are not the same as physical assault, despite your conflating the two. You don't have a right to be protected from ideas you might disagree with.

Well, unless you're posting from China.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

175. Defending these Chinese actions supporting suppression of free speech.

A more blatant, clear-cut case of suppression of free speech it would be hard to imagine.

There is no right to avoid being told "Whatever religion you have, it's wrong, and our religion is right, here take this book which will cure your idiotic belief system! Now!"; the right to tell people that is one of the most important rights around.

Freedom of speech does *not* just mean "freedom to say things Idealist Hippie agrees with or isn't offended by".

If these proselytisers were forcing people to pay attention to them, then you'd have a case. But preaching on street corners is nowhere *near* that.

You should be ashamed of yourself, and you should admit that you don't give a damn about free speech for others, just for yourself.

[Sal Minella]

184. Preaching on street corners is fine. Preaching three inches from my face is not fine.

But I'm sure you'll find a way to misinterpret even those simple statements.
Frenetic convoluted misinterpretation seems to be your forte.

[Occam Bandage]

188. Good. Since this discussion has nothing to do with people three inches from your face,

I'm glad to see that you support the right of people to proselytize without government interference.

[Zhade]

154. They faze me in that they're icons of superstitious nonsense.

But otherwise, I agree.

[Occam Bandage]

155. I think plenty of things are nonsense.

I think that Hannity's books are nonsense. I think that Coulter's column is nonsense. I wouldn't suggest that a government should confiscate them.

[elshiva]

158. I'm an atheist and think the Bible is false, but

freedom of speech....

People should be allowed to decide for themselves what is bullshit and what is not.

Yeah, the Bible is harmful, but so is Mein Kampf, which I hate even more, but it's in the public library, because people have to know about culture and the Bible is part of culture.

[WildEyedLiberal]

162. You people are not fucking liberal, what a joke

LIBERALS do not support restrictions on the freedom of speech or the confiscation/banning of intellectual/ideological material with which they disagree. You're just a bunch of fanatic far-leftists who'd ban and persecute everyone you view as your "enemy" if you had the chance. You'd do to the right-wingers and "christians" exactly what they're trying to do to you and fancy that somehow that makes you different or morally superior. Well, you're not. You're the same ugly authoritarian bully who wears different colors. Authoritarian fascists and authoritarian communists are like rival street gangs - the only thing that separates them is their hatred for each other.

[TexasObserver]

179. The right of a people to self rule is a liberal concept.

Try to wrap your head around that.

Your devotion to YOUR beliefs is no more compelling than the devotion a Chinese communist official has to stopping the words and thoughts his country considers dangerous. Your version of "freedom" is a world where every culture agrees with your opinion about what is and what is not acceptable.

The arrogance is yours. So get down off that high horse and take a good look at yourself. See if you can figure out what is flawed with you telling 1.3 billion people you're right and they're all wrong.

[Dr. Strange]

182. I think the liberal idea of freedom...

does indeed hold that "Your devotion to YOUR beliefs is no more compelling" than another's beliefs. I have difficulty believing that a liberal would support "stopping the words and thoughts his country considers dangerous." Or are we onboard with the whole Gitmo thing now?

By the way, there are 2.1 billion Christians worldwide. Does that mean it's arrogant to say they're wrong?

[TexasObserver]

185. I'm not concerned with what Christians think about China.

I'm not concerned with what Muslims or Jews or Hindus think about China, either. China belongs to the Chinese, and if they want to consider religion the dangerous nonsense it is, so be it.

You ask if Christians are wrong. Yes, they are wrong. Frequently and almost all the time, but especially in this instance. The arrogance of the religious knows no bounds. Why do the religious always feel their silly myths and beliefs in them should overrule any other consideration? There is zero evidence to support the beliefs of the religious. That's why they have to take things on faith, because they're HOPING they're right but there's not a single bit of evidence they are.

[Dr. Strange]

191. But doesn't a liberal still think they should be allowed to believe as they wish?

Even going so far as to (gasp!) let them read and talk about their faith?

And your second paragraph has a lot of wisdom in it. But it doesn't just apply to religion--it applies to just about any human endeavor. For example,

You ask if governments are wrong. Yes, they are wrong. Frequently and almost all the time, but especially in this instance. The arrogance of the government knows no bounds. Why does the government always feel their silly myths and beliefs in them should overrule any other consideration? There is zero evidence to support the beliefs of the politicians. That's why they have to take things on faith, because they're HOPING they're right but there's not a single bit of evidence they are.

I agree that China belongs to the Chinese. But I believe that freedom belongs to everyone. Even this guy:

[TexasObserver]

202. China is becoming more open, and the USA is becoming more closed.

Freedoms are moving in opposite directions for these two countries. China will eventually outlive its old guard and freedoms will increase as that happens. Meanwhile, we are marching toward fascism here, and younger people are more accepting of it than are their seniors. Like two tectonic plates rubbing, China and the USA are headed in opposite directions.

We laud freedom of religion as a general principle, but it's only been a couple of years since the state of Texas refused to consider Unitarian Universalists a religion, with the rights attendant to same. Those in UU are some of the most moral people in the country, but a Baptist ruled they were not a religion, just a political group.

Speaking of Baptists and all religions, the difference between a cult and a religion is time, not essence.

As a general proposition, I think freedoms of speech, press, and associations, are preferable. But if I were running China, I might have rules about what kind of proselytizing materials and what quantities of same a visitor could bring in. I might want my citizens to have freedom of religion, but I might also want them to have freedom from foreign agents who might be bent on undermining our way of life. Freedom is easy to define. It's what you want to do, and the other guy wants to stop YOU from doing it. But what you want to stop the other guy from doing, that's just reasonable restrictions on human behavior.

It's all in one's point of view.

[Dorian Gray]

257. And through court cases

UU was deemed a religion. While awaiting that distinction, their texts were not confiscated and their religious leaders were not jailed.

[Dorian Gray]

256. How have you

extrapolated all that from the news story? For all you know, they were in touch with people who asked them to get them copies of the Bible and they were bringing them to them. You don't know what their arrogance level is. You don't know what they were hoping to overrule anybody else.

I understand why people have antipathy towards fundamentalists. They rub me the wrong way, as well. But, you are advocating for the Chinese to obstruct the free flow of information. If this didn't involve religion, but rather Pro-Democratic writings, or the writings of the Dalai Lama, would you feel the same way about the confiscation of the literature? Or is it only because you dislike Christianity that it is okay in this instance?

I am not trying to argue here, but I really don't understand how you can say that this is okay. No matter which country one is in: The US, China, Saudi Arabia, France or Togo. It's horrible when the government interferes in the free flow of information, and it should be rallied against!

[Occam Bandage]

189. Claiming the Chinese government represents self-rule for the Chinese people is laughable.

Liberals are students of Locke, not Hobbes.

[hendo]

247. Did someone really credit Hobbes with that?

damn. Have they ever actually read Hobbes? Thats like crediting Tocqueville with fascism, or Morgenthau with neo-liberal theory.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

195. Hang on - you're evoking the right to self rule in *defence* of the Chinese government?

Surely the right to self rule is another reason to condemn the dictatorship in China?

[Occam Bandage]

198. It's a strange mind that would believe

that the concept of "self-rule" justifies a dictatorial government declaring by fiat that its people are barred from access to information that challenges its ideology. Again, liberals are students of Locke, not Hobbes.

[Snarkturian Clone]

214. Well said. NT

[provis99]

224. I take it you'd be in favor of pedophiles selling child porn in schools, then

After all, we can't interfere with their freedom of speech, can we?

[NeedleCast]

234. Excellent Post

[Donald Ian Rankin]

172. Everyone trying to defend this should be ashamed of themselves.

A clearer, more obvious, more blatant and indefensible violation of freedom of speech would be hard to imagine.

All those trying to defend it have demonstrated clearly that they only support freedom of speech for people they agree with, not for others - which is to say, they don't actually give a damn about freedom of speech.

[TexasObserver]

180. I always laugh at people who try to shame others in discussions.

Different country, different rules and norms. It's a simple concept, and one you should learn.

China is not yours to rule. You're just another westerner who thinks he knows what is best for China. If you don't want to follow their rules, don't go there. They have no obligation to allow harmful superstitions like religion to operate there. Look at all the damage religions do everywhere in the world they are a factor.

There is no such thing as a right to freedom of speech, not even in the USA. There are restrictions on speech in every country in the world. The only question is which words and which situations are being controlled. We do not have unfettered free speech in this country, and if you think so, go to the airport, stand in line, and start talking about how TSA and the Bush administration are repugnant to the constitution.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

199. Yes, I'm just another westerner who thinks that freedom of speech is best for China.

You'd be amazed at how many of us there are...

No country has - or should have - total, unfettered freedom of speech, but most have far, far more than China - in the US, for example, it's perfectly possible to enter the country while criticising the government, and the odds of anyone stopping you for it, while non-zero, are pretty damn low.

"Different norms" is a non-argument; I could just as well use it to justify shooting you in the head, and claim that it was not immoral by a "different norm".

Dictatorship is bad. Individual liberty and freedom of religion are good. And that's true whatever country you're in.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

177. As many of you know, I'm a Christian, but...

these guys aren't heroes, they're clowns who are trying to gain some notoriety on the evangelical media circuit.

They can get arrested or deported or whatever, and the next thing you know, they have a book deal from an evangelical publishing house and then guest appearances on the 700 Club and every other evangelical radio and TV station.

An EFFECTIVE smuggler does nothing to attract the attention of the authorities. Three hundred Bibles is a lot of suitcases, especially for a demographic (young men) that usually travels light. No wonder the Chinese authorities checked them out.

I bet that if four four young men of ANY nationality came to a U.S. Customs inspection point with lots of heavy suitcases each, they would be stopped.

If they were found to have 300 copies of ANY book, Customs would levy import duties on them on the suspicion that they were going to sell them in the U.S. Nobody, not even a bookworm like me, brings 300 copies of one book on a vacation.

These guys are either the world's dumbest Bible smugglers or inept publicity hounds.

[Occam Bandage]

192. Not all villains require there to be heroes in the same story.

[Sal Minella]

194. Successful publicity hounds, imo.

"The persecuted church" being persecuted yet again, in living color. Behold. Send money.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

200. Nothing wrong with trying to attract more publicity to Chinese oppression.

Attracting attention to just how repressive the Chinese government is will do far more good than distributing any number of bibles. I think it very probable that publicity is what these people were after, and I applaud them for it.

As the number of people still willing to defend it on this thread shows, just how god-awful and repressive the Chinese government is still needs to be publicised a lot more.

C.F. Ghandi, Luther King, etc.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

217. I have no illusions about the Chinese government and I doubt that many do

Has anyone not heard that the Chinese government is repressive?

I've actually been there and talked to victims of that government.

Those young men are still ineffective except at gaining publicity for themselves.

[carlyhippy]

213. so there are 300 Chinese christians in China?

Couldn't they have mailed the bibles to the 300 christians in China...it seems to me like they were looking for media attention.

Religion and Hummers.....the sparks that start the flames at DU....

Carly

[Lydia Leftcoast]

218. Actually, there are quite a few more than 300

Back in 1990, a few people from my tour group attended the only officially permitted Protestant church in Beijing. There was a main seating area that was about the size of the interior of the average American downtown church, with annex seating that was just as big.

It was packed. We got there 15 minutes early and still ended up in the annex.

Later, in another city, one member of our group somehow got into contact with a member of an unofficial house church and accepted an invitation to attend a service. She said that there were about 50 people in attendance.

[TexasObserver]

216. Aren't these Bible advocates supposed to believe Chinese customs were doing God's will?

How could they do otherwise?

When God closes a door, he opens a window.





(no, I don't believe it, but am pointing out the illogic of those who constantly think they're divining God's will)

[asteroid2003QQ47]

226. That's a Goddamned good point, T.O.! n/t

[AZ Criminal JD]

227. I know of no Christian faith that has that belief

Christians don't believe God micromanages human behavior.

[hendo]

245. but maybe TO's God does.

I personally don't think that God takes much part in the daily life of any one individual.

[spoony]

228. This thread is a real keeper

Even I'm impressed by the spine-bending and jack-booting of a lot of you. I guess when the people being stomped on are the ones you don't like, you'll literally side with any regime anywhere at any time. There are too bloody many of you to even respond to individually, well that and I doubt I could quash the nausea long enough to do so. But yeah, with all the ugly faces in full bloom, this one's a permanent bookmark.

[girl gone mad]

232. It's a pretty despicable display. n/t

[NeedleCast]

233. Absolutely!

The number of people revealing their authoritarian bent and complete disregard for the first amendment really is amazing. Then again, as has been pointed out upthread, authoritarianism is not just for the right. Plenty on the left are happy to strip people's rights as long as it's a right they don't personally agree with. You're right though, this is a GREAT bookmark because I'm sure we'll see several of the folk here praising the Chinese for this (or outright saying that religion should be banned) throwing a fit when someone who they agree with has their right to free speech denied.

[Evoman]

241. I think china will open up eventually....they still have idiotic censorship, but hopefully it will

ease as they mature from a communist state capitalism (I know, weird...but thats the term that best describes them) to a democracy. I think it will happen.

Not that I hope that china becomes christian....but I think the marketplace of ideas should be open enough to let christianity compete.

If I had my choice, the chinese people would be exposed to the religion, as well as other religious ideas. And if I had my way, they would reject it utterly, like the terrible bullshit it is. I don't want society to ban religion...I want individuals to ban it their minds.

[hendo]

246. China is slowly opening up

they are far better than they used to be. Heck, they even started allowing democratic elections at the local level a few years back. It will happen eventually, Chinese communism is in its death throes, much the same as Russian Imperialism.

The world has moved on, but a few countries are reluctant to move along with it.

[Evoman]

248. Nothing is permanent in this world.

Not Rome, not Spain, not Russian, not the U.S, and definitly not China.

States change.

Give it another 2000 years, and the new chinese-australian race of Chinaustral will be writing in their Holographic discussion forums about the mutants from the Canmexican super-state and how their leaders are preventing access to the "Great Book of Mr. Bean".

[NNN0LHI]

250. They have already been down this religion road before see post # 39

It was a lesson well learned.

Don

[Wizard777]

249. They were full of the most powerful drug known to man. Religion.

A lot of people get high and mighty on that.

[Indenturedebtor]

252. Why on earth would anyone object to the destruction and supplantation of their culture?

I mean, it's not as though this has been tried in dozens of other countries with disastrous results or something :sarcasm:

[TexasObserver]

258. It's not as if the West used gunboats in the 1800s to force them to accept our Opium trade!!

The Opium Wars of the 1800s really introduced China to the ways of the West. They wanted to stop the imports of opium, because they wanted to protect their population from opium addiction. The West, led by Britain, would not hear of it.

For 100 years thereafter, China was the target of gunboat diplomacy from the West.

Given the role that religion played in the oppression and genocide of native peoples in the Americas, how can anyone ever conclude that stopping Holy Warriors from other cultures is a bad idea?

[Indenturedebtor]

259. Not just the Americas either... not by a long shot. See Africa, Pacific Islands, Austrailia, etc

Break their culture and you break their society. Was textbook imperialism.

[TexasObserver]

260. Yes, because what is more noble than saving the souls of heathens?!

[Indenturedebtor]

262. Exactly. Have you read "Things Fall Apart"? n/t