Dennett: West should be outraged over pending execution of Afghani student for *blasphemy*

[BurtWorm]

Daniel Dennet, writing on the blog Secular Philosophy, argues passionately against the barbaric notion that blasphemy is still a capital crime in the 21st Century.

http://blog.secularphilosophy.com/index.php?entry=entry080127-190527

Blasphemy

The West screwed up badly when the denunciation of the fatwa on Salman Rushdie was not closer to unanimous. (I will never forget or forgive the shameful silence of some writers who shunned the invitation to join in a firm but not hostile rebuke.) The West screwed up badly again when the Danish cartoons were not reprinted world-wide. What many didn’t understand was that the staged riots were a political strike against moderate Muslims, not non-Muslims. The “tolerance” urged by many voices outside the Muslim world played into the hands of the radical Islamists. Now we get a third chance to come to the aide of moderate Muslims all over the world, but so far, I haven’t heard much outcry. Several days ago I sent the following letter to the Boston Globe, which has not yet indicated that it will publish it:

The conviction and pending execution of an Afghani student, Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh, for blasphemy is an appalling circumstance, but it offers an opportunity that we should all seize. The time has come for Muslims to step up to the plate and demonstrate that Islam is a great faith that has no need for violence or intimidation to maintain the loyalty of its congregation. And we outside Islam must make it crystal clear that we cannot respect or honor a religion that would consider blasphemy a capital crime, no matter how ancient the tradition from which this decision flowed. Muslims who support–or refrain from condemning–the conviction and sentence of Kambakhsh must be made to realize that they share responsibility for bringing dishonor to their cherished heritage, and if we non-Muslims do not speak out, we too must share in the blame. Friends don’t let friends commit, or condone, evil. The best way of showing our good will towards Islam is by helping it shed an indefensible aspect of its legacy. Every religion has much to atone for, but that is no reason to button our lips and tolerate fresh grounds for atonement.

There is no need, yet, for anger. Let us all just remind Muslims everywhere of what they must surely know: blasphemy is not a capital crime in any society worthy of respect. It is now up to Muslims to prevent some of their number from defiling their own precious culture.

[Hydra]

1. As if we cared what happens in places we invade, as long as we're getting what we want n/t

[Marrah_G]

2. It is disgusting and barbaric- When will it end? When will they decide human life matters?

[NMMNG]

27. Human life matters

When it toes the line they dictate. :eyes:

[Nederland]

3. What gives you the right

...to inflict your moral standards on other people?

[BurtWorm]

4. Are you talking to me or the government of Afghanistan?

:eyes:

[Nederland]

6. I'm refering to "The West" nt

[BurtWorm]

11. Is Justice regional? (Here are the details of the case)

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/24/world/middleeast/24afghan.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Death Sentence for Afghan Student


By ABDUL WAHEED WAFA and CARLOTTA GALL
Published: January 24, 2008

...

The student, Sayed Parwiz Kambakhsh, 23, who also works for a local newspaper, was charged with insulting Muhammad by calling the prophet “a killer and adulterer,” the judge, Shamsurahman Muhmand, said in a telephone interview.

The sentence was denounced as unfair by Mr. Kambakhsh’s family and journalists’ organizations. Mr. Kambakhsh’s brother, Sayed Yaqub Ibrahimi, denied that his sibling had committed blasphemy, and said that his brother was not given enough time to prepare his defense and was denied a lawyer.

...

He is being punished for articles written by his brother, said Jean Mackenzie, director of the Institute for Peace and War Reporting in Afghanistan, which has printed some of Mr. Ibrahimi’s articles. Officials from the National Directorate of Security raided Mr. Ibrahimi’s home and seized his computer hard drive the day after his brother was arrested in October, she said. They were most interested in the sources for an article critical of a local militia leader and legislator named Piram Qol, she said.

The case is the third time that clerics have called for death for a blasphemer in the six years since the removal of the Taliban leadership and reflects the deep conservatism that prevails even under the more liberal government of President Hamid Karzai.

Mr. Kambakhsh is a student in the town of Mazar-i-Sharif and also works as a reporter for a daily paper, Jahan-e-Naw. He was accused of downloading a controversial article and adding some of his own words about the ignorance of the Prophet Muhammad on women’s rights.

[Nederland]

12. Of course Justice is regional

Different cultures have different conceptions of what is right and what is wrong.

Is this really that hard a subject to grasp? You sound like Bush with all this absolutist talk...

[BurtWorm]

15. Frankly, you sound absolutist as well.

One might even be uncharitable enough to say you sound like Bush with your seeming to care more for the powers that be than the people whose lives they hold in their hands.

[Nederland]

20. Nonsense

I'm the one saying we need to leave these people alone to settle their own affairs, Bush is the one sending in hundreds of thousands of troops to "bring them democracy". How exactly am I like Bush?

[BurtWorm]

24. You don't give a shit about the young man they're about to behead.

"It's not my problem." That seems to be your attitude.

Is that man's life worth less to you than someone from a culture where blasphemy is not a capital crime--or a crime at all?

[Nederland]

29. Not true

I just see the big picture that you seem to be utterly incapable of seeing. You are fixated on one person and one moment in time. I'm looking at the effects this type of behavior has on millions of people over decades. In the big picture and over the long term, you do more harm than good by intervening in things like this.

[BurtWorm]

34. What do you think intervening in this means?

Forcing them at the point of a gun to give the young man due process and allow freedom of thought? You think there are no other ways to protest this injustice? You don't think diplomatic pressure can be brought to bear?

[Nederland]

36. Intervening means

Calling them barbaric as you did in the OP.

[BurtWorm]

42. That's an intervention?

You have high tolerance for state murder and low tolerance for name calling?

[Nederland]

60. No

I have a low tolerance for stupidity. Calling people barbaric and hoping that will help them to see things your way is stupid.

[BurtWorm]

61. The practice of killing people for their thoughts is barbaric, among other things.

It's inhumane, it's unjust, it's wrong, it's evil. And people should not sit back and just let it happen when they know about it. They should not allow tyrants to get away with thinking no one notices when they abuse their power.

Are Afghans a different species to you? Is that why you think you have no right to try to stop them from murdering this man? You think they follow a different species of justice from "ours?"

[Nederland]

62. Answer

You think they follow a different species of justice from "ours?"

As I stated in post #37, yes.

[BurtWorm]

63. What do you make of Afghans asking people in the west and elsewhere

to help them get this sentence overturned? Should we ignore them and defer to the Afghan powers that be? That seems to be your position: Ignore those who appeal to our common species of justice because the ones with a different species are in power.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2829401&mesg_id=2829781

[Nederland]

64. Response

I think the Afghans should handle this on their own. As I have said repeatedly, having us "help" them will only lead to more problems. I believe the historical record is replete with examples of this. You choose to ignore history.

[BurtWorm]

66. So your position really *is* ignore them.

Amazing.

[karlrschneider]

45. If I were to call you a dumb fuck, would that be intervening?

Just wondering

[Nederland]

55. No

Just rude.

[wuushew]

47. I really don't think the West has that much leverage in Afghanistan

mind you as it stands currently the so called War on Terror and human rights concerns are often cross purposes.

Cultures are a result of their environments and lifting one of the poorest countries on Earth out of tribalism is a large task. Best to console yourself with the knowledge that every mile of paved road built reduces spousal beatings and other acts of violence by some indeterminate amount.

[Squatch]

39. Yes...they should feel free to implement this solution, this final solution, if you will

to blasphemy in their own country and the rest of the world should fuck off. :thumbsup:

Yes, I know...Godwin's law and all that.

[Marrah_G]

5. What gives them the right to murder people? They rule through fear and pain.

What gives them the right to enslave and torture women?

If you do not understand the barbarity of these leaders take a good look at the treatment of women there, especially the last few decades.

[Nederland]

7. True

That's their culture. If they want to change their culture's moral sensibilities, they will. People in the West should leave them alone.

[BurtWorm]

8. Should we leave alone cultures that perform clitorodectomies too?

How many more blasphemers and young girls are you willing to sacrifice on the altar of moral sensibilities?

[Nederland]

13. I'm not sacrificing anyone (nt)

[BurtWorm]

16. Sure you are, You're happy to turn your back on an injustice

for the phony principle of relative justice. You're the New Yorker who shuts the shutter on Kitty Genovese's murder because it's not your problem.

[Nederland]

22. Not happy

I've just understand historically how much harm has come when white western enlightened people try to help the poor savages of the world...

[BurtWorm]

25. You seem willing to look the other way when a human being is about to be killed

**for a thought crime** because you think those Others in Afghanistan must just have some different morality from our own. You seem to be ignoring the fact that Afghans are in the streets protesting this backwards decision of their country's court. If Afghan morality is so different, how did these Afghans in the streets come to have a problem with the court's morality? Or do you think maybe these protestors are just Western plants?

[Nederland]

31. Not at all

What I understand is that we are better off letting those Afghans in the streets deal with their own government by themselves. By supporting them we merely give aid to their enemies who can now point and say: "See, these people are nothing but pawns of the evil West." You seem to be ignorant of the fact that Western support is a liability, not a benefit, in that area of the world.

[BurtWorm]

43. So even though many in the west know that Afghanistan is acting immorally

they should just let them kill the pawn without comment. Does that actually do some good, that doing nothing?

[BurtWorm]

44. There is no real difference between taking your action and looking the other way.

Except for this: you can claim you are acting morally. The one who looks away simply doesn't care if he or she is or isn't acting morally. But the net result for you and those looking away is exactly the same.

[Marrah_G]

10. So as a woman I should turn my back on the women enslaved and dying across the world?

Why? Because a bunch of men have decided it is their culture to treat women worse then donkeys?

Sorry I will not stop caring. I will not stop speaking out. I will not stop writing letters.

I WILL NOT SHUT UP..........

I realize the men would prefer that the uppity women just go away and leave them alone to beat, rape, kill and starve their women. But that is not going to happen.

(My anger is not directed at you, but rather at all people who allow this behavior to continue)

[Nederland]

14. Fair enough

Just don't be surprised when people hate you for trying to force your moral sensibilities on them.

[BurtWorm]

17. Is it worse to be hated or to be wrong?

:shrug:

[Nederland]

18. It is worse to be wrong

The trouble is, you'll never know with any certainty if you are wrong. Things like this do not have any objective truth, they are merely opinions shaped by the culture and environment you grew up in.

[BurtWorm]

19. Do you think it's rational to kill people for their beliefs?

Do you think it's just to kill someone to make an example for others? Is there any way a reasonable person could explain what the Afghan court has done reasonably?

[Nederland]

21. "Reasonable" and "rational" are subjective terms

You don't really get that, do you?

[BurtWorm]

26. Is it reasonable in some cultures to think 1 + 1 = 5?

Is it rational for some people from other cultures to believe that? Is it beyond the capabilities of Muslims to grasp that killing people for thinking the "wrong" way is extreme and unjust?

[Nederland]

30. Mathematics is Objective, Morality is not

Jesus, you really don't get this do you?

[BurtWorm]

32. If morality were completely subjective, then why should we have a problem with neocon morality?

It's just what they think. Why force our morality on them? Why teach our children morality? They'll figure out some morality for themselves, won't they?

And why are you insisting that *my* morality is wrong, by the way? How can I "get it" if "it" is not my morality but yours? According to my morality, one shouldn't sit idly by while tyrants arbitrarily and unjustly murder a citizen for having the wrong thoughts. Why are you trying to inflict your alien morality on me?

[Nederland]

33. Because it's our country

Get it?

Let us deal with the definitions of morality inside out own country, let them deal with the definitions of morality inside their own country.

[BurtWorm]

35. So morality stops at the border.

It's not a human issue but a political issue. That's your position?

[Nederland]

37. No

My position is that morality is not universally consistent across cultural boundaries, and treating it as if it is causes more harm than good.

[BurtWorm]

41. Why doesn't the state murder of a person for thinking incorrectly not constitute sufficient harm?

Because it's just one measly Muslim?

[Nederland]

56. Exactly

[Marrah_G]

49. I know with certainty that the treatment of women by these leaders is barbaric and wrong

If you do not know that it is wrong then I don't know what else to say to you.

[Marrah_G]

54. If standing up for a Woman's right to not be enslaved makes me hated, then so be it.

Anyone who would hate me for that is not someone worth knowing.

I get it that you could care less about these women. Your posts show that. You care more about respecting a man's "culture", even when it is not deserving of respect.

[Spartacus88]

57. 144 Countries in the world

Of the 144 separate countries, well over 100 of them have cultures that do not meet American standards of morality. For example, slavery is alive and well inside dozens of African countries. According to Amnesty International, 29 million Africans are slaves now. Highly religious muslims reside in 60 countries, and their values are rather shocking to MTV-pop-cultured Americans, no doubt. Mexico and other South American countries treat their Indian minorities terribly.

But the question is: "Should America enforce our culture and our values on every one of the 144 countries in the world" ?? And "Since we're what $10 trillion dollars in debt and facing The Great Depression II, can we afford to" ??

I say to hell with trying to police the world. We've been sticking our noses in other peoples' businesses far too long already. And not only has it not worked, proven by the fact most of the world is still a "jungle", our "nose-stickings" have bankrupted us and placed our grandchildren in debt-bondage. And most of the world hates our guts for our efforts.

We need those trillions being spent on foreign wars and in futile attempts to export our morals, for our own people and for our own country.

[Marrah_G]

58. I am betting you are male. n/t

[BurtWorm]

59. No one is talking about "enforcing" any one else's cultures.

We are talking about speaking out against injustice. Are you, like Nederlander, arguing that justice is relative and local?

[alarimer]

46. I don't believe we should accept other cultures that murder people for dissenting

Some things are just wrong and should be wrong the world over. Murdering women for committing adultery (even if they were raped) is WRONG. It is immoral and barbaric. Treating women like second-class citizens is wrong.

I do not have to "respect" it. It is wrong.

Human rights are more important than any culture. There are basic standards of common decency that are universal and any culture (including our own) that does not respect that is WRONG and not worth respecting at all.

[Marrah_G]

50. It goes far beyond treating them as second class. n/t

[wuushew]

9. Please chime in on this thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2822456

Informal survey of pro vs. con sentiment among progressives to intervene in Afghanistan.

[varkam]

38. It's not as though we're discussing the Muslim tradition of women wearing the veil...

There are some things which may be wrong in one society and right in another in accord with regional traditions and conceptions of morality. It seems to me, though, that there are some things that are just going to be generally wrong - regardless of where it happens. Capital punishment for the non-crime of blasphemy seems to be one to me.

[GaYellowDawg]

51. Would you say the same thing to the Nazis?

Sure, go ahead, gas the Jews. After all, what would give you the right to inflict moral standards on other people? What about female genital mutilation? Or the genocide in Darfur? Or countless other acts of subjugation and murder based on one's gender or sexual orientation or race? How can you ever criticise Bush and neocons? After all, their moral code is "oil and money count, l'il brown people don't." Why not just shrug that off, too?

Surely, at the very minimum, the right to life should supercede the right to take it arbitrarily. I think so, and I don't give a shit if that makes me an absolutist or an cultural hegemonist or whatever the fuck label someone wants to put on it.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

52. Opposing evil is a moral duty. There is no such thing as a right.

There is no such thing as an inalienable right. Rights can be granted by a body - government, a constitution, a school board, or similar - or taken away. So your question is, essentially, meaningless - no such right exists, or needs to.

One has a moral duty to try and stop other people doing bad things, though, if one can.

"Inflicting one's moral standards on other people" is just a perjorative way of saying "opposing evil".

[WinkyDink]

53. Because the murder of a human being is not a "cultural" relativity.

Same way I despise OUR killing of Iraqis, based on insane political and personal reasons.

[Fire Walk With Me]

23. Who else here is envisioning a Huckabee Presidency?

[Disturbed]

28. Our Govt. should speak out about this to the Afghan Govt.

There was another case regarding Muslim Religion some time ago that
created controversy & it seems that the Afghan Govt. under pressure
from the Busholini Regime kept a man from being executed. Hopefully
this case will not lead to an execution.

[Chovexani]

40. No one in the West gives a shit when brown people kill each other

Maybe I'm just cynical, but I've seen too much evidence over the years to support that.

[malletgirl02]

48. I agree

The west, especially the US should intervene.

[edhopper]

65. Nederland

Was the North wrong for imposing their anti-slavery bias on the South? Was the world right to allow the Khmer Rouge to fulfill their pro-genocide culture. Why does the Constitution protect the rights of the Minority, when they obviously fly in the face of the Majority's culture? Shouldn't everyone in America have to live as the Majority wants them to, if the Majority passes laws that mandate it?