Live data from Hacker News

Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

buzzfeednews.com

501–510 of 515 posts

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#501

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What if a person sincerely believes Jesus was gay, and that Muhamad was a pedophile? Were do you draw the line at sincerely held religious beliefs and what you think is not a sincere religious belief?

Why do you care so much about what other people believe? It's like you are trying to justify religious persecution.

Why do I care if delusional people get help? For the same reason I'm in support of universal healthcare as a human right. Again, if you want to claim something like religious persecution, can you define what it means. I would love a clear and concise definition of what is and isn't a religion.

As a side note that many readers might find interesting, delusion as defined in the DSM-5, the book that defines what is and isn't a "mental illness", EXPLICTLY makes an exception for "religious beliefs" when it comes to delusions. I.E., if you believe in Zeus and Thor and claim you pray and worship them, you can can be admitted for delusion because those "religions" aren't considered socio-normal, I.E. no big groups of people actively practice them. It's kind of the idea why cults are considered delusions. Now, you take that same exact logic, but apply it to someone who claims they talk to Jesus or Allah, bam, exemption and it's perfectly normal delusions.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do you care so much about what other people believe? It's like you are trying to justify religious persecution.

Why do I care if delusional people get help? For the same reason I'm in support of universal healthcare as a human right. Again, if you want to claim something like religious persecution, can you define what it means. I would love a clear and concise definition of what is and isn't a religion. As a side note that many readers might find interesting, delusion as defined in the DSM-5, the book that defines what is and…

My simple definition is "harmful actions are bad, not beliefs." What is or isn't religion isn't very important.

I wish people didn't hold beliefs I find nonsensical, but they likely feel the same way and any action I try to force on them will not improve anything. It's unfortunate that many are fine forcing things on me, but that doesn't mean I should adopt the practice.

>DSM-5

DSM-IV, it was changed in DSM-V.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#503
post #51

For those defending this practice, consider carefully the implications of what you are advocating. On one hand you have a government deciding who can and cannot refer to themselves as adherents of a particular religion (by declaring that Ahamadis cannot call themselves Muslim). On another hand you have Google and Apple, yet again, being the complicit chokepoints of “free speech”, with regard to app developers. These…

You make a great argument for Governments that support religious freedom. Not sure I follow your logic to a conclusion that makes Apple and Google the villains here though. A&G have a binary choice - serve users in (Oppressive Country X) or not. There is no choice that involves serving those users but not following the oppressive laws of said country.

VPNs are a thing.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do I care if delusional people get help? For the same reason I'm in support of universal healthcare as a human right. Again, if you want to claim something like religious persecution, can you define what it means. I would love a clear and concise definition of what is and isn't a religion. As a side note that many readers might find interesting, delusion as defined in the DSM-5, the book that defines what is and…

My simple definition is "harmful actions are bad, not beliefs." What is or isn't religion isn't very important. I wish people didn't hold beliefs I find nonsensical, but they likely feel the same way and any action I try to force on them will not improve anything. It's unfortunate that many are fine forcing things on me, but that doesn't mean I should adopt the practice. >DSM-5 DSM-IV, it was changed in DSM-V.

Beliefs can lead to harmful actions though, that is why people can be locked up for "delusions" or "beliefs that can lead to harmful actions" in the first place. Your definition doesn't really address the idea that ideas can be harmful and that we do actually disallow certain beliefs in society.

As for your definition of religion, I think it is entirely relevant, as you suggest my ideas on redefining Christianity to include a gay Jesus is offensive to religion. Well, if you are going to claim that, I would challenge why this religious belief is less sacred than the traditional view of Jesus according to Christianity. How do you define religion is definitely relevant.

As for the last comment of it being DSM-V, what does that matter when referring to it as DSM-5? As far as I can tell, it is not a meaningful distinction. Do you disagree with the idea that religion has a specific exception in the current DSM when concerning religion?

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#505

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My simple definition is "harmful actions are bad, not beliefs." What is or isn't religion isn't very important. I wish people didn't hold beliefs I find nonsensical, but they likely feel the same way and any action I try to force on them will not improve anything. It's unfortunate that many are fine forcing things on me, but that doesn't mean I should adopt the practice. >DSM-5 DSM-IV, it was changed in DSM-V.

Beliefs can lead to harmful actions though, that is why people can be locked up for "delusions" or "beliefs that can lead to harmful actions" in the first place. Your definition doesn't really address the idea that ideas can be harmful and that we do actually disallow certain beliefs in society. As for your definition of religion, I think it is entirely relevant, as you suggest my ideas on redefining Christianity to…

I don't think certain beliefs should be disallowed. I've never heard of a person being arrested just for having a delusion, it may be possible.

>gay Jesus is offensive to religion

No, its intentionally trying to be offensive to the person you are talking to. Any example of a theological difference works for your argument, yet you kept returning to ones I said we're offensive.

The definition you provided was in the DSM-4, the one in 5 is different. I have no opinion on diagnosing delusions.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#506
post #496

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was discussing how secularism is defined in the indian constitution, and how it functions with respect to the related laws guaranteeing minority rights. It doesn't have anything to do with "nationalism" but was a reply to another post (by a french?) in the hopes of discussing how secularism works in India and other democratic countries. But it was hijacked and derailed. As I have pointed out to you before, it's a t…

You were part of the hijacking and derailing. Please stop perpetuating flamewars on HN, no matter how right you are or feel you are. It's not what this site is for. If other comments are egregious, flag them and/or let us know at hn@ycombinator.com and we'll take a look.

> You were part of the hijacking

I can see how one can conclude that. But I replied to a post with honest intention (it hadn't been flagged, and I assumed secularism was a "safe" topic :). But it wasn't certainly on the topic, and I'll keep that in mind from now before contributing.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#507

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beliefs can lead to harmful actions though, that is why people can be locked up for "delusions" or "beliefs that can lead to harmful actions" in the first place. Your definition doesn't really address the idea that ideas can be harmful and that we do actually disallow certain beliefs in society. As for your definition of religion, I think it is entirely relevant, as you suggest my ideas on redefining Christianity to…

I don't think certain beliefs should be disallowed. I've never heard of a person being arrested just for having a delusion, it may be possible. >gay Jesus is offensive to religion No, its intentionally trying to be offensive to the person you are talking to. Any example of a theological difference works for your argument, yet you kept returning to ones I said we're offensive. The definition you provided was in the DS…

Arrested or committed are a very thing line apart. More so when you realize that what is defined to be a delusion versus a religious belief is arbitrary in nature. I think you realize this since you dodge the issue of defining exactly what religion is in the first place as "not relevant".

As for the DSM 4 versus DSM 5, please, if the distinction of which document we are using to define delusion has changed, do you mind explain your rational for why the DSM 4 has an explicit exception for religion concerning delusion when compared to how the DSM redefines it?

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#508

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think certain beliefs should be disallowed. I've never heard of a person being arrested just for having a delusion, it may be possible. >gay Jesus is offensive to religion No, its intentionally trying to be offensive to the person you are talking to. Any example of a theological difference works for your argument, yet you kept returning to ones I said we're offensive. The definition you provided was in the DS…

Arrested or committed are a very thing line apart. More so when you realize that what is defined to be a delusion versus a religious belief is arbitrary in nature. I think you realize this since you dodge the issue of defining exactly what religion is in the first place as "not relevant". As for the DSM 4 versus DSM 5, please, if the distinction of which document we are using to define delusion has changed, do you mi…

I took the term "lock up" to mean arrest. People don't get committed just for having a delusion either, which is why I don't need an specific definition of religion. I don't need to label other people's beliefs.

I was just fixing your mistake on the DSM part, but if I'm honest the religion exception was probably to prevent assholes from using it to label anyone religious crazy, and the new one makes it more clear harm is necessary.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#509
post #483

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it ethical to deny information discovery to oppressed people?

That's called "finding a justification for unethical behaviour". "Well overall it's better if I do the unethical thing because when you think about it REALLY it's for the best- and yes, I'll make some extra money this way, but that's unrelated to why I've searched my soul for any reason to make this okay". Google et al aren't denying information to oppressed people. Their governments are. The companies have to decide…

I'm from a developing nation who has a good tech career. I give a lot of credit to YouTube and Google for that. Denying that option to me is very costly. I'd rather have a censored version to nothing. It's just a pragmatic choice. However if Google is able to arm twist the government and remove the censor, nothing like it.

Re: Google, Apple cave to Pakistan pressure to take down apps by Ahmadiyya Muslims

#510

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Arrested or committed are a very thing line apart. More so when you realize that what is defined to be a delusion versus a religious belief is arbitrary in nature. I think you realize this since you dodge the issue of defining exactly what religion is in the first place as "not relevant". As for the DSM 4 versus DSM 5, please, if the distinction of which document we are using to define delusion has changed, do you mi…

I took the term "lock up" to mean arrest. People don't get committed just for having a delusion either, which is why I don't need an specific definition of religion. I don't need to label other people's beliefs. I was just fixing your mistake on the DSM part, but if I'm honest the religion exception was probably to prevent assholes from using it to label anyone religious crazy, and the new one makes it more clear har…

Yet you use a word to label people's belief like religion as somehow protected. I'm not the one giving it a label. You are. I'm simply asking you to explain what you mean by the label you use which is the label of religion.

And harm isn't necessary in the DSM 5. Where are you pulling that idea from? Which part of the wording specifically? I'm referring to delusion disorder.

Post reply on HN