[flagged]
@dang this need to be flagged for inflammatory content.
@dang doesn't do anything. The only way to reliably get a message to us is to email hn@ycombinator.com.
Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
261–268 of 268 posts
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#262Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#263Fully banned now: https://wikimediafoundation.org/news/2023/02/03/wikimedia-fo...
in unrelated news, Deutsche Welle also banned
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#264Earlier quoted context omitted.
But it's not really even (or just) that; Muslims (in general obviously) have their own view on what Islam is and is not, and this may not jibe with Muslims from other parts of the world. A prime example is Ahmadiyyas; they consider themselves to be Muslims but in particular some of the harder line Muslims (for example some Wahhabists) would consider them to be heretical. And hence some would argue that they are breac…
tbf Ahmadiyyas are a particular exceptional case, and you'd be hard-pressed to find even moderate mainline Muslims accepting of them as coreligionists, since they (seemingly) violate one of the basic tenets of Islam, i.e., the Seal of the Prophets. The fact that Ahmadiyyas do accept the Seal of the Prophets but assign a sub-prophet role is the devil in the details here.
By the same token it could be argued that Islam violates the Blasphemy laws in that it treats Jesus as a prophet and not God; i.e. it violates one of the basic tenets of Christianity.
So my main point stands, because so many people claim so many different things under the colour of religion, laws like the Blasphemy law turns into a case of my sect is better / stronger than your sect. And now I have a piece of paper that proves you broke the law.
Originally this law was written to try to keep the peace, but now it has been weaponised to suppress minorities.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#265Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is "a follower"? Is that another term for Muslim? Your accusation doesn't make sense to me.
No, nashashmi is implying hnews_account_1 is an adherent of the same Muslim splinter group (known as Ahmadis or pejoratively as Qadiyanis; see [1]) as Abdus Salam [2], the sole Nobel Laureate that Pakistan has ever has. Salam was a prominent 20th physicist who predicted the existence of the W and Z bosons and the electroweak force. nashashmi is gaslighting here by demonstrating two logical fallacies: both an appeal t…
Yes, India has many faults but a long policy of offering refuge. They had refugee crises when the greeks were marching to their lands as well and had to resolve it. Of course, some recent decisions to favour hindu refugees is discriminative but it both fits the govt agenda and has some amount of logic in that there's wayyyy too much terrorist activity in the region. I still don't agree with it. But they also accepted the tibetans after the chinese drove them out and they accepted the zorastrians after the persians drove them out.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#266Earlier quoted context omitted.
What bias? I never even mentioned the other Muslim nations. What concern is it of theirs that Abdus existed? His own land disowning him is to their utter and ever lasting shame. This is of the order of the castration of Turing. The neighbouring nation that Pakistan always fights with would’ve gladly accepted him if he’d wanted to switch.
Exile is a frequent form of punishment and an alternative to execution. Widespread Condemnation of his group means no single country is alone in his exile. Further his group’s first leader was a supporter of the old colonial power. And they give him a place today. Your bias is supporting him while cursing another country that exiled him.
There is no widespread condemnation of ahmaddiyas anywhere outside muslim nations. Whoever the fuck his group's first leader was is irrelevant. They may worship a false prophet, they may worship a stone, they could worship an imaginary alien race. I have a bias against a sick nation that views an entire religion as outcasts. In 2023. It is absurd. No wonder the nation is absolutely dying economically.
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#267I'm starting to view more and more things as nationalism vs globalism. E.g. multinational corporations vs national tax laws E.g. global internet services vs national privacy laws E.g. global internet services vs national decency laws (the posted issue) I'm starting to realise this mismatch is where a lot of friction is and will continue to be.
[dead]
Re: Pakistani gov degrades Wikipedia connections due to blasphemy
#268Earlier quoted context omitted.
tbf Ahmadiyyas are a particular exceptional case, and you'd be hard-pressed to find even moderate mainline Muslims accepting of them as coreligionists, since they (seemingly) violate one of the basic tenets of Islam, i.e., the Seal of the Prophets. The fact that Ahmadiyyas do accept the Seal of the Prophets but assign a sub-prophet role is the devil in the details here.
By the same token it could be argued that Islam violates the Blasphemy laws in that it treats Jesus as a prophet and not God; i.e. it violates one of the basic tenets of Christianity. So my main point stands, because so many people claim so many different things under the colour of religion, laws like the Blasphemy law turns into a case of my sect is better / stronger than your sect. And now I have a piece of paper t…
I agree with your assessment of Islamic beliefs would constitute as Christian blasphemy, and vice versa.
My point is directed at the specific example of the Ahmadiyyas, with the text suggesting that it's an example of the spectrum of Islamic practices. While there is definitely a spectrum in the way Islam is practiced across the world in ways that might throw off outsider Muslims, Ahmadiyya is an extreme example that I would suggest is not representative of the continuum. It's not just some hardliner believers that would consider them heretical, or even just 'some Wahabbists' - I would suggest that mainline Muslims across the spectrum would denounce the theology as heretical. Yes, there is definitely a spectrum of beliefs across the Islamic world, but the Ahmadiyya theology modifies one of the core pillars that would be a hard buy for believers.
Whether blasphemy laws should exist is an entirely other point (I don't think they should).