FPI lawyer arrested over terrorism link

[ponyexpress]

This is interesting.

https://thediplomat.com/2021/04/indonesia-arrests-firebrand-clerics-lawyer-over-attacks/

 

[IndoTom]

It seems to be a global trend now, governments persecute the opposition and their supporters even if they are peaceful.

 

[nd_eric_77]

It seems to be a global trend now, governments persecute the opposition and their supporters even if they are peaceful.

FPI was "peaceful"??? They were a threat to Indonesia's entire governing philosophy, as they wanted to replace Pancasila with a caliphate. Those fanatics deserve all the sanctions and penalties they will receive.

 

[fastpitch17]

It seems to be a global trend now, governments persecute the opposition and their supporters even if they are peaceful.

I don't remember the FPI being peaceful. Illegal raids, supporting and arming their own army, taking laws into their own hands, and causing good people to go to prison because they were not muslim or of the same heritage as them.

 

[Helpful Herbert]

It seems to be a global trend now, governments persecute the opposition and their supporters even if they are peaceful.

1) the FPI are not the opposition, that would be the SBY party
2) they are the opposite of peaceful
3) the government are not persecuting them (the legal system is prosecuting some of them individually)
4) I don't see any global trend, other than most countries have legal systems, and these would be used to prosecute vigilante groups where appropriate
5) nice trolling

 

[IndoTom]

FPI was "peaceful"??? They were a threat to Indonesia's entire governing philosophy, as they wanted to replace Pancasila with a caliphate. Those fanatics deserve all the sanctions and penalties they will receive.

If the system is changed democratically then what's the problem?

 

[IndoTom]

1) the FPI are not the opposition, that would be the SBY party
2) they are the opposite of peaceful
3) the government are not persecuting them (the legal system is prosecuting some of them individually)
4) I don't see any global trend, other than most countries have legal systems, and these would be used to prosecute vigilante groups where appropriate
5) nice trolling

1. The other political parties are all the same. Just a different shirt.
2. Are governments peaceful?
3. Prosecution can be a method of persecution.
4. Too many examples of crazy nationalist leaders these days to list all the autocratic governments. I won't mention them by name to protect the innocent.
5. The Hobbit has trolls not me.

 

[HappyMan]

If the system is changed democratically then what's the problem?

The problem is that they want the majority to have the right to further suppress the minority. Doing bad things from within the framework of the existing polity does not keep them from being bad things.
If the senate passed a law giving them the right to order summary executions, the fact that they had put it into a law would not stop them from being tyrannical murderers.

 

[IndoTom]

The problem is that they want the majority to have the right to further suppress the minority. Doing bad things from within the framework of the existing polity does not keep them from being bad things.
If the senate passed a law giving them the right to order summary executions, the fact that they had put it into a law would not stop them from being tyrannical murderers.

Isn't this majority rule already oppressing the minority around the world? Example: What do you think about France's law banning of muslims womens modest bathing suits on the beach but allowing topless women. Seems like oppression to me.

 

[HappyMan]

Isn't this majority rule already oppressing the minority around the world? Example: What do you think about France's law banning of muslims womens modest bathing suits on the beach but allowing topless women. Seems like oppression to me.

Yeah, they shouldn't do that... They also shouldn't try to bring in a much worse system, like the FPI wants to. This is obvious.

 

[nd_eric_77]

If the system is changed democratically then what's the problem?

This is the difference between liberal democracy and illiberal democracy. Liberal democracy respects the rights and privileges of majority AND minority people. Pancasila is an excellent example of the philisophy of liberal democracy. Illiberal democracy is mob rule, plain and simple. Most modern democracies (including Indonesia) have constitutions that enshrine the rights of minority people within them.
Side note: the term "liberal" as used in "liberal democracy" is small-l liberal, and is not directly related to big-L Liberal as relates to political ideologies in the US and other countries.

 

[IndoTom]

Yeah, they shouldn't do that... They also shouldn't try to bring in a much worse system, like the FPI wants to. This is obvious.

Better or worse is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[IndoTom]

I don't remember the FPI being peaceful. Illegal raids, supporting and arming their own army, taking laws into their own hands, and causing good people to go to prison because they were not muslim or of the same heritage as them.

I think you are confusing FPI with the villagers that react crazy when people complain about noise from a mosque at odd hours of the night.

 

[HappyMan]

Better or worse is in the eye of the beholder.

Not really, when your comment was about the suppression of minorities. The FPI wants a caliphate with religious law. The religious pecking order is baked right into the book. Special taxes for some minorities and suppression/persecution for others are right there in the book.

Having second class status for minorities be an integral part of the caliphate is clearly worse than having it be the (horrible) flavor of the week in a democracy.

This is the thing that makes me wonder about how society can progress while remaining religious; you cannot change what is written in the book. You can "interpret" it to mean something different from what it clearly says, but you will never be more that a step away from someone "rightfully" throwing out all your societal progress by simply insisting on reading the book as it is written.

 

[nd_eric_77]

Isn't this majority rule already oppressing the minority around the world? Example: What do you think about France's law banning of muslims womens modest bathing suits on the beach but allowing topless women. Seems like oppression to me.

France is off-topic. We are discussing FPI and its caliphate ambitions.

 

[IndoTom]

This is the thing that makes me wonder about how society can progress while remaining religious; you cannot change what is written in the book. You can "interpret" it to mean something different from what it clearly says, but you will never be more that a step away from someone "rightfully" throwing out all your societal progress by simply insisting on reading the book as it is written.

Progress doesn't necessarily involve changing the rules. Progress sometimes means following the existing rules better.

 

[IndoTom]

France is off-topic. We are discussing FPI and its caliphate ambitions.

France is a perfect example of majority rules oppressing the minority which was one of the points brought upin this thread. Or how about China oppressing and imprisoning it's morities?

By the way, can you explain exactly what a caliphate would is and would mean here?

 

[nd_eric_77]

France is a perfect example of majority rules oppressing the minority which was one of the points brought upin this thread. Or how about China oppressing and imprisoning it's morities?

By the way, can you explain exactly what a caliphate would is and would mean here?

So, you disagree that France is off-topic and then you throw China into the mix??? I refuse to discuss other countries in a thread about terrorism-promoting FPI-holes.

As regards the use of the term "caliphate", I am specifically referring to a nation that imposes sharia law on all of its citizens (regardless of their religion). This means extra taxes on non-Muslims, a barbaric penal code, and 6th-century apparel requirements for women. Also, a caliphate would ban pork and alcohol; Indonesia without sate babi and Bir Bintang is not an Indonesia I would ever want to see!

 

[HappyMan]

Progress doesn't necessarily involve changing the rules. Progress sometimes means following the existing rules better.

Could you give me an example of how you would follow Lev 20:10 better, without changing it? It says, “And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death."

What sort of following the rules better are we talking about; are we killing the people more humanely or more efficiently? Would including killing those who commit adultery with another man's girlfriend be following the rules better?

I'm from a very conservative religious background and I can tell you that some of my friends and I were one step away from terrorism in our teenage years (early teens for me). We thought that abortionists were murders and applauded their deaths. The older kids in this group "trained" and collected weapons, preparing to be "Christian soldiers". There were discussions of how to avoid law enforcement and how to get away with murder. The only thing that kept us all from doing something really stupid was that there was no authority figure waving a flag for us.

I don't think anyone who knows me now would think I was capable of the things we contemplated, but I was just following my faith. We all were. We just took the book literally. There are loads of people out there in America who see things the way I used to see them. They believe that the book is real and true and intended to be followed.

 

[Dharma Police]

@IndoTom I'm confused by your stance. On the one hand you're saying "Their country, their rules", upholding the tenets of democracy, then you condemn France's ban of the hijab and its ancillary swimwear for Muslim women.

Their country their rules, right?