Religious extremism in Indonesia

[PLC1]

Sharia law has raised its ugly head in yet another place, Indonesia. The penalty for adultery: Death by stoning.

Extremism Spreads Across Indonesian Penal Code

BANDA ACEH, Indonesia — Under Islamic law, or Shariah, the religious police have administered public canings for such things as gambling, prostitution and illicit affairs. But under a new Islamic criminal code that goes into effect this month, the Shariah police will be wielding a new and more potent threat: death by stoning for adulterers.

Along with that unbelievable return to Old Testament times, is the imposition of mandatory prayer:

Just before noon prayers one recent Friday — a mandatory session for men — the Shariah police’s all-female brigade hopped onto a Toyota pickup to begin patrols. Dressed in olive uniforms, the officers hewed to the city center, away from the areas worst hit by the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. They urged stragglers to hurry to the nearest mosque and exhorted the recalcitrant to yield to God’s authority.

“Dear followers of Islam, people of Banda Aceh,” blared a loudspeaker on the Toyota, “our city has applied Shariah. It’s almost praying time. Close all shops, stop all business activities. No more buying and selling.”

 

[Dr.Who]

But its a peaceful religion*. As the move into the UK and the US there is nothing to fear. It's not as if a country has ever been taken over through a cultural invasion before.

British law would never consider sharia law in establishing their own rules. Neither wold the US kowtow to a minority group and abandon the larger rule of law.

Sarcasm.

* and apparently it is a peaceful religion but somehow the clerics who run it did not get that memo.

 

[PLC1]

But its a peaceful religion*. As the move into the UK and the US there is nothing to fear. It's not as if a country has ever been taken over through a cultural invasion before.

British law would never consider sharia law in establishing their own rules. Neither wold the US kowtow to a minority group and abandon the larger rule of law.

Sarcasm.

* and apparently it is a peaceful religion but somehow the clerics who run it did not get that memo.

Yes, it's supposed to be a peaceful religion, just as Christianity is supposed to be a peaceful religion. The latter has, in fact been mostly peaceful in modern times. The conquests of the Romans, the colonial wars of more recent times, the Inquisition of the middle ages, and the crusades, are all examples of a peaceful religion being perverted by its adherents.

The lesson is that religion can be a good thing, so long as it isn't taken too seriously, and as long as government and religion don't form a partnership. That's when peaceful religions turn bad.

 

[cygonaut]

Losing sleep doing paranormal research can really damage the brain.

Catholic priests engage in pedophilia.

Jehovah Witnesses refuse blood transfusions for their kids suffering massive blood loss. That's murder in my book.

And we have folks calling themselves Christians that glorify the rich and condemn the poor.

And they all want power. They want to screw with government.

You just don't need an iceberg with these folks hanging around the ship's hull.

 

[Dr.Who]

Yes, it's supposed to be a peaceful religion, just as Christianity is supposed to be a peaceful religion. The latter has, in fact been mostly peaceful in modern times. The conquests of the Romans, the colonial wars of more recent times, the Inquisition of the middle ages, and the crusades, are all examples of a peaceful religion being perverted by its adherents.

The lesson is that religion can be a good thing, so long as it isn't taken too seriously, and as long as government and religion don't form a partnership. That's when peaceful religions turn bad.

Mostly agreed.

I don't know much about the history of problems in Islam but I can speak about Christianity a bit more.

Its problems are surely at times examples of it's adherents perverting it (in fact in the daily humdrum of life that is almost all of the problem). But I think more often in the large events of history it is the non-adherents who pretend to be adherents who cause problems. The fault is not that people don't take it seriously enough but that they don't take the principles to love radically seriously enough. Both the inquisition and the crusades were far more political than religious. Which is why I agree with you about mixing government and religion. I believe our founders had it right when they intended religion to be a check on government. When the two are co-mingled there is no check.