Bangladesh: PM Sheikh Hasina vows to end deadly attacks (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-36507173)
QuoteBangladesh's Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina has vowed to bring an end to a wave of targeted killings of minorities and secular citizens in the country.
She said her government would do whatever it took to stop the attacks.
Her comments came a day after police launched a concerted drive against Islamists, arresting more than 3,000 people.
The opposition has accused the government of using the operation to target political opponents...
I don't think she's got a snowballs chance in hell of making any impact whatsoever.
Sadly, you're almost certainly right.
Quote
The opposition has accused the governmentWhat a surprise! of using the operation to target political opponents...
Well, there's a surprise.
I doubt it as well.
We have our own problems right here in River City. I refer to the massacre of LGBT people in Orlando last night. 50 dead more than 50 wounded, The death toll may rise depending on the extent of injuries to the wounded. The lone perpetrator has an Arabic name. So what else in new?
She moves absolutely right way.I wish her a lot of success. :)
I was going to post a new thread, but might as well put this here:
This is a must-see.
(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fi139.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fq301%2Fhackenslash_album%2FAvijit.jpg&hash=586a606ef87175a04f500466988896e5af87971f)
Friendly Atheist Blog (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2016/07/09/rafida-bonya-ahmed-survivor-of-attack-in-bangladesh-discusses-fighting-machetes-with-pens/?utm_medium=twitter&utm_source=twitterfeed)
Quote
I don't think she's got a snowballs chance in hell of making any impact whatsoever.
I think you are correct, Tank.
Fundamentalism is an infectious, intolerant, assymetrical, long-lived and often covert force that thrives well where people are already obeying a strict, dominating, doctrine in everday life. Added to any culture where illiteracy, corruption and poverty are rife, where violence and execution have been seen, historically, as a solution to most religio-political "problems," and it is hard to think of any valid solution.
To the Western mind there is no real solution, no "soft" solution at least. "Education" is sometimes considered but this would have to be forced, 100%, education over at least a couple of generations with dissention strictly eliminated.
Yeah, well, that's been tried by Russia, China, Cambodia . . .
Quote from: Gloucester on July 10, 2016, 12:37:48 PM
To the Western mind there is no real solution, no "soft" solution at least. "Education" is sometimes considered but this would have to be forced, 100%, education over at least a couple of generations with dissention strictly eliminated.
Yeah, well, that's been tried by Russia, China, Cambodia . . .
I think Western civilization can do a much better job of adhering to secular values than it has thus far, though. Like taking a definitive stand against the "religious liberty" crap that the US South tries to peddle to mask their homophobia or attempts to close abortion clinics. Or not allowing things like separate Sharia family courts for Muslim families in Canada or separate police forces for the orthodox Jews in Brooklyn. In other words, you're allowed to practice your religion but it doesn't allow you to set up your own system of justice, no matter how incompatible it may be with your beliefs. Rule of law still must apply.
The US is also way too loose with things like home-schooling or private high schools. Sure, Common Core had issues, but there still needs to be some basic level of knowledge required to have a diploma, including fluency in science. Local control over schools is not necessarily a good thing either in some cases.
Quote from: Firebird on July 10, 2016, 11:33:24 PM
Quote from: Gloucester on July 10, 2016, 12:37:48 PM
To the Western mind there is no real solution, no "soft" solution at least. "Education" is sometimes considered but this would have to be forced, 100%, education over at least a couple of generations with dissention strictly eliminated.
Yeah, well, that's been tried by Russia, China, Cambodia . . .
I think Western civilization can do a much better job of adhering to secular values than it has thus far, though. Like taking a definitive stand against the "religious liberty" crap that the US South tries to peddle to mask their homophobia or attempts to close abortion clinics. Or not allowing things like separate Sharia family courts for Muslim families in Canada or separate police forces for the orthodox Jews in Brooklyn. In other words, you're allowed to practice your religion but it doesn't allow you to set up your own system of justice, no matter how incompatible it may be with your beliefs. Rule of law still must apply.
The US is also way too loose with things like home-schooling or private high schools. Sure, Common Core had issues, but there still needs to be some basic level of knowledge required to have a diploma, including fluency in science. Local control over schools is not necessarily a good thing either in some cases.
Hmm, I think the West is in a cleft stick here. Mist of our laws etc. were formed in a religious framework and, historically, we have seen how divisive religion can be - "British America" was founded because of that very problem. Thus the effective right to freedom of religion was built into its constitution - they just never imagined the outlying problems the conflict between secular and religious "laws" that we are witnessing.
So the West is divided in a way that Islam can never really be and, to the fundamentalist, this is a grave moral weakness. And it is comprised of confused, and often conflicting, laws and perceptions. Trying to balance secular and religious sensibilities rarely works but we do not really want the conflict that would be caused by strict control. There is enough evidence of the results of this in Muslim countries.
There are fundamental rules that both sides could, intellectually, agree on - the "Golden Rule" being the prime one - but, humans being humans, there will always be those who seek an exremist view, no compromise possible. "Believe in what I think or die!"
My humble opinion is that such things as Sharia should be allowed where there is no conflictvwith secular law. Any who dispute that should remove themselves to a country where their desires have the force of law.
There is a bloke who constantly spams forums for total Islamic freedom in education in Britain. But he does not want to live in any wholly Muslim country where this is the norm apparently - wonder why . . .
Later: Islam is divided amongst itself but still shares a common set of strict basic morals and life rules, universal and much more integrated into everyday life than Christianity has enjoyed since the iron grip of the Catholic church in medieval times. And often just as corrupt behind the scenes.