No atheist ever wants to regimentalize his followers. Followers of
any religion that propagates falsehood in the name of God deserves to
be criticized. Their ultimate goal is not to win the favor of God.
It is to capture political power, they have always done it. Mr.
Chakravarty is no judge to decide what is to be criticized. If
something cannot tolerate the limelight of analysis, it deserves to be
forgotten or treated as unculture. Those who defend such types of
'faith' also should be proper education.
On 1/26/12, subimal chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com> wrote:
> My dad hurts my feelings by scolding me and Rushdie hurts Khomeini's
> feelings by writing Satanic Verses. I am so so upset that I do not take my
> dinner. Khomeini is so upset that he promises $1million for an unknown
> hitman who will kill Rushdie. I am helpless and dependent on my dad.
> Khomeini holds the highest power in a near theocratic state and has the
> power to do or undo any thing. I am childish and can't value my dad's good
> advice. Khomeini is full of himself and wants to judge art and literature
> with his own "light". I am a trivial person. Khomeini is an "establishment"
> founded on religion. He perceives that his religion is is under threat from
> Rushdie's literary work. Perception is subjective---both Khomeini's and
> mine. I have no followers, nobody supports me although my mom pulls me
> closer to her with affection to eat dinner. Khomeini's huge following is
> completely opposite.
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Jiten Roy <jnrsr53@yahoo.com>
> To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2012 7:05 PM
> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] FW: Rushdie cancels visit, angry authors read
> Satanic Verses
>
>
>
>
>
> Why critiquing a religion is so hard to bear for its believers.
>
> I know criticism of communism is forbidden in the communist countries. If
> anybody does so, he will not be heard of again. Communism requires total
> subjugation and control of the masses to make that system work. That can't
> be the reason behind prohibiting criticism of religion. Then again - there
> are civil laws prohibiting criticism of religion in many countries. So, the
> motive may be the same in both systems. In fact, these two systems may
> be the flip-sides of a coin.
>
> More or less all religions demand total subjugation of their followers to
> the God. In some followers even feel proud of calling themselves as slaves
> of God; slaves are not in a position to criticize the system. So, they
> don't. But, not everybody is happy to assume this role. For those who do not
> want to be a slave - let them go free. God will deal with them. OK?
>
> Some people say criticism of a religion hurts the feelings of its followers.
> All criticisms hurt feeling. When my father scolded me in my childhood, it
> used to hurt my feeling; I used to question his love for me during that
> transient period. When my teacher criticized me in front of my fellow
> classmates, it used to hurt my feeling badly. You cannot go after the person
> just because he hurts your feeling. That's totally uncivil manner. Yes,
> Rushdie and Taslima may have hurt feelings of the believer. So what? Deal
> with it, as you do with any other hurt-feelings. That's a mature and
> civilized way to deal with it.
>
> Jiten Roy
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Sukhamaya Bain <subain1@yahoo.com>
> To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2012 11:43 PM
> Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] FW: Rushdie cancels visit, angry authors read
> Satanic Verses
>
>
>
> What is 'middle-class concerns on women's issues'?
>
> Taslima Nasrin could be the culprit behind increasing 'hizabization' of
> women in Bangladesh, what an absurd argument! I can understand that the
> Jamati's would resist any movement that advocates women's rights. One way to
> suppress such movements would be to hizabize more women. If Bangladesh fell
> for that, it was because the country did not have enough educated people to
> advocate women's rights, not because the women's rights activists were wrong
> or imperfect in executing their movement.
>
> I do not think a truly secular person would downplay "Lajja" by branding it
> 'a badly written account of Hindu persecution in Bangladesh'. 'Badly
> written' and 'badly executed' are the kind of excuses that are made by
> people who do not wish to support the fight against the persecution in
> question. It would also be pretty uneducated of anyone reading the book
> (Lajja) and finding that the 'central message' was a cowardly whimper of the
> Hindu hero managing to slap a Muslim street prostitute as his climactic act
> of protest.
>
> I agree with Ms. Majid on one point. A Hindu should not criticize Islam (or
> any other non-Hindu religion), and a Muslim should not criticize Hinduism
> (or any other non-Islamic religion). The religious fools need to see the
> silliness in their own religions. To be a neutral critique of religions, one
> should promote himself/herself to a Human first. I do not identify myself in
> terms of any religion. However, I still avoid picking up a religious book
> and trying to find faults in it. That is because it is obvious that a
> thousand years back people were less civilized, and knew less. We can not go
> back in time to fix anything; it is better to focus on recent and current
> hatred and injustices.
>
> Talking about Taslima Nasrin's successes with her narcissism, are we feeling
> bad that our own narcissism did not give us such successes? I think we
> should control our personal attacks on people who are writing in this forum
> as well on people who are not writing in this forum.
>
> Sukhamaya Bain
>
> ****************************************************
>
> From: Farida Majid <farida_majid@hotmail.com>
> To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Monday, January 23, 2012 6:30 PM
> Subject: RE: [mukto-mona] FW: Rushdie cancels visit, angry authors read
> Satanic Verses
>
> Taslima was a good columnist. I used to be a fan, though i often
> found her to be a bit too confined to her middle-class concerns on women's
> issues. I supported her views when she blamed religious beliefs, customs and
> other superstitions for the plight of women in our society.
>
> But in 1993, when confronted by the fundamentalists, I was
> shocked by the way she just chickened out. Her cowardice was visible in her
> body language (coy looks and min-min voice) and the stupidity of repeating
> over and over again the same dumb, unexamined Bangla translations of the
> Qur'an and calling them "religion" was simply stupefying! How can anybody be
> so scared to lose
> basic cultural sense, or an idea of what political game was being played?
> Her narcissism was then as now is too blatant.
>
> She did more harm to women's ongoing movements in Bangladesh by
> emboldening the Jamaati factions. Almost every woman activist I've met in
> the field says so. Today there are more hijabized women in BD than they were
> in 1993 and Taslima's fiasco in 1993 is partly to blame.
>
> As an old communalism combatant I can tell you that Taslima is
> just another rotten piece of wooden chip in the fire of communalism. I work
> with a team of communalism combatants and none of us singles out a
> particular religion and attacks it indiscriminately. Even the die-hard
> atheists and religion-haters amongst us has learned (the hard way) not to
> pick on "religion" as the root cause of communalism
> despite the fact that religion is the main vehicle of their hate-mongering
> machine.
>
> Her novelette 'Lajja' is a badly written account of Hindu
> persecution in Bangladesh in the sense that its central message is a
> cowardly whimper (the Hindu hero managing to slap a Muslim street prostitute
> as his climactic act of protest!). Had Taslima really cared about humanity
> the message could have been bolder in that novel, and more politically or
> even artistically meaningful in sensitizing us about the root causes of
> communalism.
>
> Just as I, a Muslim, would not go on and on about the flaw in
> Hinduism regarding its caste system, my Hindu or Christian team-mates are
> discouraged from talking about 'jehadism' as a part of Islam and as if every
> ordinary Indian or Bangladeshi Muslim lives by
> it.
>
> Combating communalism and religious fundamentalism is not as
> easy as it seems superficially. It is a rough ride and it gets rougher the
> more deeply you get involved. It requires a thorough knowledge and
> understanding of our subcontinental history and culture.
>
> Taslima has done well with her narcissism, and I applaud her.
> But please do not call her a "champion" on women's issues or a sincere
> anti-communal activist. She is a sneaky, manipulative coward, the opposite
> of 'brave'.
>
> ****************************************************
>
>
> Switch to: Text-Only, Daily Digest • Unsubscribe • Terms of Use
>
> .
>
>
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/mukto-mona/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mukto-mona-digest@yahoogroups.com
mukto-mona-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
mukto-mona-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/