Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial
George Pinto georgejpinto@... wrote: In a democracy, one can make the same arguments in an open public forum, as vigorously and robustly as in a court of law. George, The above is indeed the definition of a debate, and women are perfectly capable of debating as robustly as men. In fact, they are also capable of shouting over an opponent in a shouting match, as you saw in that TV9 YouTube video. The problem with your proposal is that the religious fanatics who filed the blasphemy lawsuit are not interested in a debate. They certainly are not interested in a civilized discussion. They only want to seek revenge and give vent to the hatred they feel in their bones, as is true of all religious and ideological fanatics. That is why we have communal riots, suicide bombings and genocides. Here is the progression of expression of hatred among religious and ideological fanatics: 1. Name-calling and demonization of the target(s) 2. Mass hate propaganda emails, websites and newsletters. 3. Aggressive public protests, and encroachment on the rights of others, including bystanders. 4. Issuance of indirect and/or direct threats in public and/or by phone calls. 5. Filing of blasphemy lawsuits and/or issuance of fatwas. 6. Engagement in violent retribution through communal riots, murders, remote control bombings, suicide bombings and genocides. Cheers, Santosh - Original Message - From: Gabriel de Figueiredo gdefigueir...@yahoo.com.au Your rationale is all very good, George, but my gut feeling is that any such discussion would very soon come to an exchange of verbal and physical violence. From: George Pinto georgejpi...@yahoo.com My view is that the Sanal Edamaruku case should not be adjudicated in a court of law but in an open public forum with both sides presenting their views and moderated by an independent person. The Indian courts are clogged enough and emphasis should be on violent crimes, including where real injury of life and limb is suffered like murder, rape, etc. and measurable like financial loss and theft of property, etc. ... George P.S. I have intentionally not used the word debate for such a proposed forum, a male-oriented word which implies confrontation as opposed to discussion. In fact, most of the voices on this issue are male, and they seem to prefer to resolve this issue as they do war - the tone and language unmistakeably hostile. Perhaps it is time to seek civil resolutions - again, for one aggrieved party would that be the Christian thing to do?
Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial
Hi all, I would second this proposal in toto, from George Pinto. It could promote compassion and understanding among people, when out in the open; rather than in a coutroom where only a few people are privy. There is a lot of sense in it. The so called laws of Blasphemy should be repealed all over the world; starting with Muslim and Islamic Countries to begin with, since Islamism is like a dictatorship and Fascist movement and intrinsically so. Fast on their track is the Hindutva fascist program of the RSS and BJP. When this BJP and VHP were asked for a dialogue, some years ago by the Church Authorities in New Delhi, these groups just refused to talk, as their sinister plans would be exposed. When the Popes visit came, these groups insisted a Sadhu be present at the Ceremony of Holy Mass by the Pope as main celebrant. This was so silly as if it could prove anything like all religions are equal. Will these groups make 'such a demand' from Muslim religious? Bloody hypocretes! In the end they only made a fool of themselves. The helpless Sadhu looked and felt like a 'Fish Out of Water' totally lost physically and spirtually! Such is the communally charged atmosphere in India. Wake Up now and arrest this. Nascy Caldeira From: George Pinto georgejpi...@yahoo.com To: Goanet goa...@goanet.org Sent: Monday, 28 May 2012 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial My view is that the Sanal Edamaruku case should not be adjudicated in a court of law but in an open public forum with both sides presenting their views and moderated by an independent person. The Indian courts are clogged enough and emphasis should be on violent crimes, including where real injury of life and limb is suffered like murder, rape, etc. and measurable like financial loss and theft of property, etc. In a democracy, one can make the same arguments in an open public forum, as vigorously and robustly as in a court of law. This can be done in a calm, civilized manner. Indian courts of law which derive their legitimacy from a secular constitution, are still a notch below in matters of truth than an open public discussion of such matters, better settled in the court of public opinion. Imagine if all of India through public forums, television, newspapers engaged in these discussions rather than the narrow confines of a court of law. And Sanal and his accusers would be no less wrong or no less right at the end of such a forum, where the public can make up its own mind after hearing both sides. Towards this end, I would hope the Christian group withdraws its legal case (would that be the Christian thing to do?) and instead makes available a church hall and invites Sanal and his colleagues to an open public discussion about his statements and about miracles, religious offense, Church impropriety, etc. Let each side present its case without fear or favor. The truths which result are no less true than those derived in court, but substantially more valid when derived in the court of public opinion. And yes, I believe the public is free and capable of making up its own mind. That is how democracy should work. George P.S. I have intentionally not used the word debate for such a proposed forum, a male-oriented word which implies confrontation as opposed to discussion. In fact, most of the voices on this issue are male, and they seem to prefer to resolve this issue as they do war - the tone and language unmistakeably hostile. Perhaps it is time to seek civil resolutions - again, for one aggrieved party would that be the Christian thing to do?
Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial
My view is that the Sanal Edamaruku case should not be adjudicated in a court of law but in an open public forum with both sides presenting their views and moderated by an independent person. The Indian courts are clogged enough and emphasis should be on violent crimes, including where real injury of life and limb is suffered like murder, rape, etc. and measurable like financial loss and theft of property, etc. In a democracy, one can make the same arguments in an open public forum, as vigorously and robustly as in a court of law. This can be done in a calm, civilized manner. Indian courts of law which derive their legitimacy from a secular constitution, are still a notch below in matters of truth than an open public discussion of such matters, better settled in the court of public opinion. Imagine if all of India through public forums, television, newspapers engaged in these discussions rather than the narrow confines of a court of law. And Sanal and his accusers would be no less wrong or no less right at the end of such a forum, where the public can make up its own mind after hearing both sides. Towards this end, I would hope the Christian group withdraws its legal case (would that be the Christian thing to do?) and instead makes available a church hall and invites Sanal and his colleagues to an open public discussion about his statements and about miracles, religious offense, Church impropriety, etc. Let each side present its case without fear or favor. The truths which result are no less true than those derived in court, but substantially more valid when derived in the court of public opinion. And yes, I believe the public is free and capable of making up its own mind. That is how democracy should work. George P.S. I have intentionally not used the word debate for such a proposed forum, a male-oriented word which implies confrontation as opposed to discussion. In fact, most of the voices on this issue are male, and they seem to prefer to resolve this issue as they do war - the tone and language unmistakeably hostile. Perhaps it is time to seek civil resolutions - again, for one aggrieved party would that be the Christian thing to do?
Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial
Your rationale is all very good, George, but my gut feeling is that any such discussion would very soon come to an exchange of verbal and physical violence. That which we see on Santosh's private email list (to which I've been added unasked) is only between half-a-dozen folks; imagine what the result would be if you get the whole nation involved in such a discussion in a place where democracy has degenerated into a mobocracy. That's my point of view anyway. Regards, Gabriel From: George Pinto georgejpi...@yahoo.com To: Goanet goa...@goanet.org Sent: Monday, 28 May 2012 5:45 PM Subject: Re: [Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku trial My view is that the Sanal Edamaruku case should not be adjudicated in a court of law but in an open public forum with both sides presenting their views and moderated by an independent person. The Indian courts are clogged enough and emphasis should be on violent crimes, including where real injury of life and limb is suffered like murder, rape, etc. and measurable like financial loss and theft of property, etc. In a democracy, one can make the same arguments in an open public forum, as vigorously and robustly as in a court of law. This can be done in a calm, civilized manner. Indian courts of law which derive their legitimacy from a secular constitution, are still a notch below in matters of truth than an open public discussion of such matters, better settled in the court of public opinion. Imagine if all of India through public forums, television, newspapers engaged in these discussions rather than the narrow confines of a court of law. And Sanal and his accusers would be no less wrong or no less right at the end of such a forum, where the public can make up its own mind after hearing both sides. Towards this end, I would hope the Christian group withdraws its legal case (would that be the Christian thing to do?) and instead makes available a church hall and invites Sanal and his colleagues to an open public discussion about his statements and about miracles, religious offense, Church impropriety, etc. Let each side present its case without fear or favor. The truths which result are no less true than those derived in court, but substantially more valid when derived in the court of public opinion. And yes, I believe the public is free and capable of making up its own mind. That is how democracy should work. George P.S. I have intentionally not used the word debate for such a proposed forum, a male-oriented word which implies confrontation as opposed to discussion. In fact, most of the voices on this issue are male, and they seem to prefer to resolve this issue as they do war - the tone and language unmistakeably hostile. Perhaps it is time to seek civil resolutions - again, for one aggrieved party would that be the Christian thing to do?
Re: [Goanet] “Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!
I am a little confused by Gabe's post. Does he want the offended christian extremists belonging to the CSF to emulate that select group extremist muslims into conducting violence against civil society? Or is he implying that the christian extremists are not as violent as some of the muslim Jihadies and that Sanal should thank his lucky stars that he is still alive. In this post, Gabe is sounding a lot like former goanetter Mario G who would take any opportunity to disparage muslims. Marlon From: Santosh Helekar chimbel...@yahoo.com To: Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994! goanet@lists.goanet.org Sent: Saturday, May 19, 2012 1:13 AM Subject: Re: [Goanet] “Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”! Wouldn't this comment about Muslims in the interview and in the subject line hurt the feelings of Muslims? Here is the rhetorical question in the interview, which insinuates ina public forum that Muslims in general are intolerant: QUOTE Would he have dared to make any uncharitable remarks against the Muslim community? UNQUOTE Please see: http://www.thesundayindian.com/article_print.php?article_id=34385 Perhaps, now Muslims have a reason to file a criminal law suit under the blasphemy law, IPC Section 295A. Cheers, Santosh - Original Message - From: Gabe Menezes gabe.mene...@gmail.com *“Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!* * * http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GHS_kjfMRpY/T7Oy_mkXtcI/AKw/vpCE3dgfGtA/s1600/SundayIndianBishop.jpg * * *Targeting of Edamaruku has created an impression that the Church is intolerant of any * *rationalist viewpoint?* This is incorrect. We are not opposed to rationalist perspectives. In fact we encourage them. We never claimed that the dripping cross in Vile Parle was a miracle. It is quite possible that it has a natural explanation. Edamaruku’s comments were thus unwarranted.
[Goanet] Sanal Edamaruku
From: Marshall Mendonza mmendonz...@gmail.com To: goanet goanet@lists.goanet.org Cc: Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 11:43 AM Subject: [Goanet] Support Sanad Edamaruku T he below poster has made it a habit of embarassing himself on public forums when he sermonises on subjects of which he has zilch knowledge, little insight and no awareness. One can only forgive him for he knows not what he is talking about. Regards, Marshall True. Sanal Edamruku, a self proclaimed ‘Rationalist’ spent several years debunking ‘miracles’ and other beliefs, thereby hurting peoples’ faith, beliefs etc, which is not his business. Just because we can’t see ‘wind or air’ that it isn’t there!! Belief in miracles, superstition, custom, tradition is personal. Now Sanal Edamaruku is accused by Catholic groups in Mumbai of breaking the Indian Penal Code, which outlaws “deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings.” Mr. Edamaruku is facing blasphemy charges after he claimed water dripping from a statue of Christ in Mumbai was not miraculous but the result of a badly plumbed toilet, and designed to make money from visiting pilgrims, but church authority says no money has been collected at the shrine. Edamaruku says “ I believe in absolute freedom of expression in any free society people should have the freedom to ridicule to criticize or to be ridiculed. That should be guaranteed in any civil society,” he said. But he is misusing what he believes to hurt the religious sentiments of others. “This is the first time I have had cases filed against me… I don’t want unexpected people to come and attack me, so only close friends know where to find me,” Mr. Edamaruku told India Real Time. And in this forum, there are some people, first to criticize if Christians speak up. MD
Re: [Goanet] “Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!
Wouldn't this comment about Muslims in the interview and in the subject line hurt the feelings of Muslims? Here is the rhetorical question in the interview, which insinuates ina public forum that Muslims in general are intolerant: QUOTE Would he have dared to make any uncharitable remarks against the Muslim community? UNQUOTE Please see: http://www.thesundayindian.com/article_print.php?article_id=34385 Perhaps, now Muslims have a reason to file a criminal law suit under the blasphemy law, IPC Section 295A. Cheers, Santosh - Original Message - From: Gabe Menezes gabe.mene...@gmail.com *“Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!* * * http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GHS_kjfMRpY/T7Oy_mkXtcI/AKw/vpCE3dgfGtA/s1600/SundayIndianBishop.jpg * * *Targeting of Edamaruku has created an impression that the Church is intolerant of any * *rationalist viewpoint?* This is incorrect. We are not opposed to rationalist perspectives. In fact we encourage them. We never claimed that the dripping cross in Vile Parle was a miracle. It is quite possible that it has a natural explanation. Edamaruku’s comments were thus unwarranted. *So why is the Church and Christian community upset? * We are not against him for expressing his opinion. The community is hurt by his highly derogatory utterances. He has charged the priests of having created the dripping cross to make money. To the best of our knowledge, no money has been collected by any priest. Besides, priests do not build churches. It speaks volumes about his ignorance. He has also made unwarranted statements against the Pope and the Church. *But aren't you overreacting by filing police cases against him? Even Jesus preached tolerance and forgiveness?* The police cases have not been filed by the Church but by Christian association members who are loyal to it. He has no right to hurt other people’s sentiments. He has made these and other unwarranted statements out of ignorance. The least he could do is apologise to the Catholic community. But he has no remorse. He dared to make these remarks only because he knows that Christianity preaches tolerance and so he can get away with it. Would he have dared to make any uncharitable remarks against the Muslim community? *Is there a process in the Church for identifying what is a 'miracle' and what is just a natural phenomenon?* Yes. There is a lengthy scientific process to be undergone before any official pronouncement is made. In this case, the Church did not make any pronouncement. As a rule, the Church is slow to attribute supernatural causes to extra-ordinary phenomenon we observe in life. As far as possible it tries to explain such phenomenon by natural causes. *Do you think Edamaruku made such comments for cheap publicity? * I do not want to attribute any motive. May be he felt that he was launching a crusade. Whatever be his motive, the approach was unacceptable. COMMENT: A copy and paste job from The Hindu -- DEV BOREM KORUM Gabe Menezes.
[Goanet] “Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!
*“Sanal Edamaruku would not have dared to offend Muslims”!* * * http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-GHS_kjfMRpY/T7Oy_mkXtcI/AKw/vpCE3dgfGtA/s1600/SundayIndianBishop.jpg * * *Targeting of Edamaruku has created an impression that the Church is intolerant of any * *rationalist viewpoint?* This is incorrect. We are not opposed to rationalist perspectives. In fact we encourage them. We never claimed that the dripping cross in Vile Parle was a miracle. It is quite possible that it has a natural explanation. Edamaruku’s comments were thus unwarranted. *So why is the Church and Christian community upset? * We are not against him for expressing his opinion. The community is hurt by his highly derogatory utterances. He has charged the priests of having created the dripping cross to make money. To the best of our knowledge, no money has been collected by any priest. Besides, priests do not build churches. It speaks volumes about his ignorance. He has also made unwarranted statements against the Pope and the Church. *But aren't you overreacting by filing police cases against him? Even Jesus preached tolerance and forgiveness?* The police cases have not been filed by the Church but by Christian association members who are loyal to it. He has no right to hurt other people’s sentiments. He has made these and other unwarranted statements out of ignorance. The least he could do is apologise to the Catholic community. But he has no remorse. He dared to make these remarks only because he knows that Christianity preaches tolerance and so he can get away with it. Would he have dared to make any uncharitable remarks against the Muslim community? *Is there a process in the Church for identifying what is a 'miracle' and what is just a natural phenomenon?* Yes. There is a lengthy scientific process to be undergone before any official pronouncement is made. In this case, the Church did not make any pronouncement. As a rule, the Church is slow to attribute supernatural causes to extra-ordinary phenomenon we observe in life. As far as possible it tries to explain such phenomenon by natural causes. *Do you think Edamaruku made such comments for cheap publicity? * I do not want to attribute any motive. May be he felt that he was launching a crusade. Whatever be his motive, the approach was unacceptable. COMMENT: A copy and paste job from The Hindu -- DEV BOREM KORUM Gabe Menezes.
