What's all the hubub, Bub?
Mar. 28th, 2006 08:03 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
lurkittyWhy do mice have small balls?
Thats one of my favorite stupid jokes because it preys upon peoples assumptions. It works because it exposes their prejudgement of me and their own dirty mind. The answer? Because not many mice know how to dance. See? dumb joke.
I have been thinking about the case of Mr. Abdul Rahman for a few days now, and the international outcry at his plight. He is to be commended for sticking to his principles in the face of death. The international community is to be commended for coming to his defense and the defense of freedom of religion.
But one thing has been niggling at the back of my mind.
You see, Mr. Rahman was not prosecuted, nor convicted for that matter, for becoming a Christian, despite how the media couches it. He was convicted of apostasy. He became an infidel. He was a Muslim, and he converted. To convert from Islam to any other religion is against Sharia law.
I wonder if Mr. Rahman would have received the worldwide media attention had he converted to, say, Buddhism? Would anyone have sounded the rallying cry if he had been a Satanist?
This case received the attention it did because it was perceived to be a case against Christianity, not religious freedom or democracy. I'm glad Mr. Rahman escaped with his life. But it was only because the mice were dancing to the right tune.
Thats one of my favorite stupid jokes because it preys upon peoples assumptions. It works because it exposes their prejudgement of me and their own dirty mind. The answer? Because not many mice know how to dance. See? dumb joke.
I have been thinking about the case of Mr. Abdul Rahman for a few days now, and the international outcry at his plight. He is to be commended for sticking to his principles in the face of death. The international community is to be commended for coming to his defense and the defense of freedom of religion.
But one thing has been niggling at the back of my mind.
You see, Mr. Rahman was not prosecuted, nor convicted for that matter, for becoming a Christian, despite how the media couches it. He was convicted of apostasy. He became an infidel. He was a Muslim, and he converted. To convert from Islam to any other religion is against Sharia law.
I wonder if Mr. Rahman would have received the worldwide media attention had he converted to, say, Buddhism? Would anyone have sounded the rallying cry if he had been a Satanist?
This case received the attention it did because it was perceived to be a case against Christianity, not religious freedom or democracy. I'm glad Mr. Rahman escaped with his life. But it was only because the mice were dancing to the right tune.
