PDA

View Full Version : Censorship in Australia



Arhetton
19th March 09, 07:56 AM
So "The Great Australian Firewall" is up and active.

Can you guess what one of the first websites that it is blocking is?

Wikileaks.

Apparently they were blocked for publishing a list of banned websites in denmark (wtf?), and also published the list of blacklisted sites in Australia.

Whats that service that sarcastro posted which emails you a picture of the webpage you're trying to access?

SFGOON
19th March 09, 08:01 AM
Obviously, the only solution here is to burn your entire country/freakshow down.

Down to the gwound.

Arhetton
19th March 09, 08:05 AM
don't worry I'm not exactly taking this one lying down.

The first thing I'm trying to do is find a way around the firewall and see what other sites they blocked.

Various free web proxy services don't appear to be working.

Arhetton
19th March 09, 08:17 AM
Well to access wikileaks is actually pretty simple, I found I can just use the google cache.

It looks like the fagbots who blocked wikileaks unblocked it at midnight eastern central time.

theres also some interesting paper releases which have popped up too - it looks like this will be heavily reported in the media tomorrow.

We will see if the fourth estate is still doing its job.

In the meantime, I'll still have to find ways around this piece of shit.

elipson
19th March 09, 11:51 AM
Hotspot?

Phrost
19th March 09, 03:16 PM
I just donated $10 to Wikileaks.

Shame on you Australians for letting your elected officials do this without burning their fucking buildings to the ground.

Aphid Jones
19th March 09, 03:25 PM
Censorship on the Australian internet? Isn't that like someone dumping nuclear waste into a fishtank?

Zendetta
19th March 09, 03:28 PM
I just donated $10 to Wikileaks.

Yo, Boss: I was just thinking that we need a thread on Net Neutrality.


Shame on you Australians for letting your elected officials do this without burning their fucking buildings to the ground.

Easy, Tiger. You need to be hanging Dick Cheney by the neck before you start giving other countries shit.

Aphid Jones
19th March 09, 03:31 PM
Obviously, the only solution here is to burn your entire country/freakshow down.

Down to the gwound.
You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.

HappyOldGuy
19th March 09, 03:32 PM
Yo, Boss: I was just thinking that we need a thread on Net Neutrality.


I don't think our words mean the same thing? :confused:

But
a) wikileaks rocks
b) the aussies are silly for letting this get this far
c) we have done silly things too, and our aussie friends didn't hesitate to tell us so for our own good

Zendetta
19th March 09, 03:35 PM
I don't think our words mean the same thing?

Separate issue, it was just on my mind right before I saw this thread.


c) we have done silly things too, and our aussie friends didn't hesitate to tell us so for our own good

Dear God, Man. Next you'll be saying we need to listen to Kanucks too!

Harpy
19th March 09, 04:20 PM
Arhetton - I had no idea.

What can we do now to get things changed (or is it too late)? Or is it only possible to circumvent the firewall?

socratic
19th March 09, 05:40 PM
They instituted the firewall? FUCK. I thought that it didn't pass!?

Phrost
19th March 09, 06:53 PM
Torches and pitchforks, hermano.

Cullion
19th March 09, 06:56 PM
Wikileaks is the source of some of my anger about what Britain has become.

From this point on, let's just help a dude get around that firewall. Fuck censorship.
Freeborn people have a duty to subvert this kind of thing.

Virus
19th March 09, 08:52 PM
I can get onto wikileaks.

Cullion
19th March 09, 09:10 PM
Tell the OP how to do it then.

Arhetton
19th March 09, 09:41 PM
as I said, the ACMA has already removed wikileaks from their list of blacklisted sites.

They did it at midnight last night, probably before this became a major furor. I know because I was online all of last night trying to access wikileaks and found it started working again after 12:00am.

There was only one article in the paper about it this morning, on page 3 of the SMH.


http://www.smh.com.au/national/dentists-website-on-leaked-blacklist-20090319-93cl.html

I also found a list of the blacklisted sites, most of them appear to be pornographic and hate sites. Some of the sites are IP addresses only.

http://88.80.13.160.nyud.net/leak/acma-secret-blacklist-aug-2008.txt

Apparently hosting a link to wikileaks can have you charged $11,000 per day for the offence...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/18/aussie_firewall_wikileaks/


The Great Australian Firewall has claimed another victim - some pages of Wikileaks have been added to the blacklist of websites which Australians are not allowed to look at. The reason for the block is that Wikileaks published a list of websites banned by the Danish government. Australian websites which link to the pages face the threat of a A$11,000 fine.


The move is part of a trial masterminded by Communications minister Stephen Conroy to test technology to block sites considered unsuitable for Australians. The idea is that there will be two lists of approved websites - one for children and one for adults...

Arhetton
19th March 09, 10:07 PM
So virus lets pretend you have a website that rationally debates the legitimacy of certain religions.

And some people find your website 'intolerant' or 'offensive'.

See where I'm going?

HappyOldGuy
19th March 09, 10:15 PM
Wait a sec. Somebody down under help me out here.

According to this...

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/03/02/oz_firewall_finished/

The legislation authorizing this whole mess still hasn't been passed and is pretty much dead in the water.

So what possible right does this douchebag have to go and block peoples internet access "as a test."

syberia
19th March 09, 10:23 PM
The move is part of a trial masterminded by Communications minister Stephen Conroy to test technology
Does this mean this is trial only? Or is this staying up? If its only a trial i doubt it will get much further.


to block sites considered unsuitable for Australians.
The idea is that there will be two lists of approved websites - one for children and one for adults...
Suitable my fucking ass. I decide whats suitable for me. This is not cool. Not cool at all. I had no idea this was going on, clearly i dont read enough news.

On another note, i dont use Wikileaks. Never even been there. And i imagine most of the sites i freaquent will still be accesible. But thats not the point, really.

Virus
19th March 09, 10:44 PM
So virus lets pretend you have a website that rationally debates the legitimacy of certain religions.

And some people find your website 'intolerant' or 'offensive'.

See where I'm going?

I see where you're going. I don't know why you think I can't see where you're going. Stephen Conroy is a Christian and it wouldn't surprise me if he's motivated by puritanism.

Arhetton
19th March 09, 11:04 PM
its just a figure of speech.

I just thought you would be interested in the topic, was trying to engage you that was all.

Virus
20th March 09, 12:27 AM
If anything is important to me, it's the right to offend religious dickheads.

DAYoung
20th March 09, 12:32 AM
Jesus forgives you, Virus.

bob
20th March 09, 01:41 AM
The legislation hasn't passed yet. That list is only the proposed one I believe and the govt is denying that it is the real list.

Nevertheless this blows and sucks simultaneously. I will be making it clear to my local member that no government that passes this legislation will ever get a vote from me. I will also do everything in my power to break this fucker if it ever does go up.

Methinks anonymous may have another playmate.

BTW the Danes already have this don't they? Ian?

bob
20th March 09, 01:43 AM
Actually I'm not sure if the legislation has passed or not, but the wall is proposed for later this year.

socratic
20th March 09, 05:08 AM
China has a version running 24/7. I don't know about the rest of the world.

Truculent Sheep
20th March 09, 07:24 AM
Australia is run by a government that's run out of things to say so is trying to stop anyone else saying anything. It's somehow fitting, don't you think?

Seriously, arse-fuck Rudd with an Echidna. The man is a statist turd monger.

Invoke the spirit of Fred Emery - he'd know what to do.

Aphid Jones
20th March 09, 12:18 PM
Come on, Australians. Let's be real here.


You guys are going to let this legislation slide by, will find some easy way around it, and then the game starts all over again.

Haven't you figured out the pattern yet?

EuropIan
25th March 09, 07:22 AM
The legislation hasn't passed yet. That list is only the proposed one I believe and the govt is denying that it is the real list.

Nevertheless this blows and sucks simultaneously. I will be making it clear to my local member that no government that passes this legislation will ever get a vote from me. I will also do everything in my power to break this fucker if it ever does go up.

Methinks anonymous may have another playmate.

BTW the Danes already have this don't they? Ian?
Yes they have.

I can honestly say that it is harder to watch hulu here than to bypass this 'great' national firewall.

That said the only site that I use on that list is thepiratebay.

The rest is cp and sites whose names has been confused with cp so.. pass.

danno
25th March 09, 08:19 AM
i'm assuming that it will be pretty easy to get around? i'm not terribly concerned about how it will affect my internets.

but i am really pissed off that they would even consider this. i can't believe it's got this far. the internet is one thing that shouldn't be touched by my government.

i still prefer the current government to our last one by quite a measure, but jesus bloody wept, this is so disappointing.

danno
25th March 09, 08:24 AM
america fucks up - countries get invaded, massive casualties, global economic crisis.

australia fucks up - wikileaks is down for a couple of days. CP is harder to find.

but... we deserve to be burned to the ground?

EuropIan
25th March 09, 08:24 AM
I think it was very assholeish to sneak in wikileaks and makes me want to question your government's motives as a whole.

The whole operation is still retarded.

danno
25th March 09, 08:28 AM
I think it was very assholeish to sneak in wikileaks and makes me want to question your government's motives as a whole.

The whole operation is still retarded.

i feel like someone has touched me in the bad place while i was sleeping and took a photo.

EuropIan
25th March 09, 08:36 AM
i feel like someone has touched me in the bad place while i was sleeping and took a photo.
That's Australia's new pay site.

Yiktin Voxbane
25th March 09, 08:51 AM
Danno + rep Sir .

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Ian G.R. again.

Harpy
25th March 09, 07:06 PM
i still prefer the current government to our last one by quite a measure, but jesus bloody wept, this is so disappointing.

Yes and no. Anyway, do you think this is some Chinese conspiracy cooked up with Rudd?

danno
25th March 09, 10:50 PM
the fact that he speaks mandarin is fantastic imo.

i'm quite happy with him apart from this firewall caper.

Harpy
25th March 09, 11:17 PM
Hey I voted for him, his language skills are definitely impressive.

I still think the Firewall has something to do with the Chinese-Australian relationship. Wait and see.

Arhetton
26th March 09, 01:00 AM
yeah his language skills were impressive enough to speak with a senior figure in the Chinese Communist Party (the chief of propaganda) the other day.

I'm unimpressed with both of the parties. They're both full of shit.

Costello inflated the base money supply 7% yoy - thats how the coalition built a 'surplus' - they stole peoples savings. Massively inflating a housing bubble in australia - and now whats labour doing? desperately trying to keep that bubble from bursting (lower interest rates, FHBG, cash handouts etc).

and if I hear 'global financial crisis' one moer fucking time... We did stupid shit in australia too, and its time to pay the piper.

/rant

syberia
26th March 09, 08:28 AM
They're both full of shit.

They're all polititians, what did you expect?

danno
26th March 09, 07:10 PM
yeah his language skills were impressive enough to speak with a senior figure in the Chinese Communist Party (the chief of propaganda) the other day.

our relations with china are extremely important. we need to look after that for our own sake regardless. doesn't mean i like how china behaves.


I'm unimpressed with both of the parties. They're both full of shit.

Costello inflated the base money supply 7% yoy - thats how the coalition built a 'surplus' - they stole peoples savings. Massively inflating a housing bubble in australia - and now whats labour doing? desperately trying to keep that bubble from bursting (lower interest rates, FHBG, cash handouts etc).

i actually think that both the last government and the current one have run the country in a satisfactory way. my opposition to the liberals is more ideological than anything else at this stage. still that's quite an important difference to me.

just wondering, who did you vote for?


We did stupid shit in australia too, and its time to pay the piper.

yes, but it's mainly the global problem is it not? i thought we were dealing with it better than most other countries.

Cullion
26th March 09, 07:14 PM
Aside from wikileaks, the other stuff that was banned of a political/social nature were mostly pro-life sites as far as I can tell.

Phrost
26th March 09, 07:20 PM
That's damning. Political discourse, thought, our expression should never be censored or impeded.

Cullion
26th March 09, 07:27 PM
No, I totally agree. At this point, I'd like to offer my help to any Aussie trying to get at a site they find to be blocked. Tell me what you're looking for and I'll try to find a proxy that lets you through or just copy and paste the text to you myself if the page can be reached from the UK.

We have a firewall in the UK too. Hopefully this can be a reciprocal arrangement.

It goes without saying that I won't help with child porn or snuff. Other forms of porn I don't have any objection too but I won't prioritise my time for it very high. Something of a political/social/current affairs nature I'll deal with as fast as I can as soon as the request comes to my attention.

Harpy
26th March 09, 07:28 PM
www.nunsonhorses.com.au (http://www.nunsonhorses.com.au)

Please find it for me.

Cullion
26th March 09, 07:30 PM
That's disgusting. 5 Hail Marys. And then birch yourself whilst reading Deuteronomy, witch.

Phrost
26th March 09, 07:49 PM
I'm actually going to see about the feasibility of starting up a free proxy service for people in Australia to bypass this.

I didn't want to visit your continent anyway.

Cullion
26th March 09, 07:51 PM
I don't think you should turn you back on a place because they have a broken government.

There are lots of cool Australians on this site for example. Most of the Australians I've met in the UK have been outgoing, down-to-earth people who've impressed me with their zest for life and enthusiasm for sports that the 'motherland' I live in would do well to recapture.

danno
26th March 09, 07:53 PM
even if none of the sites i visit are the ones getting blocked, i'd use your service just out of principle.

Harpy
26th March 09, 07:54 PM
I didn't want to visit your continent anyway.

Considering you have more than enough BS where you live, probably a good idea you don't infect us further.

Phrost
26th March 09, 08:00 PM
even if none of the sites i visit are the ones getting blocked, i'd use your service just out of principle.

Thanks. This is something I feel as strongly about as I did when I put together the site that would become Bullshido.

It fucking pisses me off when free speech is stomped on. And as an English-speaking nation with strong cultural ties, this hits too close to home.

If people don't rise up and start raising hell when something like this gets pushed though, they'll consider it a mandate to try and push things even further down that slope.

Cullion
26th March 09, 08:39 PM
Yes they will. The UK is the template for how bad things can get in an English speaking democracy IMHO. Think of us as a warning, in all things political.

danno
27th March 09, 12:12 AM
everyone i know is pretty pissed about it. they're signing petitions and whatnot.

though, this is getting a lot less attention from the public than the industrial relations laws brought in by the last government, which was one of the main reasons they lost the last election.

i doubt most people know what is really going on, or even what a firewall is. a lot of them might even think it's a good idea.

danno
27th March 09, 01:21 AM
v1-IZxX0lMY

watch the entire episode here:

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s2521164.htm

EDIT - it goes for just under and hour, but i really recommend watching that entire show if you want a good understanding of what is happening here.

DAYoung
27th March 09, 01:46 AM
The woman second from the left is our publisher, Danno.

danno
27th March 09, 03:22 AM
oh shit! it didn't even click when she was introduced.

DAYoung
27th March 09, 03:42 AM
She said "may a thousand ideas bloom".

Classic.

Phrost
27th March 09, 08:02 AM
Maybe it's just early but I couldn't get past the fact that the panel had a female muslim sociologist on it.

I can only handle so much cognitive dissonance at 8 in the morning.

partyboy
27th March 09, 10:10 AM
Hackers Deface Aussie Censorship Board's Website

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/images/2009/03/26/picture_14.png

Australia's official online censorship board's web page was offline Thursday, hours after hackers hijacked it to protest revelations the government was going to require ISPs to block public access to thousands of websites, many of which aren't obscene.

Anonymous hackers defaced the Censorship Board's homepage -- classification.gov.au -- and restated the board's public message in a chilling and humorous tone.

"We are part of an elaborate deception from China to control and sheepify the nation, to protect the children," one part of the five-sentence message read, according to a screenshot. "All opposers must hate children, and therefore must be killed with a (sic) large melons…."

The defacement, first reported by The Register, came a week after WikiLeaks exposed a secret blacklist of web pages the Australian government is considering permanently filtering from the internet.

The list of some 2,395 web pages includes the usual suspects of sites pertaining to child pornography, extreme violence and even bestiality.

However, not all the sites are offensive, and include links to rank-and-file pornography, YouTube videos, poker sites, WikiLeaks entries and even URLs to a Queensland dentist and dog-boarding kennel.

http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2009/03/hackers-deface.html

--------------------------------------


brilliant.

danno
27th March 09, 05:54 PM
for what it's worth, i should have pointed out before that the discussion i posted was on a TV station funded entirely by the government.

Phrost
27th March 09, 08:38 PM
Even 12 hours later I'm still dumbfounded by the fact that there's an actual female muslim sociologist that isn't a Saturday Night Live character or part of a Chaser prank.

danno
28th March 09, 04:37 PM
don't worry, she gets dipped in acid by her father every time she appears on television or does lectures.

Cullion
28th March 09, 04:48 PM
Phrost, do you really believe that all muslims are backwards incestuous pakistani hicks or demented spoiled Saudis looking for a purpose in life and proof of their manhood through Wahabi fundamentalism ?

Meok
12th April 09, 12:18 AM
Even 12 hours later I'm still dumbfounded by the fact that there's an actual female muslim sociologist that isn't a Saturday Night Live character or part of a Chaser prank.
Take a visit to a few Australian university particularly in Melbourne or Sydney. You might be dumbfounded for quite a while. A muslim female university student? What has this world come to?

Phrost
12th April 09, 12:39 PM
Phrost, do you really believe that all muslims are backwards incestuous pakistani hicks or demented spoiled Saudis looking for a purpose in life and proof of their manhood through Wahabi fundamentalism ?

You're missing the point.

It takes a tragic level of suspension of disbelief to fit being a Muslim, a Woman, and a Sociologist all into the same world view.

It would be a lot like:

a Jewish SS Captain
a Fundamentalist Christian evolutionary biologist
an OT3 Psychiatrist.
a M.D. nutritionist and certified fitness trainer with the NAAFA
a devout Catholic, Product Manager for Trojan Condoms
the Human Rights Coordinator for the Pol Pot regime
Chancellor of the MBA program at Karl Marx UniversityWhat do those things all have in common? They should fucking know better.

Islam is an abominable religion with regards to how women are fundamentally viewed and treated. Religion itself is irrational, but there's no excuse for believing, in the year 2009, that women should be forced to cover their heads and/or other body parts. The reasons for doing this are even more ridiculous, which include the implication (or outright statement) that men cannot help but rape a woman who isn't modestly covered.

A goddamn sociologist should fucking know better.

And don't give me some bullshit cultural relativism. I realize that there are hundreds of thousands of female muslims with degrees. The issue here is that someone has a degree in a subject which, unless they're just frantically delusional, should fundamentally undermine their faith to such a degree that at the very least, she wouldn't be caving to anachronistic traditions and blatant misogyny.

HappyOldGuy
12th April 09, 12:45 PM
You're missing the point.

It takes a tragic level of suspension of disbelief to fit being a Muslim, a Woman, and a Sociologist all into the same world view.


I will note that you are none of those things, so your expertise in those areas is somewhat suspect. I have to admit that I don't personally know any female muslim sociologists, however female muslim computer programmers are a dime a dozen around here, and they don't seem to have much difficulty with programming in c# instead of holy arabic.

Phrost
12th April 09, 01:16 PM
I will note that you are none of those things, so your expertise in those areas is somewhat suspect. I have to admit that I don't personally know any female muslim sociologists, however female muslim computer programmers are a dime a dozen around here, and they don't seem to have much difficulty with programming in c# instead of holy arabic.

You can post better than that. You don't have to be a doctor to know operating with a hatchet is probably a bad idea. Nor do you have to have tits to know that Islam is brutally repressive to women. Your post fails on several levels.

Computer Science is not an area of study which is supposed to involve objective analysis of cultures and impart knowledge that should enlighten a rational person with a vagina to the fact that believing in Islam is pretty fucking stupid unless you're just a submissive or masochist.

Phrost
12th April 09, 01:18 PM
I'm off to go get my degree in Modern Feminism. My thesis will argue why a society of women and eunuchs, run by a religious oligarchy, would be better for the world.

Oh wait, I'm not a fucking deluded hypocrite trying to reconcile retarded beliefs like this twit.

Cullion
12th April 09, 01:31 PM
You're missing the point.

It takes a tragic level of suspension of disbelief to fit being a Muslim, a Woman, and a Sociologist all into the same world view.

You've been drinking black coffee with Mountain Dew chasers again, haven't you?

What's mutually exclusive about being a female muslim and being a sociologist?

What happens to your world view if she constructs a sociological argument that the strictures which apply to her as an Islamic female are good things ?



Islam is an abominable religion with regards to how women are fundamentally viewed and treated. Religion itself is irrational, but there's no excuse for believing, in the year 2009, that women should be forced to cover their heads and/or other body parts. The reasons for doing this are even more ridiculous, which include the implication (or outright statement) that men cannot help but rape a woman who isn't modestly covered.

What about Islamic women who like dressing that way?

You seem to think that all women naturally want to dress in a sexy and provocative way and would only don hijab if threatened or somehow coerced into doing so. That's not real though.



A goddamn sociologist should fucking know better.

Why? Do you really believe that everybody who studies society will reach the same conclusions as a western Libertarian ?

Most sociologists I've met tend to range from left-leaning liberals to avowed marxists.



And don't give me some bullshit cultural relativism. I realize that there are hundreds of thousands of female muslims with degrees. The issue here is that someone has a degree in a subject which, unless they're just frantically delusional, should fundamentally undermine their faith to such a degree that at the very least, she wouldn't be caving to anachronistic traditions and blatant misogyny.

Oh, there's no cultural relativism going on here.

Phrost, tell me what you know about what the Qu'ran says about the education of women and how they should be treated.

HappyOldGuy
12th April 09, 01:32 PM
Number of female prime ministers/presidents of islamic countries 5
Number of female US presidents?

Possibly the veil isn't the big deal that you think it is?
Possibly the things you identify as characteristics of islam are actually characteristics of arab tribal society?

Cullion
12th April 09, 01:40 PM
^ this

Phrost, you do realise how many islamic women who take the hijab voluntarily think that western women who display their bodies are being brainwashed by a grossly materialistic society into humiliating themselves and displaying themselves like a piece of meat, right?

I mean, I know which approach I prefer, but I'm not parochial or dumb enough to think that everybody who disagrees with me has been the victim of some kind of brainwashing or physical intimidation.

Phrost
12th April 09, 02:02 PM
I fully accept that people will rationalize just about anything if it makes their lives easier and especially when they're culturally indoctrinated to see it as a norm.

That doesn't make it any less fucking stupid or contradictory, from an objective standpoint.

Cullion
12th April 09, 02:06 PM
The problem here is that you don't seem to know what the Qu'ran actually has to say about the treatment of women and are assuming that mistreatment of women you see in some middle eastern cultures is a product of Islam, rather than something that exists alongside it, sometimes in direct counter to what the Qu'ran has to say on the subject.

HappyOldGuy
12th April 09, 02:07 PM
What exactly is your objective measure?

Phrost
12th April 09, 02:09 PM
Phrost, you do realise how many islamic women who take the hijab voluntarily think that western women who display their bodies are being brainwashed by a grossly materialistic society into humiliating themselves and displaying themselves like a piece of meat, right?

Which is why we see dozens of modest atheist women wearing hijabs too; it's not a religious thing after all.



I mean, I know which approach I prefer, but I'm not parochial or dumb enough to think that everybody who disagrees with me has been the victim of some kind of brainwashing or physical intimidation.

Did I say everyone? Religion is stupid. Religious people do stupid things for stupid reasons. You'd expect someone with a freaking degree, and one in a subject that specifically involves analysis of the things people do and the reasons why the do them, to be a bit... well... not stupid.

Now if you were going to argue that she wears a hijab because she's fucking ugly and uses Islam as a justification for it, I'd understand that. That would be a rational decision.

Maybe it's because I have an idealistic respect for what education, especially a university should be, that when I see such glaring contradictions it pisses me off. It's no different than how you'd expect a biologist who supports "young earth" creationism to not be invited to speak on a blue ribbon panel about the latest discoveries in the field.

Phrost
12th April 09, 02:20 PM
The problem here is that you don't seem to know what the Qu'ran actually has to say about the treatment of women and are assuming that mistreatment of women you see in some middle eastern cultures is a product of Islam, rather than something that exists alongside it, sometimes in direct counter to what the Qu'ran has to say on the subject.

Bullshit. The Bible doesn't say anything about stem cells, yet Christians take up a specific, church-driven position on the subject.

Islam is both a religion and a culture; any attempts at separating the two are almost always done in an intellectually dishonest manner.

Also from the Koran:

Menstruation is a sickness. Don't have sex with menstruating women. 2:222 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#222)
Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like. 2:223 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#223)
A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#282)
Males are to inherit twice that of females. 4:11 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#11)
Lewd women are to be confined to their houses until death. 4:15 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#15)
Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women. Refuse to have sex with women from whom you fear rebellion, and scourge them. 4:34 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#34)
When it's time to pray and you have just used the toilet or touched a woman, be sure to wash up. If you can't find any water, just rub some dirt on yourself. 5:6 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/5/index.htm#6)
Women must cover themselves when in public. 33:59 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/33/index.htm#59)
Your wives and children are your enemies. They are to you only a temptation. 64:14-15 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/64/index.htm#14)
Allah's rules for divorcing wives that have not yet reached puberty. 65:4 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/65/index.htm#4)
PBUH? STFU.

HappyOldGuy
12th April 09, 02:28 PM
Bullshit. The Bible doesn't say anything about stem cells, yet Christians take up a specific, church-driven position on the subject..

Really?

http://archives.umc.org/interior.asp?ptid=4&mid=6560
http://www.americancatholic.org/NEWS/StemCell/ask_stemcell.asp
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_62380_ENG_HTM.htm

Cullion
12th April 09, 02:36 PM
Bullshit.

Also from the Koran:
[LIST]
Menstruation is a sickness. Don't have sex with menstruating women. 2:222 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#222)


That's part of Orthodox Judaism too. Do you feel angry when you see female Jewish sociologists on TV?



Have sex with your women whenever and as often as you like. 2:223 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#223)


This is what the verse actually says:-

"Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad)."

Of course, in anti-religion black coffee and crack-smoking land, this is clearly a commandment to rape the shit out of your wive(s) until your pee-pee bleeds.

Phrost, have a read of this Islamic view of popular misconceptions about Islam:-

http://www.submission.org/women/mis.html

Phrost
12th April 09, 02:50 PM
That's part of Orthodox Judaism too. Do you feel angry when you see female Jewish sociologists on TV?



This is what the verse actually says:-

"Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad)."

Of course, in anti-religion black coffee and crack-smoking land, this is clearly a commandment to rape the shit out of your wive(s) until your pee-pee bleeds.

Phrost, have a read of this Islamic view of popular misconceptions about Islam:-

http://www.submission.org/women/mis.html

I would have the exact same problem with an Orthodox/Fundamentalist of any religion that purported to be a Sociologist.

Cullion
12th April 09, 02:54 PM
What about if they're just a little bit religious, is that OK then?

How religious are people allowed to be before you think we should revoke their Ph.Ds?

Phrost
12th April 09, 02:56 PM
You're taking my "that's stupid" to the extreme of "let's lynch them".

Cullion
12th April 09, 03:01 PM
Have you read the Islamic refutation to what you believe is being taught by Islam, rather than local tribal customs yet?

Phrost
12th April 09, 03:06 PM
No, and I honestly wouldn't read it any more than an apologist diatribe in favor of Christianity's nonsense either.

How many tribal customs in tropical Indonesia prescribed for the wearing of headscarves or wearing extensive amounts of clothing?

Cullion
12th April 09, 03:08 PM
So what you're saying, when presented with a refutation of your assertions about a religion, by members of that religion who've given detailed arguments supported by scripture and explanation of the Islamic legal system is :-

'nuh-uh, ain't gonna read no mooslim propaganda, I can jes' tell when something is evil?'

Bravo.

Phrost
12th April 09, 03:17 PM
No, what I'm saying is that there's no point in taking seriously a website as an objective, rational source when this is their header image:

http://www.submission.org/images/r2_mid.jpg

any more than it is worth taking the word of a person who believes in faeries or demons. Their entire world view is corrupted from the beginning having been founded upon the fact that it centers on the existence of the supernatural.

And how about that Indonesia? How many headscarves were in play there, in that culture, before Islam swept in?

Islam is a fucking culture.

Cullion
12th April 09, 05:04 PM
Phrost, you're not actually interested in learning anything here. You're actually refusing to read something that may be instructive because 'it's the work of the enemy'. That's absurd and I hereby revoke your status as a 'Bright'.

Meok
12th April 09, 06:11 PM
How many tribal customs in tropical Indonesia prescribed for the wearing of headscarves or wearing extensive amounts of clothing?

Customs can be transmitted. That said there are plenty of muslim women who don't wear a hijab, it depends where you are. Compare Iran and Turkey, both countries with predominantly muslim populations. Different countries can have different views on the hijab.

Cullion
12th April 09, 06:56 PM
But Phrost knows they don't have the real Islam. He just knows.

Phrost
12th April 09, 10:31 PM
You are arguing that the hijab is a cultural, not religious requirement. Indonesia disproves this.

Meok
12th April 09, 11:30 PM
You are arguing that the hijab is a cultural, not religious requirement. Indonesia disproves this.

When I said customs can be transmitted that includes any customs around hijab. That shouldn't be surprising since so many Arab muslims travelled to Indonesia. The origin of the hijab can still be middle eastern culture, religous or not, even if it is practiced in Indonesia. This is just like Arabic influence on the language and music. The hijab being a foriegn influence in Indonesia is no comment on it's religousity.

That is all beside the point when you consider that many muslim women do not wear a hijab. Certainly in some views of Islam you will have the hijab or more cover as a requirement. Often this is becomes more of a legal requirement/political stance rather than simply muslims deciding their own faith and practice; see the Iranian revolution.

However there's plenty more of relaxed views where hijab is the choice of the wearer, and many of those women do not wear one and many do. It can get to the point that wearing a hijab is actively discouraged by many muslims such as in Turkey, Tunisia and Morroco.

EuropIan
13th April 09, 04:16 AM
You are all chasing a goddamned red herring with this stupid hijab shit.


The hijab was originally a purely cultural thing and later on was partly assimilated into muslim culture. However, it is important to note that the hijab is a poor example of suppression of women in Islam because it is not always mandatory (see e.g. attaturk's Turkey).

This leads to one of the problems when critiqueing Islam. The pursuit of "t3h re4l 1Sl4m": the overused tactic of moving goalposts.

So, is Islam fundamentally sexist? I think so, in the same way Judaeism and Christianity are.
Is Islam even moreso? That depends on the context; the problem arises when you try to pin down and compare specific examples.

Cullion
13th April 09, 04:26 AM
You are arguing that the hijab is a cultural, not religious requirement. Indonesia disproves this.

Central Americans speak Spanish. Christianity was spread by the Spanish. Ergo, speaking spanish is a religious thing.

See what you just did there ?

bob
13th April 09, 04:36 AM
However, it is important to note that the hijab is a poor example of suppression of women in Islam because it is not always mandatory (see e.g. attaturk's Turkey).



Wasn't the de-hijabing of Turkey a move specifically designed to dissociate the country from Islam and proclaim its secularity?

EuropIan
13th April 09, 04:42 AM
Wasn't the de-hijabing of Turkey a move specifically designed to dissociate the country from Islam and proclaim its secularity?
yes, but they wear it anyway. When the thing becomes a goddamned fashion item it is not religious. In my own opinion, of course.

My mom pointed out to me that in the old days everyone was wearing a goddamned scarf.

HappyOldGuy
13th April 09, 10:40 AM
My mom pointed out to me that in the old days everyone was wearing a goddamned scarf.

And yes, for modesty purposes. Where I went to church as a kid, women were expected to keep their heads covered.

Phrost
13th April 09, 11:07 AM
Central Americans speak Spanish. Christianity was spread by the Spanish. Ergo, speaking spanish is a religious thing.

See what you just did there ?

Not even remotely related.

Christ, what's with the epidemic of fuzzy logic here lately?

Indonesian women only wear hijabs because of Islam. Non-muslim Indonesian women generally don't wear hijabs. You're grasping at straws.

All of the Abrahamic religions are fundamentally oppressive to women in theory. It's just that Islam happens to be significantly more oppressive in practice as well.

Cram your fucking relativism up your ass sideways. It's not that Christianity or Judaism are better, they're just less bad.

Cullion
13th April 09, 11:17 AM
No Phrost, you still don't get it.

A religion and a culture artefact can travel together. You're confusing association with causality.

But what's the point? you don't even read detailed explanations when offered them because 'tis the work of the enemy'.

When confronted with evidence counter to your inaccurate worldview (i.e. the existence of a female muslim academic) you went into throbbing-vein cognitive dissonance.

Too much caffeine Phrost. Too much caffeine.

Phrost
13th April 09, 12:26 PM
Dude, you're making assumptions about my positions on things, based on... more assumptions.

Your timeline of events doesn't even correspond to reality.

1. I posted a casual observation about how it was stupid for a female sociologist to be a Muslim, given Islam's documented history of oppressing women.

2. Dipshits jump on me about completely unrelated shit including an implication that I'd somehow be surprised that there were female muslims with degrees (wtf?)

3. From there we go to you posting an argument from a Pro-Islam site as if it's a valid explanation of anything. What's next, links to a pro-KKK site explaining why interracial marriage is bad?

4. Thread continues to derail with more unrelated bullshit because some of you bumblefucks don't get the fact that Religion is Culture and Culture is Religion in many parts of the world, specifically the Islamic world.

Baby Jesus froze to death in his manger because you jackasses stole all the straw for your arguments.

HappyOldGuy
13th April 09, 01:36 PM
1. I posted a casual observation about how it was stupid for a female sociologist to be a Muslim, given Islam's documented history of oppressing women.

Which you have yet to document.

What everyone is telling you, and you refuse to hear is that Arab countries have a documented history of oppressing women. And that women are not oppressed (to the same degree at least) in other muslim countries. And the hijab just keeps coming up because YOU are using it as your example of how women are oppressed in these non arab countries.

Phrost
13th April 09, 01:37 PM
Which you have yet to document.

You want me to use the Scientific Method to explain why I think something's stupid?

Meok
13th April 09, 05:30 PM
1. I posted a casual observation about how it was stupid for a female sociologist to be a Muslim, given Islam's documented history of oppressing women.
Is this how it's stupid for a christian to be an evolutionary biologist? That does make some broad sweeps and assumption on what it means to be a christian and what the beliefs are or should be. Not every christian is a young earth creationist. Christians have a wide array of views of what Christianity is.

I imagine a sociologist can have different views of what Islam is too (or even what the r34L Islam is). Views that fit with being a female muslim without being too excitingly astounding.

Cullion
13th April 09, 06:43 PM
You want me to use the Scientific Method to explain why I think something's stupid?

You can go that far later. You haven't even satisfied the more casual requirement of 'not sounding like a retard when talking to people who've met actual muslims and/or read the Qu'ran other than in google-search snippets from an anti-muslim website where I didn't even bother reading the actual surahs the 'rationalist' justification for ignorance was pointing me at'.

I know this is painful, you being a busy guy, but I'm actually asking you to read something.

BTW: Steven Dawkins is a douche who's out of his depth a lot of the time. You know that, right?

Phrost
13th April 09, 09:57 PM
Is this how it's stupid for a christian to be an evolutionary biologist? That does make some broad sweeps and assumption on what it means to be a christian and what the beliefs are or should be. Not every christian is a young earth creationist. Christians have a wide array of views of what Christianity is.


Islam has nowhere near the diversity or moderation of Christianity. They're about 100 years behind in that regard at least.

Didn't I mention Young Earth Creationists, not generic christians? Alert the Beef industry, we're going to be short some straw this year.

Cullion
15th April 09, 03:32 PM
Islam has nowhere near the diversity or moderation of Christianity. They're about 100 years behind in that regard at least.

How do you measure these things Phrost? Islam had a mechanism for divorce that didn't involve burning in hell before Christianity did.