Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

In Iran, Blogging May Be Punishable By Death

timothy posted more than 6 years ago | from the get-yourself-a-good-sharia-lawyer dept.

Censorship 495

An anonymous reader writes "In Iran, crimes such as apostasy (leaving a religion, in this case Islam) and armed robbery are already punishable by death, but a new bill in Iran aims to add to the list 'establishing weblogs and sites promoting corruption, prostitution and apostasy,' effectively giving the government a free hand in silencing bloggers. The internet is widely used in Iran, despite its previous attempts at censorship. Will this change as the censorship grows more rampant?"

cancel ×

495 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

mm (0)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#24067997)

Separation of church and state anyone?

Re:mm (5, Funny)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068027)

Separation of church and state anyone?

Yeah, it's almost as if the First Amendment doesn't apply to Iran...

Re:mm (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068377)

More proof we need to go in there and help them to be more like us. Then they will be happy and free, just like we did in Iraq when we helped them back in 2002.

Re:mm (2, Interesting)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068587)

Our meddling is the reason for their current situation. I would encourage you to read up on the events that brought about the Iranian revolution for starters.

That country is something WE ALREADY FUCKED UP. Perhaps it's our responsibility to fix it.

Re:mm (3, Insightful)

Original Replica (908688) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068609)

So true. I wish we could get rid of this idea of "bringing Freedom" to countries that don't have the cultural prerequisites of freedom already growing within them. We might not have won the American Revolutionary War without the help of the French, but we started it on our own. Now if there is sufficient desire by the people of Iran (or any country) for democratic freedom, then they will fight for it. When that fighting starts it would behoove us to aid those fighting for freedom, but forcing freedom upon a nation is such an obvious oxymoron that I am appalled at the way such actions are paraded around like good deeds. If anything, the outside intervention cuts short any building cultural movement towards a democratic state. The Cold War is over, could we please not start another one.

IT'S TIME 4 COCOA KRISPIES, THEY ARE SO CHOCOLATY (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068057)

That when I get a taste of them, I trumpet happily.

Doot doot doot doooo!!

Re:mm (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068067)

Um, I'm just going to go out on a limb here and guess "no". Probably not.

Re:mm (1)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068263)

Glad you're not in Iran for your sake...

Re:mm (2, Informative)

belal1 (981326) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068291)

Seperation of Church and State is a Secular ideology. Iran is supposedly an "islamic" state ruled by "islam" and so cannot separate religion from state laws. There's a beautiful book for you non-muslims if you want to understand the issue of man-made laws vs shariah (divine laws) from an islamic perspective: http://islamicbookstore.com/b7932.html [islamicbookstore.com]

Re:mm (3, Insightful)

jeiler (1106393) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068467)

I'd have no objection to Iran applying Shariah law. My objection is that they go far over and above Shariah, subverting Shariah and instead practicing "Bid'ah law."

Re:mm (2, Insightful)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068323)

Separation of church and state anyone?

Non-separation of church and state is not necessarily bad but most (if not all) "states" which do not have the separation are also dictatorships therefore giving non-separation movements a bad connotation. Despite what many want and think, the U.S. was never intended to institute a true separation of church and state, at least that's not what the U.S. Constitution says we should be doing. If a state punishes its citizens for not conforming to state religion then, yes, it is bad and should be dealt with. That isn't freedom, especially freedom of religion, and it isn't separation either. Making laws to ban all public display of religion is also not freedom of religion which is what proponents of separation in the U.S. are fighting for. But there is nothing wrong with a state *having* a religion which is what our (U.S. that is) Constitution was trying to accomplish.

Those who chastise the U.S. for not keeping a separation of church and state do not know what true separation is. We now have yet another example with this story about Iran who wants to kill those who do not conform to the state religion. If those who chastise the U.S. would live in Iran for a year they would realize that what the U.S. has is not the same and was never intended to be a state-sponsored religion (the Founding Fathers knew they didn't want that because they were escaping that) but yet a country *with* a common religion (with some minority religions too, which is fine). That is true freedom of religion. People are always quick to chastise the U.S. government and hail other, foreign governments as better, but yet I don't see anyone such as celebrities, who are famous for criticizing the U.S), moving to Iran or Venezuela. I mention Venezuela because some celebrities in the last year or so were giving props to Hugo Chavez for his dictatorship.

Mod me flamebait or troll or whatever makes you feel better just because you may disagree.

Re:mm (4, Informative)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068619)

"Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God; that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship; that the legislative powers of the government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between church and State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore man to all of his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties. "
Thomas Jefferson

The Founding Fathers very explicitely set up a secular state, a state with complete religious freedoms and a state free of any potential government religious coercion. That means that a Jew, atheist or Hindu has equal rights before the law and has a right not to have any particular religion pushed on him by the government. Attempting to redefine what the Founding Fathers meant is a pretty weak tactic, particularly when their views on religious freedom and on the noxious mix than religion and politics make is so well known.

Re:mm (3, Insightful)

mrsteveman1 (1010381) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068631)

That was at times contradictory and at others, incoherent i think.

Your challenge is to "move to iran" if we complain? Why? Because we should shut the fuck up and take what we can get and be happy? No.

I also question your various claims about the intent of the constitution with regards to separation of church and state. There are some choice quotes from the time period from various figures involved in the forming of the U.S government who hint and in fact come out and say that there was an intent to keep church and state separate, and that it is reflected if not outright stated in the first amendment.

How is this regime possible? (5, Interesting)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068009)

When every single Iranian I meet traveling abroad, without exception, apologizes for the actions of their government and expresses their shame for the theocrats in change, I wonder how long things can stay the way they are there. Doesn't Iran have an unusually high proportion of young people, and doesn't that often bode revolution?

Re:How is this regime possible? (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068077)

Iran = Let us do what we want and you do what we say or the US will come get you.

US = Let us do what we want and you do what we say or the terrorists will come get you.

Politics of fear: it works. Sadly.

Re:How is this regime possible? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068087)

Yes, but the government has been good at the odd killing/arrest spree to calm the students down.

And of course at just the right time America does something (say invading Iraq) that the Iranian government spins to up the anti-US sentiment which helps them stay around.

Re:How is this regime possible? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068097)

How?

How many dolts on these pages made fun of Bush for labeling them part of an "Axis of Evil"?

That oppressive regime persists because of naive enablers like that.

Re:How is this regime possible? (-1, Flamebait)

grolaw (670747) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068443)

You go fight your own, private, war. The rest of us like the idea of letting the nationals deal with their internal problems, internally.

But for Charlie Wilson and his private aid program to the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan when under Soviet control - we wouldn't have had 9/11.

Rudyard Kipling was all for preemptive war, until his son was killed in WWI. Try some fact-based research before defending the (*soon to be indicted*) actions of "W."

Re:How is this regime possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068543)

How exactly did labeling Iran part of the "Axis of Evil" help?

I mocked it not because I think Iran is one of the best governments out there, but because it is typical of Bush's simple-mindedness and ability to draw clear lines around "evil" states he dislikes from other governments that are similarly terrible to their own citizens and of similar threat to the U.S. but whom Bush ignores or actively befriends. Bush's treatment of Iran has nothing to do with how its government treats its citizens and his labeling it part of an "axis of evil" and talk of "evildoers" is laughable not only for its simple-mindedness but also now - years later - for all of the things he's done since he came up with that imbecilic terminology to rape the U.S. constitution and its citizens of their freedoms. Iran has done how much harm to the U.S. in the same time period?

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

chaosite (930734) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068099)

I remember the last time Iran had a revolution.

That went real well.

Re:How is this regime possible? (2, Insightful)

Klaus_1250 (987230) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068241)

What about the last time Iran had a democracy? What happened to that?

Re:How is this regime possible? (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068337)

It went well until their moderate, democratically elected government was overthrown by the CIA and had it replaced by The Shah. Apparently democracies aren't allowed to exist if they aren't pro-US.

Re:How is this regime possible? (4, Informative)

grolaw (670747) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068519)

But, we (the US & GB) put the Shah's father in power through a coup in 1953 - toppling the elected Prime Minister, Dr. Mohammed Mossadegh. Feel free to read how and why that little operation was accomplished here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohammad_Reza_Pahlavi#Oil_nationalization_and_the_1953_coup [wikipedia.org] and here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d [wikipedia.org] 'état

But for our intervention, where would Iran be today?

Re:How is this regime possible? (5, Insightful)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068143)

The problem you may be having is with your sampling group. Unless you happen to be traveling to Iran itself, the people you are meeting are travelers themselves, and possibly of a different overall mindset than hardliners, who would be less likely to travel. (I base this on my father, an American, who stoutly refuses to travel anywhere requiring a passport, simply because it's "not America")

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

Devout_IPUite (1284636) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068283)

Does he own a chevy pickup and hate Obama for not wearing a lapel pin with a flag?

Re:How is this regime possible? (4, Insightful)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068303)

Actually, it's a Dodge, with a McCain bumper sticker. And he hates Obama for whatever reasons Fox News tells him to.

Re:How is this regime possible? (2, Interesting)

nbert (785663) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068603)

I base this on my father, an American, who stoutly refuses to travel anywhere requiring a passport, simply because it's "not America"

It always fascinated me that there are no US citizens in Europe who favor the republicans (at least in the last 8 years I haven't encountered a single one, but I only met around 30), which lead me to two theories: Either the republicans "don't make it" that far or some simply lie because they want to avoid endless discussions. Your comment supports my first theory, but in the end I guess both are valid to a certain extend.

Re:How is this regime possible? (-1, Redundant)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068201)

Yeah me too, oh Iranian, I thought you said American!

Re:How is this regime possible? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068231)

Bleh .... come up with something new . This is not funny anymore.

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

edalytical (671270) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068227)

Good idea Iranians in power have significantly different values than we have in the West. Let's send some CIA operatives to Iran armed with cash for paying off citizens who can cause instability and start the revolution process. Hopefully the new pro-Western dictatorship won't every be overthrown by yet another revolution and replaced with anti-Western democratic republic. This can't possibly fail...

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

grolaw (670747) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068533)

That worked out so well in 1953....

Re:How is this regime possible? (2, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068301)

It is entirely possible that Iranians who somehow managed to get out, or were forced out, are not a representative sample of the overall population.

In my case, I know a few Persians, and off the top of my head... one escaped with his parents who were associated with the Shah somehow. One was highly educated and decided to get the hell out. One is gay - staying in Iran obviously not a good idea.

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068397)

I was speaking of Iranians I met who were still resident in Iran, but abroad on business or tourism.

Re:How is this regime possible? (0)

renoX (11677) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068349)

A case of biased sample obviously.

Note that I would say also 'How is-it possible that Americans reelected Bush?'
It'll take *many* death sentence in Iran to equal the number of dead Irak people caused by Bush actions justified either by incompetency and/or by lies yet he was reelected..

(I'm neither from Irak, Iran or the USA).

Re:How is this regime possible? (0, Troll)

edalytical (671270) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068541)

Are you Turkish? Or is you 'q' key broken?

Re:How is this regime possible? (1)

tukang (1209392) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068583)

Re:How is this regime possible?

Had it not been for operation AJAX [wikipedia.org] we would probably not have a theocracy in Iran today.

Re:How is this regime possible? (1, Interesting)

Ilgaz (86384) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068627)

Nothing is impossible with support from gigantic forces if you take advantage of the fight for power between them.

Just last Monday, one of the Turkey's most peaceful and democratic columnists who writes in the oldest newspaper, Cumhuriyet got arrested for attempting a coup. He was kept in custody for 6 days straight without having a single clue about what he may have done and refused to talk. Today, he gets released. There are massive clues about widespread wiretapping and servicing to the pro-govt newspapers. Can you think such thing is possible without someone clearly abusing a big power?

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/home/9361510.asp [hurriyet.com.tr]

For example, Europe and particularly France should have nothing to say about Iran regime of today. Khomeini was happily living and getting supported in France (yes, that secular France) and even went to Iran with a Air France jet.

Things will keep that way since Iran is a big chess player, they are playing with the World like a toy with billions of dollars. Iran regime can't exist without foreign support.

But Ahmadinejad has his OWN blog... (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068029)

This can't end well... well, for HIM anyways. I imagine it will end very well for the people of Iran.

http://www.ahmadinejad.ir/

So, let's TALK to them! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068033)

Yeah, that'll work.

The mullahs want kill their own people for posting things to the internet (and for women dressing in Western clothes...) and some naive TWIT thinks we can TALK to them.

Dumbass.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068085)

Yes, let's bomb them into a secular state instead. That always works out so well in the Middle East.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068225)

Do you really think the medieval mullahs who believe and promote this kind of crap [memritv.org] can be REASONED with?

Yeah, you probably do. "Peace in our time", right?

You are one naive and hopeless waste of protoplasm.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (3, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068309)

I notice you had to qualify your statement with "in the Middle East".

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (2, Funny)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068333)

It would work out of we bombed them all at once and didn't put any troops in.

After that, we'd wait for the dust to settle. If none of them are left then we go in and take the sweet, sweet oil while we thumb our noses at OPEC and turn the rubble into the world's largest Hedonism resort. Or, the ruins of the middle east could consolidate into some kind of Islamic mega-state, of which we will again bomb into oblivion when WWIII begins. That'll solve the ol' existentialist crisis.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068171)

True, the hardline stance against States like Iran worked wonders with North Korea. I'm not sure what multilateral negotiations are, but since Bush was saying it I can only assume it means bombing and machine gun fire. Obviously, talking to North Korea like barack HUSSEIN obama wants to do would never EVER work.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (4, Interesting)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068387)

Yeah, that'll work. The mullahs want kill their own people for posting things to the internet (and for women dressing in Western clothes...) and some naive TWIT thinks we can TALK to them. Dumbass.

It very well may not work, however, are you prepared to pay $15/gallon for gasoline (assuming you are in the U.S.) if Iran is attacked by the U.S. military? Iran has stated they will respond with military action and one of their actions is to block oil exports through the Straits of Hormuz. If that occurs you know damn well commodity traders and actual purchasers of crude oil will pay $200-$250/bbl which will cause obvious increases in gasoline prices. We must talk to them first and if that fails then do we go in militarily to solve any problems. The problem with that though is it will have a ripple effect, one of which is the price of oil. There is no winner in the battle with Iran. Everyone loses. Iran may be destroyed but they know we survive on oil and they are the 4th largest exporter so economically we could be destroyed too. If the U.S. goes down economically (moreso than we already are recently) then world markets follow suit because of the economic interdependencies of world gov'ts.

Re:So, let's TALK to them! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068555)

Yeah, it is so nice here in the US where we don't have any radical religious groups trying to push their idea of morals onto people that think different.

I did meet a weirdo spouting something off about zombies [demotivatorblog.com] , but I didn't pay much attention.

Freenet now (3, Insightful)

synthespian (563437) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068127)

It is time people start learning and using Freenet more.

Everywhere you look, politicos are pushing freedom-restricting legislation for the intertubes.

Re:Freenet now (1)

Turadg (13362) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068435)

You think they don't block Freenet?

Re:Freenet now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068571)

What someone needs to do is to:

1. Make a OpenWRT image for the WRT54GL with both freenet and tor up in running with a single flash. Also turn off the essid to make a poor attempt of hiding it (at least it's something)
2. Get a local to pickup a new router (available anywhere)
3. Flash router and change password. Also name change if desired
4. Take to work and bury it in a false ceiling never touching it again. You might want to wipe any prints off of it
5. Enjoy a few days or more of free speech
6. Repeat as needed. =)

Ok, that's it (0, Troll)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068137)

We need to bomb those fuckers back into the stone age. Shouldn't take that long to move them from the mideavel(sp) age.

Re:Ok, that's it (4, Insightful)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068167)

Yeah, killing thousands of people and destroying their country will help establish a peaceful democracy!

Re:Ok, that's it (1, Funny)

UziBeatle (695886) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068449)

LighershadeofBlack spurted with ignorance aplenty:

Yeah, killing thousands of people and destroying their country will help establish a peaceful democracy!

  My response.

Jane, you ignorant slut. It worked in WWII and we killed millions between the Soviets and the other Allies.

Japan was gutted, Germany was totally trashed.

The only way to win a war is to totally destroy the enemy. All out war works if your not a coward and afraid
to wield the dogs of war to full effect.

  Is that the answer here? I can't say but I suspect, in the end, it will be.

Iran will force us to nuke that entire region into non existance because THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT.

ALl you need for proof is to listen to the leadership of that country that BELIEVES in the 'end times' and
are doing all they can to bring about a global war.

Once they get the nuke, they will use it. Period.

Unlike the weak minded folk of the West these days, they will not hesitate to kill all that are not of their faith.

  It is a shame more of us can't wake up to that fact and grow the balls of our forefathers and
do what has to be done.

  No, what we will do is wait until they hit us again with a nuke or three and then act. by then, it may be
too late.

  I'll prefer to die than live under a Muslim lead world. I'll die killing as many of them as I can before
I bow to their idea of how I should live my life.

  I'd rather reason with them but there comes a point you have to fight for what you believe is right.

  Again, go back and read history. If your not willing to wipe out the opposition >>> YOUR SIDE LOOSES.

  Idiots

Re:Ok, that's it (3, Insightful)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068633)

Poster - when talking about Iran:

The only way to win a war is to totally destroy the enemy. All out war works if your not a coward and afraid to wield the dogs of war to full effect.

...

ALl you need for proof is to listen to the leadership of that country that BELIEVES in the 'end times' and are doing all they can to bring about a global war.

... sounds like you're referring to the religious fruitcake sitting in the White House.

I for one am sick and tired of Xian twats going on and on about the "end times." Tell you what - we'll ship you ALL to one spot, and you can kill each other to the glory of your individual gods.

What we REALLY need is a cure for religion.

Re:Ok, that's it (0, Offtopic)

leomekenkamp (566309) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068209)

That totally unbalanced, agressive, uninformed, degrading, unrealistic, hate mongering and genocidal remark just made you the person with the lowest ID on my 'foe' list.

Re:Ok, that's it (1, Insightful)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068259)

Well then, looks like my life is complete. I can die happy now.

Re:Ok, that's it (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068421)

I thought you were going for Funny....

Re:Ok, that's it (1)

SpacePunk (17960) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068453)

Originally, I was going for dark political satire.

Iraq/Iran (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068149)

I hate Bush and I hate the Iraq war and as un-PC as this sounds (and it will surely enrage slashdot users here)- I hope Israel bombs them into the stone age.

Re:Iraq/Iran (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068243)

I hate Bush and I hate the Iraq war and as un-PC as this sounds (and it will surely enrage slashdot users here)- I hope Israel bombs them into the stone age.

And I hope they bomb the Israelis back to where they belong - Egypt, building pyramids.

Idiot.

Re:Iraq/Iran (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068313)

They don't belong there either, you must use something better than The Ten Commandments for historical information.

Re:Iraq/Iran (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068477)

They don't belong there either, you must use something better than The Ten Commandments for historical information.

No, really? Are you sure? Who would have thought?
You know, if they bombed really well, they wouldn't even need to be moved back to Egypt ;)
It's somewhat entertaining that the GP gets modded "Interesting" for his stupid comment, yet my sarcastic comment gets modded "Flamebait", as will this one undoubtedly.
Rock on, Zionists.
Keep it up, Slashdot, keep posting your Gandhi quotes and your "First they came.."-Niemoeller quote, but it's really hypocritical and meaningless if you mod up posts hoping and demanding countries/groups of people to be bombed.
Pathetic.

Re:Iraq/Iran (1)

DrSkwid (118965) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068265)

Freedom through death.

"Do unto others as you have them do unto you." - some beardy guy

Re:Iraq/Iran (1)

glitch23 (557124) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068431)

I hate Bush and I hate the Iraq war and as un-PC as this sounds (and it will surely enrage slashdot users here)- I hope Israel bombs them into the stone age.

It's okay to be un-PC. It's good for the soul. :) Enraging slashdot users just encourages improper modding but sometimes it is required. I'm not much of a supporter of Bush anymore and the war needs some direction but I do agree Iran needs bombed but I'm torn with that decision to actually do so because it will be a Bad Thing(tm). See my post here [slashdot.org] I just submitted for my take on the "bombing" idea.

Irony? (2, Interesting)

RabidMoose (746680) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068177)

I'd like to point out the irony of this post being submitted by Anonymous reader

NOT Irony (1)

mangu (126918) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068233)

I'd like to point out the irony of this post being submitted by Anonymous reader

More appropriate terms for describing this would be "survival instinct" or "darwinism". It's certainly not "irony".

Re:Irony? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068297)

Irany?

Sorry.

Pfffft stupid story (0, Flamebait)

coren2000 (788204) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068187)

Since anything is punishable by death in Iran.

On that note (1)

jessica89 (1319331) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068207)

Oh good, they should do that here too with people who put up SPLOGS. Just kidding of course, I know this is a serious matter. Next time people bitch about Western democracies one should just point to Iran's politics...

Re:On that note (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068437)

Oh good, they should do that here too with people who put up SPLOGS. Just kidding of course, I know this is a serious matter. Next time people bitch about Western democracies one should just point to Iran's politics...

For the love of freedom NO. Just because it's worse elsewhere on the planet, it is no reason to accept less for ourselves. It is just MORE reason to bitch about MORE governments and power groups.

When pointing to worse places becomes a reason to not complain about the deterioration of your country, you'll soon find yourself living in the same kind of place.

What a politcally correct headline... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068213)

In Iran, crimes such as apostasy (leaving a religion, in this case Islam)...

Because you know, there are so many non-islamic states that murder their population for leaving the state religion.

Re:What a politcally correct headline... (1)

LighterShadeOfBlack (1011407) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068391)

Because you know, there are so many non-islamic states that murder their population for leaving the state religion.

Apostasy has nothing to do with state religions. That line is simply explaining what apostasy means and then pointing out that it's specific to Islam in Iran in case anyone thought the crime would also apply to anyone promoting leaving Christianity or another religion too. Might seem unlikely but certainly not impossible that it could.

As for another belief system where apostasy can still have negative consequences, I'd suggest Scientology for a start.

Re:What a politcally correct headline... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068393)

What is your point?

Re:What a politcally correct headline... (4, Insightful)

orasio (188021) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068411)

They kill robbers, and talk about killing apostates. Other countries kill murderers, and want to kill rapists. There is a difference, but it's not a fundamental difference. It's only a matter of being more moderate or more radical. The values that determine what is a crime and what should be punished by death is slowly changing.

A civilized country doesn't kill their people, period. A civilized country doesn't impose religion on their people, in an way.

Some countries are getting more civilized, for some others it's harder. Anyhow, history has taught us that war doesn't accelerate this process, and some times it makes it go backwards.

Re:What a politcally correct headline... (1)

Tim C (15259) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068445)

"Apostasy" is an ordinary English word (definition [cambridge.org] ); it's useful to point out which is the religion in question in this specific situation.

for gosh sakes, please, don't be so darn smug (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068257)

lol ... as if there's no sacred subjects in our so-called free, western world. Sure, go ahead, just blog about corporate crime, drug legalization or enviromental and social injustice and then you'd better run like hell.

Makes sense (1)

bobwrit (1232148) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068277)

This makes sense when you concider the iranian government. You're trying to force a single religion on everybody and in order to do that you have to make the citizens blind to the other religion.

Too bad Bush's war against "tyranny" is helping (0, Troll)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068307)

the tyrant Ahmadinejad stay in power. It seems that there are a lot of people in iran(esp. young people who make up a pretty significant portion of the population) who really dislike his domestic policies but support him because they see him as the only one strong enough to keep Bush and Co. in check. Yet another dictator that has been HELPED by Bush's war to avenge daddy.

Re:Too bad Bush's war against "tyranny" is helping (4, Insightful)

thermian (1267986) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068483)

Dictators usually use the technique of identifying a terrible enemy that only their regime can save country x from.

Not only dictatorships actually, but generally its what dictators do.

The fact is that if Iran stopped saying things like they want Israel to be wiped off the earth, and threatening the west, the problem almost certainly would go away. That's not going to help the regime stay in power though, so they won't want that.

Note that if they really wanted a way to end the tension, Ahmadinejad could have gone another way then declaring that the holocaust was a lie in a worldwide broadcast speech. They want this tension, it serves them well.

They almost certainly realise that the US is extremely wary of invading them, so they know that this technique may serve them for generations to come. The exact same method worked in North Korea. Sure the country's fucked, but the ruling faction are seriously rich, and quite powerful locally.

Unless of course some trigger happy nation or president decides its time to end the argument with a few large nukes. I *really* hope that doesn't happen, because the result may well be bad for the entire worlds population, but sooner or later some jerks going to think its the only way out. Then the question will be who is able to hold said jerk in check.

What worries me is that if the Islamic states continue down this fundamentalist route, they are going to cripple their countries economically as well as scientifically. Given that they were the originators of most of our mathematics and astronomy, that's a tragedy of epic proportions.

As it stands there hasn't been any meaningful scientific research from a middle east nation for decades. Thats bad news for them in so many ways.

Mankind will never advance to the stars if we have two civilisations on the planet. One technologically advanced, and the other technologically illiterate, with each hating the other. That is an untenable situation.

Bloggers (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068315)

Death is too good for them.

Different worlds, same bill, the "induce" act! (1)

plasmacutter (901737) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068319)

The inducing and inciting apostacy act, or IIAA, will set a new precedent in Iranian law of contributory liability.

Blame .. (1)

slack_prad (942084) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068325)

Blame US [wikipedia.org] for the state Iran is in now...The nation was a rising democracy back in the 1950s.

The irony...

Re:Blame .. (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068475)

It's worth blaming the mullahs just as much. The revolution against the Shah was very much a popular one that would have resulted in true democracy, had it not be taken over by Khomeini, just as the February Revolution in Russia was twisted by Lenin into the October Revolution.

Re:Blame .. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068501)

From your link:

The idea of overthrowing Mosaddeq was conceived by the British who asked U.S. President Harry S. Truman for assistance but he refused.[14] The British raised the idea again to Dwight D. Eisenhower who became president in 1953. The new administration agreed to participate in overthrowing the elected government of Iran.[15]

Seems like the US isn't the only one to blame considering Britain wanted BP back in charge of Iranian oil. There's plenty enough blame for everyone.

Re:Blame .. (1)

Brett Buck (811747) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068575)

Bullshit. Blame the people doing it.

          Brett

Considering they would execute me.. (5, Insightful)

BlueParrot (965239) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068357)

..simply because I've had a boyfriend, I don't think this is particularily surprising. It is a supressive theocracy. Like other theocracies it has no qualms with torturing and even killing innocent people in order to silence criticism. This is common in dictatorships religious or not. The fundamental problem is the dictatorial rule and the regime's complete lack of limits in terms of what lengths it will go to in order to protect its own survival. Soviet was the same. Zimbabwe is the same. The only difference is what excuse these regimes use to justify their crimes. In soviet it was political ideology. In Iran it is religion. In Zimbabwe it is skin colour. What they have in common is that they kill and torture people in order to make the public afraid of organising opposition, their official reasons (religion,economics,race,culture) for doing so have little to do with their actual objectives. It's all about supressing dissidents, all other reasons is smoke and mirrors trying to obscure the true nature of the regime.

Time for another revolution. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068361)

You could certainly do better.

Apostasy? (1)

madenglishbloke (829598) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068385)

So what would happen if, say, a Christian were to convert to Islam - would the death penalty apply there?

Re:Apostasy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068417)

of course not. what a stupid question.

Re:Apostasy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068441)

So what would happen if, say, a Christian were to convert to Islam - would the death penalty apply there?

You wouldn't be an Iranian Citizen and a Christian for very long

Re:Apostasy? (0)

belal1 (981326) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068495)

No because there are no such thing as christian laws. There's only man-made laws and then divine laws (laws that hasn't been altered by humans). Shariah is the only laws that hasn't changed since the time of Prophet Adam (peace and blessings be upon him and his family).

Re:Apostasy? (3, Insightful)

thermian (1267986) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068551)

Shariah is the only laws that hasn't changed since the time of Prophet Adam (peace and blessings be upon him and his family).

Unfortunately, the world those laws are applied in has changed. They are in desperate need of an update.

Re:Apostasy? (1)

menace3society (768451) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068523)

No, Islamic law as practiced in Iran only forbids non-coerced apostasy from people (and, I think, only from men) who have asserted faith in Islam as adults. There may be lesser penalties for causing a child to convert, but given that execution is punishment demanded by the holy texts for Muslims, the law in Iran is rather lenient compared to those on adultery and lasciviousness.

Atheists on the chopping block too (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068439)

The current government of Iran is f*cking sad BUT should not be confused with the people of Iran. Good, decent people; very bad government. No irony that I'm posting from the USA.

Why is it that the people that don't hear the voices are called wrong? What's the difference between God and Zolabor? The guy preaching about God has a nice building and a nice paycheck and the other is on a street corner. Both are in need of "meds." I say they're both free to be wrong and no one should stop them. Just don't hunt me for sport. Either in Iran or Alabama.
 

I wonder if suicide is legal in that country? (2, Funny)

utahraptor (703433) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068507)

In america we sometimes have suicide by cops, but I wonder how suicide by blog would work out?

Muslims (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068527)

Is there anything they *don't* hate?

It's getting tough out there (2, Interesting)

a.ameri (665846) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068537)

The new bill proposes death penalty for "disturbing the nation's psychological security", a broad, catch-all phrase that also specifically includes "establishing websites and blogs distributing un-islamic and indecent material" (i.e., porn, or anything that can be tagged 'un-islamic').

The bill already has 180 signatures on it (including that of the Speaker of the House), and with the current parliament's setup, is guaranteed to pass. Even the minority so-called 'reformists' are likely to vote for it considering the consequences of not doing so.

Fact: Already, Iran has the second highest rates of capital punishment after China, and by far the highest rate of capital punishment per capita in the world.

Fact: The Islamic regime still executes children (i.e., those under 18). At times, it waits until they are 18 before carrying out the execution, at times (like last month) it even doesn't follow that.

Fact: After years of pressure, the Islamic regime still carries out capital punishment by the mediaeval and inhumane way of stoning the condemned, for certain crimes such as adultery.

Fact: Ethnic minorities (Kurds, Baluchis, Arabs) are heavily discriminated against in Iran. They absolutely have zero representation in the government, even in the local governments of the provinces where they form the majority of the population.

Fact: Iran, despite artificial appearances, is NOT a representative democracy. All candidates for all elections are vetted by a 12-member Council of Guardians, which defeats the purpose of an election. That is how the regime has kept power in its grips for the past 3 decades.

The international community (including the ineffective and outdated Security Council) which claim to have adopted the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect in 2005, need to define the criteria that would trigger a response from the international community. Does this doctrine only apply to cases where hundreds of thousands of people die? (i.e, Darfur? even in that case the international community is only grudgingly and hesitantly acting). Isn't jailing, torturing and killing of hundreds of journalists, labour union leaders, students, ethnic minorities, EVERY YEAR FOR THE PAST 30 YEARS, enough to trigger a response? (I am not in favour of bombing ANY country, as that will not solve any problem, but surely something has to be done, no?)

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a theocratic quasi-communist authoritarian rule of a select few with military and economic might and power, over the a population of 70 million which have been suffering with no respite. We need to put aside our 16th century nation states ideas and stop turning a blind eye to such cases of cruel injustice. It is the duty of each and every single one of us, as citizens of this world, to actively seek to terminate the ruling arrangements in countries such as Iran, Burma, North Korea and Zimbabwe. A a democratic and prosperous Iran is a key to a long-lasting Middle East solution. A well-governed Zimbabwe is an absolute ingredient of the global fight against HIV. We need to realise that we are citizens of the same world, that we all face the same problems, including climate change, proliferation of nuclear arms and fundamentalist terrorism, to name a few. We need to realise that it is our responsibility, as citizens of this world, to act in cases of humiliation (Iran) and starvation (N.Korea) of a nation by its corrupt government.

We need to remind the Republicans, that military operations are not the only solution, and we need to remind the Democrats, that isolationism is a self-defeating answer.

Death would be generous to most bloggers (3, Funny)

belloc (37430) | more than 6 years ago | (#24068539)

Maybe it's just because I'm getting old and cranky, but I'd say for about 90% of the blogs I happen upon these days, I wish the death penalty were the punishment for blogging in the rest of the world, too.

wait! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068565)

i thought that freedom was dead in the us and bush was the next hitler and that you couldn't even have a private phone conversation. and they're going to stop seti! those fucking nazis! and gitmo, gitmo is evil. obama will save us all. don't buy into the hype. obama 2oo8!

Keep up the hate and dichotomies! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#24068581)

Disclaimer:

1. I've got no ties with Iran whatsoever
2. I'm not saying that I agree with the Iranian leaders either

That being said: what about the everyday Iranians?!?

Inside the real Iran

Despite the welcome for their President's nuclear bragging and anti-Israel rhetoric, many Iranians have private worries about the economy - and the threat of war. By Angus McDowall in Tehran and Raymond Whitaker

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/inside-the-real-iran-474365.html [independent.co.uk]

The REAL Iran:
http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread368018/pg1 [abovetopsecret.com]

And look at those desert dwelling people!

TEHERAN - Mega Capital of IRAN
http://www.worldisround.com/articles/98910/ [worldisround.com]
(huge page! broadband only)

But, yes.. the 'everything in Iran is horrible and they need to be freed' machine is running and running. I admit that it isn't a perfect country, but what about North-Korea (oh wait: they've already got a deterrent)? Zimbabwe? Darfur/Sudan?
(who cares about poor people that are suppressed in areas without natural resources? they don't need democracy!)

I give a war against Iran an 80% chance, before the elections.

http://youtube.com/results?q=war+iran&search_type= [youtube.com]

We need more oil and more beachheads to contain upcoming super powers like India and China... ... and the whole world will be dragged down into darkness when that happens..

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>