Dennis Prager's comments

[Miraz]

And my analogies require that a person be somewhat well-aware of the situation in both the countries. Taking my comparisons out of that context and reading them from a Bangladesh-only view, like you have done here, will generate a skewed version of what I was talking about and may seem even anti-Bangladesh. But obviously, that's not my intention here.

Arnab, you got me wrong here. I am not taking your argument from a Bangladesh only view. Currently I am living in a western country and I am well aware of the world media. Nothing is appearing as 'skewed' to me as you are presuming. I am not considering your views 'anti - Bangladeshi', its more like superficial views about Bangladesh perceived from either media or due to lack of interaction with the different parts of Bangladeshi society.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Miraz
Arnab, you got me wrong here. I am not taking your argument from a Bangladesh only view. Currently I am living in a western country and I am well aware of the world media. Nothing is appearing as 'skewed' to me as you are presuming. I am not considering your views 'anti - Bangladeshi', its more like superficial views about Bangladesh perceived from either media or due to lack of interaction with the different parts of Bangladeshi society.

Well, you have to be more precise about what parts of my posts you find implausible. For example, I don't think a Hindu MP can realistically be a PM in Bangladesh, nor can he talk about making Bangladesh constitutionally a "secular" state without creating some controversy and being talked about in an adverse manner (e.g. may be being labeled India's dalal) by our own Dennis Pragers in some/many of the newspapers.

[Miraz]

Well, you have to be more precise about what parts of my posts you find implausible. For example, I don't think a Hindu MP can realistically be a PM in Bangladesh,

Well, you are right for the next few years that's for sure as neither Mujib dynasty or Zia dynasty are Hindu. I don't see anyone becoming PM in near future of Bangladesh apart from these two dyansty.

nor can he talk about making Bangladesh constitutionally a "secular" state without creating some controversy and being talked about in an adverse manner (e.g. may be being labeled India's dalal) by our own Dennis Pragers in some/many of the newspapers.

That's why I termed your comments as superficial in my earleir post. Hindu MP's like Suranjit Sen Gupta, Panchanan Biswas, Bir Bahadur, Promod Mankin, Dhirendra Nath, Dipankar Talukdar and many others are regularly talking in different seminars about making Bangladesh 'constitutionally a "secular" state '. Their views are getting adquate media attention without much atrocity at all. I am not mentioning anyone names who belong to civil society as you mentioned about MP.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Miraz
Well, you are right for the next few years that's for sure as neither Mujib dynasty or Zia dynasty are Hindu. I don't see anyone becoming PM in near future of Bangladesh apart from these two dyansty.

I don't see anyone in the next 10-15 years. Plus a lot of educated Hindus have been leaving the country to India at a steady rate for the last 10-15 years, as far as I know. There's no strong next generation of Hindu MPs I am afraid.

That's why I termed your comments as superficial in my earleir post. Hindu MP's like Suranjit Sen Gupta, Panchanan Biswas, Bir Bahadur, Promod Mankin, Dhirendra Nath, Dipankar Talukdar and many others are regularly talking in different seminars about making Bangladesh 'constitutionally a "secular" state '. Their views are getting adquate media attention without much atrocity at all. I am not mentioning anyone names who belong to civil society as you mentioned about MP.

I know about them. All of them are Awami League MPs. Part of the reason why they are being heard is because they are backed by a big party. But I think they have been criticized by say, Dinkal, Inqilab and Songram among others, many times. I have no doubt that there's a deep distrust against secularism in a large portion of our society. Secularism has become a part of partisan politics.

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Not really, no.

Sure.

Sure, but not the western democratic tradition.

Hmm...I wish what you are saying were 100% right. It is mostly true. But not always.

Arnab bhai...why is a big chunk of your response like one sentence, only saying no, yes, and yea rite...without any arguments about why you say so? It doesn't seem like a good argument.

Originally Posted by Arnab
Well, I have lived both in America and in Bangladesh for a significant number of years. So I guess my viewpoint will be different from yours.

And my analogies require that a person be somewhat well-aware of the situation in both the countries. Taking my comparisons out of that context and reading them from a Bangladesh-only view, like you have done here, will generate a skewed version of what I was talking about and may seem even anti-Bangladesh. But obviously, that's not my intention here.

I don't think I was "unnecessarily undermining the values and tradition" of Bangladesh. I am a Bangladeshi myself and am well aware of our "values and traditions". But when someone among us call some American a "racial bigot filled with hatred towards our religion" but doesn't, in my eyes, provide a good reason behind saying that, I think I am justified in making the comparisons I made.

I think the topic at hand is an interesting, but sensitive issue and I find your take on my view unfortunate.

Once again, many of us have lived in many both Bangladesh and the Western world for long enough to understand some of your analogies, and arguments. Unfortunately, they don't quite fit. Yes, if you're putting the analogy there for saying why does x have to do it when y doesn't do it...sure we can deal with that, even if it doesn't make a case. But when you're comparing these x and y from different countries that are vastly different in culture, religion, population, liberacy, juctice, media, and what not...then you simply lose the case. Specially in terms of media. I'm really sorry that you don't understand why one of us said "racial bigot filled with hatred towards our religion", coz if you are living in the western world, and regularly watching western media...it should be quite understandable. And honestly, if you require ONE example, it's not possible. Because these media figures are so **********, that I'm tempted to write more than just one. But just a hint...they dont talk about bangladesh, but they do talk about Islam. The word "Islam" in most cases is linked to terms such as "extremists", "terrorists", "militant", "threat towards West", "need our help", "non-democratic", and what not. So if you don't find such terms a direct attack on Islam, then too bad...you won't get my argument.

And finally, there's no point in arguing over such issue, because just like the issue about 1971 and Indian help, we're destined to go nowhere. I'm not here to change your belief, but to show the flaws in the arguments you've presented. Please don't take the time to respond to any of any of the above, coz I know you won't agree with anything...and I'm more likely to not agre with you, and not respond to that as well.

[al Furqaan]

And I don't quite like your use of "us" referring to only muslims here. BanglaCricket is not exactly a Muslim forum, it's more like a Bangladeshi forum irrespective of religion or geographical location.

well then it should be easy to see that despite what happens in bangladesh or afghanistan, it isn't OK to force people to take oath on the bible.

now if the constitution says you have to, thats a different matter. but thats the whole point is that this is a de facto law, which one can fight and which is in fact directly at odds with the very constitution for which it being sworn upon in the first place.

All I am saying that I expect that some Americans, to whom traditional values have been passed on to via older generations, will react like this if a custom like this is violated, and doing so doesn't automatically make these Americans outright bigots "filled with hatred towards our religion".

i agree...but expectation doesn't reduce their level of hostility any. you cannot say with a straight face that these prager is hunky dorey with islam. maybe he's absolutely justified (for arguments sake) but hostile he is. thats the point its hostility and hatred against the quran and ellison himself.

now, i am fully believe that prager would not have acted this way with a hindu ellison and the gita or a sikh and the grant sahib et al. tom tancredo might attack gita, grant, and quran alike, but prager the subject of this thread would not.

[al Furqaan]

Look, I understand what you're talking about. But that doesn't make sense with all those Jewish Senators touching the Bible and taking their oaths all this time. Are you saying these Jewish Senators weren't showing the ultimate allegiance to the constitution?

not a very good comparison...for the simple fact that the bible is 70% jewish. jewish senators take the oath based on that, not the new testement. so for the christian senetor elect, he embraces 100% of the bible on which he swears, the jew 70%, and ellison 0%.

further, many of the jewish senetors have sworn on the hebrew bible. this directly means that ellison has every legal right to swear on an arabic or bangla quran. because the man who started this custom (the US constitution does not mandate the swearing on any book, much less the bible) was G Washington and he used a hebrew bible as much as he used a sanskrit geeta.

Church bells don't scream at all. And they don't happen five times a day either.

neither do azans. i've been to dhaka several times, and when i'm inside the house i can't even hear the azan. similarily, in my home in the states, i don't hear church bells. therefor, there is no difference between a church bell and an azan. of course if you go inside the minaret and stick your head right next to the loudspeaker, the azan may be a tad bit loud.

No, the apt question would be: Would Muslims in BD object if a Hindu DID NOT use Bismillah in his speech AND at the same time, used Nomoshkar and wore a tilak in his speeches (dont forget Prager is mad coz the Senator DID NOT use the Bible AND wanted to use the Quran)?

The answer is obviously yes.

i disagree...mullahs would object but i doubt my 80 year old nana (who is a muslim) would object. if you haven't noticed, mullahs tend to object to a lot of trivial things. the mulla is not the average bangladeshi muslim. a brick layer in mohammadpur is the average bangladeshi muslim and he wouldn't do a damn thing.

by the same token, Colorado senator tom tancredo is an american christian and has advocated nuking Mecca. does this mean all american christians want to nuke mecca? no because a senetor from colorodo is not the average american christian.

But us having a Hindu PM? Give me a break.

very true...

[Alien]

Originally Posted by Arnab
And I don't quite like your use of "us" referring to only muslims here. BanglaCricket is not exactly a Muslim forum, it's more like a Bangladeshi forum irrespective of religion or geographical location.

For crying out loud, "us" mean the world muslim. Not Bangla Cricket Muslims. Muslims in this forum make approximately 0.0000000000000001% of world muslims. I never said BD Muslims or Banglacricket Muslims.

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by Alien
For crying out loud, "us" mean the world muslim. Not Bangla Cricket Muslims. Muslims in this forum make approximately 0.0000000000000001% of world muslims. I never said BD Muslims or Banglacricket Muslims.

I can visualize Alien like this right now:

al Furqaan like this:

Miraz bhai like this:

And Arnab like this:

And I'm going like this:

[al Furqaan]

Originally Posted by Kabir
I can visualize Alien like this right now:

al Furqaan like this:

Miraz bhai like this:

And Arnab like this:

And I'm going like this:

LOLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Kabir
Arnab bhai...why is a big chunk of your response like one sentence, only saying no, yes, and yea rite...without any arguments about why you say so? It doesn't seem like a good argument.

Tai naki bhabi? Amar argumentgula ektu sajay guchay den na jeno "good" dekhay? Shunlam apnar hatey naki jadu ache?

Once again, many of us have lived in many both Bangladesh and the Western world for long enough to understand some of your analogies, and arguments. Unfortunately, they don't quite fit. Yes, if you're putting the analogy there for saying why does x have to do it when y doesn't do it...sure we can deal with that, even if it doesn't make a case.

I didn't make any case like that.

But when you're comparing these x and y from different countries that are vastly different in culture, religion, population, liberacy, juctice, media, and what not...then you simply lose the case.

I don't agree. We discuss and compare things like that all the time. Although, we usually talk about the bad things they do and the good things we do, to make us look good in our eyes and feel some satisfaction out of it.

And what do you think my "case" is that I'm losing?

Specially in terms of media. I'm really sorry that you don't understand why one of us said "racial bigot filled with hatred towards our religion", coz if you are living in the western world, and regularly watching western media...it should be quite understandable.

Look, I was analyzing Dennis Prager's intentions on the merit of the article posted on this thread. And I find nothing in that article that screams out "racist bigot filled with hatred towards our religion". As a means of comparison, and interpreting "us" as Bangladeshi muslims, I spoke of some hypothetical scenarios in BD. Apparently it backfired because us BDs are a little sensitive about our own bigotry.

But I think my larger point or "case" in all this, which I am going to formulate explicitly now, remains valid: Just because Dennis Prager said that a Muslim senator has to take his oath by touching the Bible doesn't automatically make him a "bigot filled with hatred towards Islam".

And what is YOUR position re: Dennis Prager's comment as posted in this article? Do you think he is being a "bigot filled with hatred towards our religion"?

And honestly, if you require ONE example, it's not possible.

I don't require any example. I know fully well what you are talking about. But, that doesn't quite apply to Prager's comment as presented in this thread.

Because these media figures are so **********, that I'm tempted to write more than just one. But just a hint...they dont talk about bangladesh, but they do talk about Islam. The word "Islam" in most cases is linked to terms such as "extremists", "terrorists", "militant", "threat towards West", "need our help", "non-democratic", and what not. So if you don't find such terms a direct attack on Islam, then too bad...you won't get my argument.

It's unfortunate. While there are plenty of Muslim extremists, terrorists, militants out there, they are obviously overblowing it and misrepresenting the Musim world. Again, what does that have to this particular Prager article? He's not talking about "extremists", "terrorists", "militant", "threat towards West", "need our help", "non-democratic", and what not, is he? This is not exactly a "direct attack" on Islam, is it?

And finally, there's no point in arguing over such issue, because just like the issue about 1971 and Indian help, we're destined to go nowhere. I'm not here to change your belief, but to show the flaws in the arguments you've presented. Please don't take the time to respond to any of any of the above, coz I know you won't agree with anything...and I'm more likely to not agre with you, and not respond to that as well.

Well, that's an interesting way to cop out. Too late.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Alien
For crying out loud, "us" mean the world muslim. Not Bangla Cricket Muslims. Muslims in this forum make approximately 0.0000000000000001% of world muslims. I never said BD Muslims or Banglacricket Muslims.

Look, the point is very simple. Your use of "us" as "Muslims only" would certainly make sense if this was a Muslim-only forum. So it's perfectly ok for someone to misinterpret what you mean by "us". If you used "Muslims" instead of "us" in the first place, there wouldn't have been any confusion.

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by al Furqaan
not a very good comparison...for the simple fact that the bible is 70% jewish. jewish senators take the oath based on that, not the new testement. so for the christian senetor elect, he embraces 100% of the bible on which he swears, the jew 70%, and ellison 0%.

further, many of the jewish senetors have sworn on the hebrew bible. this directly means that ellison has every legal right to swear on an arabic or bangla quran. because the man who started this custom (the US constitution does not mandate the swearing on any book, much less the bible) was G Washington and he used a hebrew bible as much as he used a sanskrit geeta.

Now we are talking. So it's not exactly customary to swear on the New testament, or any holy book for that matter? Please point me to the source of this info.

neither do azans. i've been to dhaka several times, and when i'm inside the house i can't even hear the azan. similarily, in my home in the states, i don't hear church bells. therefor, there is no difference between a church bell and an azan.

Er, no. It's like saying Al Furqan lives in a house, a Pygmie in Congo lives in a house, therefore Al Furqan is a Pygmie. Doesn't follow. You need to try a different line of argument.

of course if you go inside the minaret and stick your head right next to the loudspeaker, the azan may be a tad bit loud.

So can be the church bells if you go inside the bell-tower. In fact, the bells will look very huge. Bigger than humans. Wow!

I was obviously not talking about the extreme conditions such as living in a semi-sound-proof AC room or going inside the minaret/tower.

Azans can be heard everywhere if you go out on the street. And I have personally no problem with it since I have grown up with it, but I can see how a non-Muslim could find it silly. Just like I find the some holy cow sitting in the middle of the road in India silly.

i disagree...mullahs would object but i doubt my 80 year old nana (who is a muslim) would object.

How about the 18-50 years old Muslim demographic that constitute the majority of the adult muslims in our country?

if you haven't noticed, mullahs tend to object to a lot of trivial things. the mulla is not the average bangladeshi muslim. a brick layer in mohammadpur is the average bangladeshi muslim and he wouldn't do a damn thing.

Sure, how about the 18-50 years old BD Muslim demographic?

by the same token, Colorado senator tom tancredo is an american christian and has advocated nuking Mecca. does this mean all american christians want to nuke mecca? no because a senetor from colorodo is not the average american christian.

How do you reckon an Average Christian American would react to swearing on the Quran?

very true...

You're getting there.

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Tai naki bhabi? Amar argumentgula ektu sajay guchay den na jeno "good" dekhay? Shunlam apnar hatey naki jadu ache?

ATTN: BC Members. Beware of Arnab bhai...I'm sad to tell you that onar matha noshto hoye gese. Uni ajkal amake bhabi daake.

Amar hathe jadu nai. Ami hoilam bhai (not bhabi), that's why hathe bonduk ase. Lagbay naki Arnab bhai???

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Kabir
ATTN: BC Members. Beware of Arnab bhai...I'm sad to tell you that onar matha noshto hoye gese. Uni ajkal amake bhabi daake.

Amar hathe jadu nai. Ami hoilam bhai (not bhabi), that's why hathe bonduk ase. Lagbay naki Arnab bhai???

Na, amar argument-er agochhalo dhoron dekhe tomar eto matha betha, bhablam beparta ki, pola gay hoya gelo naki?

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Na, amar argument-er agochhalo dhoron dekhe tomar eto matha betha, bhablam beparta ki, pola gay hoya gelo naki?

Aray Arnab bhai...ki je bhuwa joke maren na. Hashio paye na. Fazal bhai (aka ostad) er moton hoite bohu deri ase apnar

And as far as the problem of beka (aka shomokami) comes in...agochalo = elomelo = beka = ~~~

[Arnab]

Originally Posted by Kabir
Aray Arnab bhai...ki je bhuwa joke maren na. Hashio paye na. Fazal bhai (aka ostad) er moton hoite bohu deri ase apnar

And as far as the problem of beka (aka shomokami) comes in...agochalo = elomelo = beka = ~~~

Fazal to pura joker. Ami joke likhle ter paiba dosh din por ar mone mone ektu por por hashba aro ponero din.

[Kabir]

Originally Posted by Arnab
Fazal to pura joker. Ami joke likhle ter paiba dosh din por ar mone mone ektu por por hashba aro ponero din.

Successsssssssssss. Arnab bhai agreed about something. I know I'm great...but you can all thank me later.

[al Furqaan]

Er, no. It's like saying Al Furqan lives in a house, a Pygmie in Congo lives in a house, therefore Al Furqan is a Pygmie. Doesn't follow. You need to try a different line of argument.

touche... [pedanticism duly noted...just keeding]

Azans can be heard everywhere if you go out on the street. And I have personally no problem with it since I have grown up with it, but I can see how a non-Muslim could find it silly. Just like I find the some holy cow sitting in the middle of the road in India silly.

well, the azan is basically an alarm clock, as silly as alarm clocks are. and if you have no personal problem with it, its a bad analogy for this thread since its understood most of the responders have a personal problem with prager's comments/allusions. you should pick something you have a personal problem with in order to retain argumentative consistancy.

How about the 18-50 years old Muslim demographic that constitute the majority of the adult muslims in our country?

good thing you brought them up...but i would imagine that procuring their daily bread would rank just slightly higher up on their list of priorities than making sure hindus do not violate whatever token islamic ornament decorates the top of the BD constitution.

Sure, how about the 18-50 years old BD Muslim demographic?

are you for real? given this group would not be composed of any of the aforementioned mullahs. i'll go out on a limb and say 90% of them wouldn't care a bit if a hindu took a piss on the pages of the quran as part of his "swearing in" or whatever. everyone knows, most muslims are muslim in name only...why would BD 18-50 year olds somehow be the radical anomaly?

How do you reckon an Average Christian American would react to swearing on the Quran?

well it depends,really and truely. are you talking about the average southern baptist, the average episcopalian, the average catholic, the average white evangelical male, the average jehova's witness, or the average non-denominational?

a very large section of the american public would not care at all if ellison used the quran or the bible. now would they constitute a majority? i dont know. there are liberals and their are conservatives and those in betweeners.

You're getting there.

if by 'there' you mean wherever you are, then no sadly, i am not getting there anytime soon (though its absolutely relative on whether its truly sad or not).

so bangladesh will never have a hindu PM, will israel ever have an israeli arab defense minister? or how about a homosexual attorney general in the US, or a muslim PM in india (they didn't even want a white catholic lady). this doesn't prove anything other than the fact that either humanity is biased against the minority or that it is universally accepted that an outsider should never lead a foreign entity (like having a protestant pope...catholics have nothing against protestants for the most part, but why would a protestant lead the catholics)