Feminist activist in Iran sentenced to 24 years in prison for removing hijab.

I don’t think you really understand my point.
In the US you enjoy so many freedoms, you can be a total idiot and no one will lock you up for it. While this seems silly, in real world it’s huge.
It’s definitely better to be an idiot in the US, run around naked with insults written all over you towards current President than being a normal freedom loving woman who just doesn’t want to wear that damn scarf.

 

I think you don't understand my point. Let me make it more explicitly: even in the US, where there is less (much less) to fear from any "idiots" or more aptly, any would be challengers, you already fear those who question your sacred cows. Your sacred cows aren't found in who is elected to be your 'president'. The "sacred cows" are those for whom you even bend your best principles to protect. The ones you lie for; the ones you even censor for, if not in the crude ways that are necessary in places where those sacred cows may find stronger challenges, then in the more sophisticated and subtler ways that you do. I am neither an 'antisemite' nor a 'holocaust denier', but look at what those terms have become and how far they reach! Your sacred cows are the ones you are supposed to live and die for.

It is perhaps the same in Iran, except our sacred cows don't have as much power really. Their power domestically over 'officialdom' is met with an even greater power from outside that can take and craft its messages everywhere in everyone's household and even in their pocketbooks. So, in our case, our sacred cows aren't really as sacred as you imagine. Not only are these stories about people being imprisoned for what you imagine, ultimately a grotesque misrepresentation of the reality of the charges against them; but even in relation to the real charges against them, these are merely isolated cases in a society where nothing is sacred anymore.

In the meantime, faced by these challenges, in all this chaos, to borrow a page from Nietzsche in Thus Spoke Zarathustra, Iranians need to figure out whether they want to be the "last man" or the "uberman"? If they want to be the last man, the US is there to lead them with the rest of the herd. They don't need any other "Supreme Leader". But if they want to go on the path of the superman, they don't need to learn about it from Nietzsche and an imagery "Zarathustra". That path is set right in all their traditions. They can find in Ferdowsi's great epic, the Shahnameh. They can find the spiritual uplifting they need to be able to go that route reading Rumi.
p.s.
On Rumi, I have wondered often whether he would be considered, in a Nietzsche-like framework, a representative of the highest form of the "last man", an intermediate stage between the "last man" and the "uberman" or actually one of the rare examples of the 'uberman' we have seen? Tell me what you think:

 

Not really - Separation of Church and State has nothing to do with protecting Churches or the right to worship. The first amendment comes more from the other of the two main principles which is that individual liberty (including the liberty to worship how you choose) is "Above" the legitimate authority of Gov't.

The point of separation of Church and State "Secularism" was because they did not want authority of Gov't coming from God. That's the whole point of "Consent of the Governed" - as opposed to authority of Gov't coming from "Divine Right/God" as was the case in the past.

The whole point of the enlightenment thinkers with respect to Classical liberalism was to come up with a justification for authority of Gov't other than "God".

Thirteen governments [of the original states] thus founded on the natural authority of the people alone, without a pretence of miracle or mystery, and which are destined to spread over the northern part of that whole quarter of the globe, are a great point gained in favor of the rights of mankind.
-- John Adams, "A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America" (1787-88 ) , from Adrienne Koch, ed, The American Enlightenment: The Shaping of the American Experiment and a Free Society (1965) p. 258

As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?-- John Adams, letter to FA Van der Kamp, December 27, 1816

When philosophic reason is clear and certain by intuition or necessary induction, no subsequent revelation supported by prophecies or miracles can supersede it.-- John Adams, from Rufus K Noyes, Views of Religion, quoted from from James A Haught, ed, 2000 Years of Disbelief

 

You've wasted a lot of time researching something that has absolutely nothing to do with "Feminist activist in Iran sentenced to 24 years in prison for removing hijab". Why not focus instead on the very real injustice against another human being rather than the US Constitution, a document which would surely have helped her and the common people of Iran?

 

Yeah, lets talk about propaganda pieces which distort the truth, state falsehoods, and then lets hear from folks here who (in this case, not you necessarily but several of the more enthusiastic posters here) are on record about how it would be cool to "nuke Iran", which I suppose is meant to help her and the "common people of Iran"!

At least, if you want to talk about a propaganda story, why not use the official propaganda arm of the US government? Radio Farda is a branch of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty ran by the US government? They are usually more constrained in some of the lies they can spew. But the propaganda and lies are there if you know how to pick them up!

https://en.radiofarda.com/a/anti-hi...sentenced-to-15-years-in-prison/30133081.html
Anti-Hijab Activist In Iran Sentenced To 15 Years In Prison

 

In the meantime, those who supposedly need to deter the public from doing things that are proscribed, apparently don't know that you can get 24 years in prison for simply not observing hijab!!!!

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...lice-hijab-hasan-rouhani-reform-a8132726.html
Iranian police in Tehran announce women who break Islamic dress codes no longer face arrest

With respect to hijab, if that is all that is at issue, even when there is an attempt at punishment (quite rare), it would be after you have been "warned", refuse to heed the "warning", taken to police custody to sign a statement promising you will observe the hijab in the future. If you refuse, then charges would be filed against you, with no basis in the law even then for you to face serious prison term.

 

edit: never mind.

 

LOL....

The same Iran that hangs gay people in public?

 

This is one is an even bigger lie! But go ahead...there are few such lies posted, except there is no truth to them. None. At least, on hijab, there is a real issue that is merely distorted.

 

didn't have to research anything but ... you are right though that I was responding to an off topic comment. Try post 68 for something more on topic

 

I missed that.
I recall soon after the revolution they would use extension cords on prisoners. The person in SA who used social media to criticize a mullah was sentenced to 1,000 lashes. Last I read it was to be in sets of 50.

 

I wish I had more time and patience to ponder on and answer your posts. On one hand, there are too many leading and loaded sentences in them, too much Soviet propaganda from the 60' and 70', too many slaloms around facts to gain ideological points. On the other hand, there's genuine love and devotion for your country and your people. You come across as one of those incredibly hard to find patriots who care about the real, living, breathing people of the country, rather than some idealized stereotyped image.

Nietzsche with his uberman is the last thing I expected from you, although mentioning Rumi in this context somewhat softened the blow.

The purpose of this reply is to answer this little gem:

It occurred to me that said charges - the charges that get these people imprisoned - are in themselves, perhaps not in all cases but certainly in many, a grotesque misrepresentation of the reality of the actions of these people. Nothing easier than twisting reality in a court of law amenable to a higher power with an agenda of its own.

Before - and if - you answer, keep in mind that I experienced the delights of a dictatorship up close and personal. I understand dictatorships far better than anyone born in a democracy.

You claimed Iranian scientists were killed by Israel. Well, one of your own doesn't agree:
https://www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/middle-east/iran/iran-death-of-scientists/

 

What are you talking about? Aren't you saying that people should play by the rules?

It's not the US government that carries out mass shootings is it? However, it is the Iran government that forces women to wear head covering isn't it? Surely you can make a distinction between barbaric government policy and barbaric human acts.

 

Two quick points:
1- You are wrong assuming things based on your experiences elsewhere. Even Iran itself isn't what it used to be.
2- I didn't read the report you posted, but the scandal in Iran was about something in opposite of you are trying to suggest. Not that Israel wasn't behind something it (as I am not aware even Israel disputing it), but a real miscarriage of justice owned by Iran's government too.

 

I beg to differ. The relationship between laws, religion, government, and the governed, is the topic. Comparisons between different systems are key to understand such relationships and why some are better than others.

Besides, I like your posts about American constitution and the founding fathers - an in-depth look into the intimate mechanics of the greatest democracy.

 

I don't think there are too many who AREN'T radical!

 

1. We can't assume things based on lack of experience. Of course I rely on past experiences to understand the world I live in. This is how everybody does it. Regardless of the differences, all dictatorships have one thing in common: their main purpose is their own existence as unchallenged leaders, nations be damned.

2. I'm not trying to suggest anything. Fun fact: there was a time when I believed Israel had killed the Iranian scientists. Then I found Potkin

 

We aren't going to agree anything about Iran, so lets instead talk about Nietzsche and Rumi!

 

We might agree on many things about Iran. We aren't going to agree on anything about the Iranian regime.

 

You are wrong: there are things we could probably agree on the Iranian regime, among them its corrupt nature, but what we won't agree on are the false indictments that are meant to create a stereotype about Iran which is false.

But, why not expand on what you mentioned about your reaction to my comment on Nietzsche and then Rumi. Hopefully, we can at least exchange views on this topic without the need for the usual polemics!

 

Stuff like this is why I regard Islam as nothing more than a backwards misogynistic tribal cult.

 

Who is going to hold the nuclear button in Iran?

 

You talked about sacred cows thrown from their pedestals and confusion regarding the future path of Iran. Welcome to progress

There's no way for a society to advance without sacrificing a few sacred cows, you know. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I understand your concerns. What I don't understand is why you think there are only two possible pathways.

Hanging on to past sacred cows won't make Iranians supermen. It will only make them Shia Wahabbis...brrr.

Would Rumi approve of a world divided into inferior and superior humans? Think about it. The question is not what Nietzscheism would make of Rumi, but what would Rumi make of Nietzscheism.

Of course you're proud, as an Iranian, of your spiritual inheritance. As am I, as a human being, proud of the same spiritual inheritance. Rumi is as much mine as he is yours. Please don't try to turn this amazing human being into a symbol of Iranian supremacy. He's as much a symbol of my own possible supremacy - of anyone's possible supremacy - as he is of yours. He belongs to the human race. As do you. As do I.

 

For some reason, you understood nothing about what I had meant in what I posted on the subject.

In the meantime, if there is a real story that people here like to express justified outrage and anger towards Iran's mullahs, its this one. My heart goes out to the family of this young girl, where the facts don't require any embellishments either. Indeed, I agree with the sentiments of the captain of Iran's football team. And, on this issue, ultimately blame one person only -- the person who sits on top of the regime. Unlike the other cases people like to talk about here, this one will hurt the regime.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-49646879

 

How do you know what would be preferred by the Iranian people?

Do you not see a critical point of distinction between laws against public nudity and the Muslim head wear law?

I think that we can separate issues which apply specifically to women and issues which apply to the society at large.

"Traditional culture revolving around the institution of marriage are all under assault." Under assault how?