Preaching Christianity should be stopped in Afghanistan.

[Shayesta]

It is a fact that this interpretation of Islam violates human rights. I am not arguing that you cannot interpret your religion how you want, I am pointing out that you don't have the right to force that interpretation on others.

I am not forcing Islam on anyone, I am not at all disturb by ex-Muslims in the West because here nothing can be done against them and nor can they be used for political aims. But in Afghanistan ethnics and races already have been used by foreign policies; Only religious aspect is left. In Afghanistan people are struggling for women's right, children's right, poorer people's life, etcetera. And first thing people do is worry about 'religious' rights?

A million Iraqis may have died, but if those rights they died for had not been defended, pretty much every one on the planet (and even those that are to be born still) would have their rights infringed.

Care to explain this in more detail? What right has been protected in Iraq and how does this provide yet-to-born ones a better tomorrow?

No, I mean all humans. All humans have the right to disagree with any religion and speak out against any religion -- just in some places these rights are infringed upon and people cannot safely exercise them.

The problem in Afghanistan is that they (ex-Muslims) have been offered places in West because of which Afghans show interest in Christianity. They are not speaking against Islam, they have been given an edited book tagged as bible because of which they are not even following half of the truth. But as they say in Dari 'qatra qatra aab darya meshawad', exactly same-wise this influence will increase and after ethical tension religious tension will come to life.

Regardless of when or why they disagree, they have the right to disagree.

And we don't have the right to disagree with lies and biased quotes?

If you defend the murders, you support the murder -- and saying that the converts are the ones doing wrong clearly defends the murderers.

If I would defend murderers then I would also have defended killing of former-Christian Nurestanis and suffering of Hindus and Sikhs during Mujahideen-regime. Afghanistan needs education and not change of religion, and even if Muslims do provide education then they cannot provide visa to the West because of which Christian-converts may prefer Christianity anyway.

The murders are the ones doing wrong. Period.

And also those are guilty who hardly themselves follow Christianity and know what their activities may result in (murder) and know their interference in the past has also caused killings, and yet carry on with it. Period.

They can choose not to exercise these rights, or not to defend these rights,

Then what if Afghans don't want to support rights of changing religion? It's their right to fight against other religions and refuse it in their country, right?

That is exactly what has been done -- and now that the easy 'words' part is done, it is time for the hard 'action' part. The UN declared all humans have a basic group of rights -- but there are still pigs out there infringing on these rights, and force is needed to protect them.

And who will protect them? Who are those people who fight for human rights when it comes to (for example) Israel but disappear when Afghans in need seek for their rights? I thought that was also a part of Americans being there, improving 'human rights'?

Second of all, we are not talking of Christianity, we are talking basic human rights, absent any and all religion.

I do not look down on any other religion at all. One of the Afghan families who are close friends of ours are Sikhs, my point is when Afghanistan is educated enough and not a new level of threat is faced by its civilians (from every race and religion), only then I can calm down about Christianity being preached or even Hinduism being preached! If these Americans cared so much anyway then with the money they printed bible in Dari and Pukhto they would have built schools for children where they got enough education to realise the difference between right religion and wrong religion.

Show me a reliable source showing this happened, and we can discuss it. I am not interested in discussing your exaggerated fictitious accounts.

How long has it been you visited Afghanistan? Have you heard/seen how Americans react when Afghans drive in 100 meters of distance to them, and when Afghans shout back how they are being treated? Americans would shout 'stay back you a$$hole' but when an Afghan used to curse back in Dari he used be to stopped and harassed. I had heard this before from people which I didn't care for much and nor believe, after crossing the Mahi-Par highway and witnessing this myself, I believe it now.

Not at all, but study after study has shown a correlation between intelligence and 'religiosity' that is *much* stronger than mere location.

Jews are said to be most intelligent people on earth, where do they stand with their location and religion?

[ozymandias]

I am not forcing Islam on anyone, I am not at all disturb by ex-Muslims in the West because here nothing can be done against them and nor can they be used for political aims. But in Afghanistan ethnics and races already have been used by foreign policies; Only religious aspect is left. In Afghanistan people are struggling for women's right, children's right, poorer people's life, etcetera. And first thing people do is worry about 'religious' rights?

No, *HUMAN* rights. All of them.

Care to explain this in more detail? What right has been protected in Iraq and how does this provide yet-to-born ones a better tomorrow?

I am not speaking just of Iraq, even though you have twisted the conversation that way -- I am pointing out that letting a repressive regime violate human rights without sanction tends to encourage those regimes -- and other regimes that have not yet formed.

If you let shoplifters go unpunished, you encourage them, and those that are watching them to shoplift, as they see no punishment.

The problem in Afghanistan is that they (ex-Muslims) have been offered places in West because of which Afghans show interest in Christianity. They are not speaking against Islam, they have been given an edited book tagged as bible because of which they are not even following half of the truth. But as they say in Dari 'qatra qatra aab darya meshawad', exactly same-wise this influence will increase and after ethical tension religious tension will come to life.

That says nothing about their rights to free religion and free speech. You speak only of reasons education is needed, not repression.

And we don't have the right to disagree with lies and biased quotes?

Why would you think that? YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DISAGREE. You just have to be civilized and respect their rights to DISAGREE WITH YOU.

If I would defend murderers then I would also have defended killing of former-Christian Nurestanis and suffering of Hindus and Sikhs during Mujahideen-regime. Afghanistan needs education and not change of religion, and even if Muslims do provide education then they cannot provide visa to the West because of which Christian-converts may prefer Christianity anyway.

I have no idea why you keep dragging this out, or why you even think it is true. Visa applications to most, if not all, of the west do not even ask about religion.

Furthermore, increased education does not come from repressing free speech.

Finally, you very clearly did defend the murder of ex-muslims.

And also those are guilty who hardly themselves follow Christianity and know what their activities may result in (murder) and know their interference in the past has also caused killings, and yet carry on with it. Period.

The guilty here are the muslims killing former muslims -- regardless of what they converted to. All human beings have the right to follow any religion they so choose -- including Christianity. To imply that they are guilty of anything simply for exercising their basic human rights is disgusting.

Then what if Afghans don't want to support rights of changing religion?

Too bad. Your rights *END* when it infringes on another person's rights. It's really that damn simple, no matter how you pretend to not understand that.

It's their right to fight against other religions and refuse it in their country, right?

Sure is. They can use that right to free speech to fight it all they want, since that does not infringe on the rights of others.

Once you have a free, and educated population, and organize democracy, then you can argue that the population can make these laws. At least then you would have a leg to stand on, but until all adults are educated and allowed to vote, it's a moot point, as you are not talking about the rights of the population, but rather the small subset of them holding the power.

And who will protect them? Who are those people who fight for human rights when it comes to (for example) Israel but disappear when Afghans in need seek for their rights? I thought that was also a part of Americans being there, improving 'human rights'?

Asked, and answered. The UN is supposed to be doing this, but since they are not stepping up, at least the US is.

I do not look down on any other religion at all. One of the Afghan families who are close friends of ours are Sikhs, my point is when Afghanistan is educated enough and not a new level of threat is faced by its civilians (from every race and religion), only then I can calm down about Christianity being preached or even Hinduism being preached! If these Americans cared so much anyway then with the money they printed bible in Dari and Pukhto they would have built schools for children where they got enough education to realise the difference between right religion and wrong religion.

In their mind, they are doing just that -- educating people away from the false religion of Islam. They are doing *EXACTLY* what you are suggesting they need to do.

How long has it been you visited Afghanistan? Have you heard/seen how Americans react when Afghans drive in 100 meters of distance to them, and when Afghans shout back how they are being treated? Americans would shout 'stay back you a$$hole' but when an Afghan used to curse back in Dari he used be to stopped and harassed. I had heard this before from people which I didn't care for much and nor believe, after crossing the Mahi-Par highway and witnessing this myself, I believe it now.

Please show evidence, and not just more anecdotes. Additionally, the fact that it may happen occasionally but that is far from 'every one that badmouths them'.

Jews are said to be most intelligent people on earth, where do they stand with their location and religion?

You really have trouble differenciating stereotypes and anecdotes, don't you?

I am talking about actual scientific, statistical studies, and not stereotypes. Aditionally you are ignoring the fact that Judiasm is both a ethnicity *AND* a religion. There are many atheist Jews.

[Zahed]

Ozy, I myself aint a strong believer of any religion cause it 've been religious issues which 've been causing tension all around. but Americans aint bothered by human rights in Islamic countries either my friend. I'd visit Afghanistan few yrs ago 'n its true that these Americans treat Afghans in Afghanistan like puppies. if a car indeed gets just 1 metre closer than 100 metres, these Americans 'll curse them their hearts out in English. Afghans can't say against it or they 'll be in trouble. Americans themselves hardly believe in Christianity 'n majority of westerns turned Atheistic cause they believe bible is false since its been edited so how can they lecture Afghans about what's right and what's wrong? I also believe in freedom of speech 'n freedom of religion but do u really think those leaving Islam in Afghanistan or going to leave a secure life 'n do u really believe Americans aint doing this to create tension? why don't these people preach their religion in their own country where more 'n more people leave their religion, instead of in a country for which they never did anything good 'n interfered with since Russian war, 'n still expect Afghans to accept their religion? if they'd something for Afghanistan, I'm sure today people would 've loved them.

[Zahed]

'n guys, just agree to disagree on this matter cause u all know urselves u won't get anything out of all this.

[Abdali]

Zahed, why are you not a strong believer.

[Shayesta]

No, *HUMAN* rights. All of them.

First show me evidence to what has been done by West to all these rights named and then we can discuss rights to freedom of rights of religion preached by these very same people.

I am pointing out that letting a repressive regime violate human rights without sanction tends to encourage those regimes -- and other regimes that have not yet formed.

Then how about destruction of Israeli government instead of supporting, even though they have been torturing Palestinians for past few decades? Oh wait, Israel is an American friend and that's why human right crap can be an exception for them, how could I forget!

That says nothing about their rights to free religion and free speech. You speak only of reasons education is needed, not repression.

And their (American) free religion and free speech is gonna destroy our country once again; Just like it has for the past thirty years thanks to those very same people's interference. I first want to see results of freedom of oppression by foreign forces and freedom of Afghans ruling their own country again. Or is freedom of religion priority number one in your eyes?

Why would you think that? YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO DISAGREE. You just have to be civilized and respect their rights to DISAGREE WITH YOU.

Let them disagree with me, but in their own countries or after taking those converts to their own country because by knowing all this could burn our country once again yet they are continuing this crap of converting others, that's not exactly respecting our country either init?

I have no idea why you keep dragging this out, or why you even think it is true. Visa applications to most, if not all, of the west do not even ask about religion.

LOL, yeah that's why they were trying to bring Muslims to churches as soon as the Muslims were brought to refugee camps. Ask anyone from Holland in particular who came to those countries prior to 2000.

The guilty here are the muslims killing former muslims -- regardless of what they converted to. All human beings have the right to follow any religion they so choose -- including Christianity. To imply that they are guilty of anything simply for exercising their basic human rights is disgusting.

We have had plenty of Sikhs and Hindus who could live their lives peacefully and even if someone had chosen any other religion back then, such a huge drama wouldn't have been made. I am not saying those people converting are guilty, those who convert them are there to fight against so called insurgents and not converting others to the religion which they themselves don't even follow.

Too bad. Your rights *END* when it infringes on another person's rights. It's really that damn simple, no matter how you pretend to not understand that.

Exactly same wise how Iraqis got killed because they supported Saddam Hussain? Or same wise how Afghans support Taliban and get killed for it? Or when under Mohammad Najibullah regime Afghanistan was under influence of communism and not democracy and therefore communists got killed? It's their human right to support anyone they like, right? Then why would America want to force their way of thinking (a.k.a. democracy) on them?

Once you have a free, and educated population, and organize democracy, then you can argue that the population can make these laws. At least then you would have a leg to stand on.

And just like how some Western countries (despite of being educated and 'civilized') can oppress laws regarding Muslims (for example PVV in Holland wants to ban head scarves, make sure less and less Quran-e-Sharif is available in Holland and close most mosques in the country) then even an Islamic nation like Afghanistan can bring up laws regarding 'oppressing' Christian converts, right?

Asked, and answered. The UN is supposed to be doing this, but since they are not stepping up, at least the US is.

Is the USA really? How, when and where? They haven't done anything about the rights of black people in Southern USA yet and you seriously claim they stand up on human rights of others? LOL.

In their mind, they are doing just that -- educating people away from the false religion of Islam.

If their bible was original and not false then even then it would have been okay as at least they would educating those people about the truth. But since their own bible has turned into a fairytale, they are actually facing people with lies and for those very same lies people could lose their lives.

Please show evidence, and not just more anecdotes. Additionally, the fact that it may happen occasionally but that is far from 'every one that badmouths them'.

You will see the evidences live as soon as you get into Afghanistan. If they can act in cities that way then imagine what they will be doing in villages. And not to forget, raping followed by burning alive of a fourteen year old Iraqi girl and teaching Afghan kids and Iraqi kids how to curse and insult their own nation in English is also one of their activities; You even got articles and videos as evidence for these activities, search it up. These are just some examples of what they are doing. And these very same 'civilised and honest' people are gonna teach us civilisation and truth about a religion?

[ozymandias]

First show me evidence to what has been done by West to all these rights named and then we can discuss rights to freedom of rights of religion preached by these very same people.

http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/default.htm

Then how about destruction of Israeli government instead of supporting, even though they have been torturing Palestinians for past few decades? Oh wait, Israel is an American friend and that's why human right crap can be an exception for them, how could I forget!

There is that, as well as the fact that it is easier for most rational people to sympathize with Israel, due to the nature of the conflict and the public image Islam has as an aggressive, violent religion.

Many people feel that the Palestinians are violating the rights of the Israelis based purely on the public image Islam has fostered for itself, and don't even look into the actual details and facts.

And their (American) free religion and free speech is gonna destroy our country once again; Just like it has for the past thirty years thanks to those very same people's interference. I first want to see results of freedom of oppression by foreign forces and freedom of Afghans ruling their own country again. Or is freedom of religion priority number one in your eyes?

No, actually it's free speech, and free access to education, but in some regions of the world a repressive religion is used to violate those rights, and the only way to insure the right to free speech is to remove the religiously based restrictions preventing it. In addition to the violations of free speech, religion can, and is, used to violate other rights. It can, and has, been used to enforce sexism, bigotry, violence, and all number of other evils. By allowing open education, and freedom of religion you allow the more peaceful and tolerant religions to preach their messages, and religions, as a whole, get less extreme.

Let them disagree with me, but in their own countries or after taking those converts to their own country because by knowing all this could burn our country once again yet they are continuing this crap of converting others, that's not exactly respecting our country either init?

Who said anything about respecting your country? I am talking as individuals. All people, no matter what country they reside in, have inalienable rights. Your country has no right to restrict or repress those rights, and if you do, it is the moral obligation of all people on this planet to oppose your country and correct these problems.

Once you insure all people have access to their rights, and have laws built around respecting those rights, anyone that disagrees with your laws can leave. Until then, you are in the wrong, not the people being violated.

LOL, yeah that's why they were trying to bring Muslims to churches as soon as the Muslims were brought to refugee camps. Ask anyone from Holland in particular who came to those countries prior to 2000.

This has *NOTHING* to do with visa applications, and not one of the people I know personally that have immigrated to the US has been asked anything about religion, nor asked by anyone to attend a church *WITH THE EXCEPTION* of the Bosnians that were assisted by churches to come to the area. Most of the local churches had programs to assist Bosnian refugees to come to the area, and were provided assistance in filing paperwork, and money for travel, as well as housing, language training, and work placement assistance. People that went through these programs were asked to attend a service 2-3 *TIMES A YEAR* to inform the congregation of their progress, and show the people how their donations have been used *IN AN EFFORT TO GENERATE MORE DONATIONS*.

We have had plenty of Sikhs and Hindus who could live their lives peacefully and even if someone had chosen any other religion back then, such a huge drama wouldn't have been made. I am not saying those people converting are guilty, those who convert them are there to fight against so called insurgents and not converting others to the religion which they themselves don't even follow.

First off, why would they be converting someone to a religion the converter doesn't even follow? I can't wrap my head around that.

Second of all, I fail to see the problem. People exercising free speech? Not a problem. People exercising free religion? Not a problem.

Exactly same wise how Iraqis got killed because they supported Saddam Hussain? Or same wise how Afghans support Taliban and get killed for it? Or when under Mohammad Najibullah regime Afghanistan was under influence of communism and not democracy and therefore communists got killed? It's their human right to support anyone they like, right?

This is the last time I will remind you that occasionally some people's rights -- say those that supported the dictator Hussain, need to have their rights violated, to protect the rights of those they are oppressing. They were willingly violating the rights of those they oppressed, and thus needed to be eliminated to protect the rights of others.

It really is *THAT* simple.

Then why would America want to force their way of thinking (a.k.a. democracy) on them?

It's not 'democracy', it's human rights. Democracy is simply the easiest way to acheive those goals.

And just like how some Western countries (despite of being educated and 'civilized') can oppress laws regarding Muslims (for example PVV in Holland wants to ban head scarves, make sure less and less Quran-e-Sharif is available in Holland and close most mosques in the country) then even an Islamic nation like Afghanistan can bring up laws regarding 'oppressing' Christian converts, right?

Are you three? Did your parents fail to inform you that two wrongs do not make a right?

Is the USA really? How, when and where? They haven't done anything about the rights of black people in Southern USA yet and you seriously claim they stand up on human rights of others? LOL.

I'm sorry, are you stuck in the 1750s? Did you miss out on the last 260 years of American history?

If their bible was original and not false then even then it would have been okay as at least they would educating those people about the truth. But since their own bible has turned into a fairytale, they are actually facing people with lies and for those very same lies people could lose their lives.

Funny, you replace the word 'Bible' with 'koran' and you could be any christian evangelist I have ever met.

You will see the evidences live as soon as you get into Afghanistan. If they can act in cities that way then imagine what they will be doing in villages. And not to forget, raping followed by burning alive of a fourteen year old Iraqi girl and teaching Afghan kids and Iraqi kids how to curse and insult their own nation in English is also one of their activities; You even got articles and videos as evidence for these activities, search it up. These are just some examples of what they are doing. And these very same 'civilised and honest' people are gonna teach us civilisation and truth about a religion?

Once again, the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.

[ozymandias]

Ozymandias graana wrora,

What you are trying to say is, if Muslims promote Islam in the west, how come Christians cant do in the east?

No, I am pointing out that both groups have the same rights, regardless of location.

The hypocrisy doesn't really bother me -- while hypocrisy is a relative thing, and can easily be justified away, at least to oneself, human rights are universal and absolute.

[ozymandias]

What do you mean by same rights regardless of location?

A human being has the universal right to free speech, free religion, not to be discriminated against, and the protections of due process of the law, regardless of what country they are in. A country may violate these rights by passing laws that restrict free speech, or unjustly punish a person for exercising freedom of religion -- but it is the country that is wrong.

You have the right to free speech about yours and any other religion, and to practice any religion you like. You can recruit willing converts where every you want. It is your basic human rights -- and countries that do not respect that are in violation of UN declarations. They can, and should, be reprimanded.

Morally, ethically, and on a human rights level, there is no difference between recruiting to Islam in the 'west' or recruiting to Christianity in Afghanistan.

[ozymandias]

^But its against Afghanistans law which prohibits the conversion of a Muslim to christianity.

That law violates human rights, and ought to be struck down by the UN, to protect the inherent rights of all humans. If UN sanctions are not enough to protect those rights, then the UN *should* use force. It is very unlikely that it would happen, however -- and that is sad.

[Shayesta]

^ The UN should 'force' some humanity into some Westerners first before forcing Muslims of anything. If a Western country doesn't like being told what's right or what's wrong by a Muslim, same wise counts for a Muslim.

http://www.udhr.org/UDHR/default.htm

No no no, I am not talking about the list of human rights; I was talking about what West has done regarding those rights I named in Afghanistan.

Many people feel that the Palestinians are violating the rights of the Israelis based purely on the public image Islam has fostered for itself, and don't even look into the actual details and facts.

Does the Western opinion decide who is being oppressed or the human rights activists?

No, actually it's free speech, and free access to education, but in some regions of the world a repressive religion is used to violate those rights, and the only way to insure the right to free speech is to remove the religiously based restrictions preventing it.

Not in Europe, every religious person in Europe can openly practise his religion but rules after rules are being set up against rights of Muslims. A Muslim can't even utter a word against a Jew but Muslims can be ridiculed by the entire nation, what happened to equality and freedom of whatever?

By allowing open education, and freedom of religion you allow the more peaceful and tolerant religions to preach their messages, and religions, as a whole, get less extreme.

I agree to some extend here. However, as I said, at the moment this is causing unrest in Afghanistan and just like how every nation has its own rules and laws regarding whatever, Afghanistan has its own rules and laws regarding bringing Christianity (back) to Afghanistan.

Your country has no right to restrict or repress those rights, and if you do, it is the moral obligation of all people on this planet to oppose your country and correct these problems.

Once again, how are 'all people' at the moment 'correcting' Palestinian-Israeli problems? How are they 'correcting' Hindu-Kashmiri problems? Why aren't they correcting a problem which might benefit Muslims, but think about things which might cause more and more unrest in Islamic nations?

Once you insure all people have access to their rights, and have laws built around respecting those rights, anyone that disagrees with your laws can leave.

And whether it's right or wrong, Afghan law strictly is against foreigners firstly invading their country and then also converting their people to whatever religion. In that case, if disagreement is shown against this law then Americans are more than free to leave.

First off, why would they be converting someone to a religion the converter doesn't even follow? I can't wrap my head around that.

I know of a Italian girl who has been converted to Islam by her Somalian friend, who herself hardly could pray. That's why she asked for my friend's help to learn to pray and read the Quran-e-Sharif. The answer would be increase in religion, because even if they don't follow the religion properly then at least they do identify themselves as one.

say those that supported the dictator Hussain, need to have their rights violated, to protect the rights of those they are oppressing. They were willingly violating the rights of those they oppressed, and thus needed to be eliminated to protect the rights of others.

Oppressing had always been going on Iraq. After US invasion the Sunnis were oppressed and still are in poor situation, what about their rights now? As you yourself said, two wrongs don't make a right. So if Shia rights have been handed back to them, what about Sunni rights then?

It's not 'democracy', it's human rights. Democracy is simply the easiest way to acheive those goals.

And what if people of a country refuse to accept the way called democracy? Freedom of choice maybe?

Are you three? Did your parents fail to inform you that two wrongs do not make a right?

No, I am actually twenty. Moreover, no need to question my parents' upbringing in this discussion, thank you. And wrong or right, every country is allowed to set up his own rules and laws and so is Holland. Yes, it's a different thing they can't be called a democratic state any more, but at least Afghans never claimed to be democrats.

I'm sorry, are you stuck in the 1750s? Did you miss out on the last 260 years of American history?

No I didn't, I am not talking about how the former Americans were killed by current Americans. I am talking about how the black people and Hispanics live their lives in Southern USA, the poverty rate only says it all. Instead of fixing their way of living, they are busy interfering with 'human rights' in Islamic nations.

Funny, you replace the word 'Bible' with 'koran' and you could be any christian evangelist I have ever met.

Not really, Quran-e-Sharif at least isn't edited and whatever was written in our book, still remained that way. Unlike the bible.

Once again, the plural of 'anecdote' is not 'data'.

Then why you asked for proves in first place?

[ozymandias]

^ The UN should 'force' some humanity into some Westerners first before forcing Muslims of anything. If a Western country doesn't like being told what's right or what's wrong by a Muslim, same wise counts for a Muslim.

I'm sorry -- but Muslims had a say in drafting those documents about human rights.

No no no, I am not talking about the list of human rights; I was talking about what West has done regarding those rights I named in Afghanistan.

Well, let's see: They are setting up an educational system, and working to get a fair and just government set up where all people have a voice, as well as routing out people attacking human rights, for starters.

Does the Western opinion decide who is being oppressed or the human rights activists?

Nope.

Not in Europe, every religious person in Europe can openly practise his religion but rules after rules are being set up against rights of Muslims. A Muslim can't even utter a word against a Jew but Muslims can be ridiculed by the entire nation, what happened to equality and freedom of whatever?

I'm not sure I understand you. I think you misunderstand the Crimes Against Humanities laws, or are trying to misrepresent them. You *CAN* speak out against Jews -- you just cannot excuse the holocaust, or express support for it. This hasa been discussed until we are all sick of it. It's simply a misrepresentation of what the laws *ACTUALLY* say. That said, even those laws are *very* rarely enforced.

Until you start discussing *THIS* reality, I am not sure there is much to say about this.

I will, however, point out the simple concept of two wrongs don't make a right. You may wish to google that.

I agree to some extend here. However, as I said, at the moment this is causing unrest in Afghanistan and just like how every nation has its own rules and laws regarding whatever, Afghanistan has its own rules and laws regarding bringing Christianity (back) to Afghanistan.

Unjust laws that violate human rights are immoral and should not be followed. Rather, they should be violated and revised and protested until reasonable laws replace them.

Once again, how are 'all people' at the moment 'correcting' Palestinian-Israeli problems? How are they 'correcting' Hindu-Kashmiri problems?

What are you talking about? I *NEVER* stated that 'all people' *WERE* correcting the problems, simply that they are morally obligated to do so. Not only that, but if you looked into international news, you would quite clearly see that in the case of many people, they *ARE* working to correct these issues.

Why aren't they correcting a problem which might benefit Muslims, but think about things which might cause more and more unrest in Islamic nations?

I think the problem is your interpretation of 'correcting a problem'. You seem to think that the only way to assist Muslims is to help them establish theocracies that violate human rights. Setting up a fair and just government helps all the people. Routing out terrorists? Helps the people. But you ignore those things, and would rather have all your rights violated -- as long as the violators were Islamic. How is peace not benefiting Muslims? How is equal protections for all not a benefit? How is being able to practice your human rights *not* a benefit?

And whether it's right or wrong, Afghan law strictly is against foreigners firstly invading their country and then also converting their people to whatever religion. In that case, if disagreement is shown against this law then Americans are more than free to leave.

Once again, unjust laws should not need to be followed. At one point in American history slavery, and segregation were legal. This does not make them just, or make the laws moral. The laws were bad and *SHOULD NOT* have been followed. The laws should have been, and *were* corrected. Besides the violation of the rights of your citizens superceeds any superficial claim to legality.

If I were to make up a hypothetical country with laws making it legal to take Muslims out, roll them in bacon, and force feed them pork chops and beer before drawing pictures of Mohammad to defecate on -- and then torture the Muslims for being Muslim I would expect that outside forces would enter the country and assist in protecting the rights of it's citizens.

Then again, I might be a bit of an idealist. I think that all people have rights -- not just those strong enough, or rich enough, to safely exercise them currently.

I know of a Italian girl who has been converted to Islam by her Somalian friend, who herself hardly could pray. That's why she asked for my friend's help to learn to pray and read the Quran-e-Sharif. The answer would be increase in religion, because even if they don't follow the religion properly then at least they do identify themselves as one.

Once again, you *ANECDOTE* does *NOTHING* to answer the question. Why was a non-believer putting forth the effort to convert people? And then to make the anecdote more confusing you admit that the converter *was* religious, after all.

My time for an unrelated story. I have a cat, and it likes to play with string. Gee that was fun.

Oppressing had always been going on Iraq. After US invasion the Sunnis were oppressed and still are in poor situation, what about their rights now? As you yourself said, two wrongs don't make a right. So if Shia rights have been handed back to them, what about Sunni rights then?

All people are better off now that a violent, repressive dictator is removed, and a true, just government can be set up. Now that the regime has been ousted, and people have access to education and political voices *AND BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS* they are all doing better. That said, regime change was not the goal, in and of itself. The process is still continuing with things getting better every day.

And what if people of a country refuse to accept the way called democracy? Freedom of choice maybe?

That is their right -- but that's the catch 22. You need to allow everyone a say in rejecting that democracy, and for everyone to have a say, you need to educate them, and let people exercise their human rights to discuss the issue. In the history of the world, no educated and free society has *ever* decided to reject democracy. The only times democracy has ended was through oppression and violent uprisings against the will of the population.

The minority in power does *NOT* have the right to decide the government structure against the wishes of those governed, nor does *ANYONE* have the right to violate the rights of others. Even if the entire population unanimously voted in a theocratic government, that government does not have the right to restrict the basic human rights of it's citizens. If a citizen decides the want to exercise free speech -- they have that right, even if immoral laws are in place.

No, I am actually twenty. Moreover, no need to question my parents' upbringing in this discussion, thank you.

Given the way you are acting and the common sense and common decency things you are ignoring, it might actually be relevant to the discussion.

And wrong or right, every country is allowed to set up his own rules and laws and so is Holland. Yes, it's a different thing they can't be called a democratic state any more, but at least Afghans never claimed to be democrats.

Once again, all humans have universal rights, no matter what a government says, and it is the moral obligation of all people to defend those rights.

No I didn't, I am not talking about how the former Americans were killed by current Americans. I am talking about how the black people and Hispanics live their lives in Southern USA, the poverty rate only says it all. Instead of fixing their way of living, they are busy interfering with 'human rights' in Islamic nations.

I guess you are choosing to ignore all the social programs and reform going on. Or do you think that generations of poverty, a culture of rejecting education, and embracing ideals counter-productive to increasing wealth is *simple* to over come?

Not really, Quran-e-Sharif at least isn't edited and whatever was written in our book, still remained that way. Unlike the bible.

Funny. Again, you can swap the words 'koran' and 'bible' and you are no different than a Christian evangelical.

Then why you asked for proves in first place?

Because I would like to see *proof*, not anecdotes.

[Jana]

No, I am pointing out that both groups have the same rights, regardless of location.

The hypocrisy doesn't really bother me -- while hypocrisy is a relative thing, and can easily be justified away, at least to oneself, human rights are universal and absolute.

right but the problem is there is a big difference between Muslim Tablighis and Christian missionaries. These missionaries have bigger agenda linked to the political cum spying network.

Above all these missionaries in many cases insult Islam and Quran as compared to Muslim preachers who only teach basics of Islam to people and invite them.

rest everyone has the right to adopt any religion or convert i have no issue with that neither Islam stops anyone from converting to other religion

[ozymandias]

right but the problem is there is a big difference between Muslim Tablighis and Christian missionaries. These missionaries have bigger agenda linked to the political cum spying network.

Above all these missionaries in many cases insult Islam and Quran as compared to Muslim preachers who only teach basics of Islam to people and invite them.

Free speech.

rest everyone has the right to adopt any religion or convert i have no issue with that neither Islam stops anyone from converting to other religion

You may wish to look into the Death Penalty of Apostacy thread. Not even all the Muslims *here* agree with you on that one.

[Shayesta]

I'm sorry -- but Muslims had a say in drafting those documents about human rights.

Really? When, where and how

Well, let's see: They are setting up an educational system, and working to get a fair and just government set up where all people have a voice, as well as routing out people attacking human rights, for starters.

Is it? Is that the reason they, Americans, killed nearly as many civilians as Taliban? And Hazaras' rights have been attacked time on time and they keep seeking help of their government which is being controlled by the Americans, what happened?

Nope.

Then who does?

You *CAN* speak out against Jews -- you just cannot excuse the holocaust, or express support for it.

Why? Germans still argue that by far not six million Jews have been killed and they (Germans) were attacked for their 'rudeness' by pretty much the entire world. Shouldn't that be freedom of speech?

Unjust laws that violate human rights are immoral and should not be followed. Rather, they should be violated and revised and protested until reasonable laws replace them.

Laws are already there and if it's unreasonable for others, Afghans themselves don't care about that. And Afghans have rather protested against Americans trying to convert Afghans, not for freedom of religion. That's the public choice for you. Dostum legalised change of religion in Mazar-e-Sharif and you should have seen those peoples' outburst.

Not only that, but if you looked into international news, you would quite clearly see that in the case of many people, they *ARE* working to correct these issues.

Kashmiri and Palestinian issue have been going on for decades now, does it really take decades to work on their human rights but just months to work on Christian-converts' in Islamic nations, gays in Islamic nations, etcetera's human rights?

You seem to think that the only way to assist Muslims is to help them establish theocracies that violate human rights.

So giving (once again) for example places like Palestine and Kashmir freedom is a form of violation of human rights?

But you ignore those things, and would rather have all your rights violated -- as long as the violators were Islamic. How is peace not benefiting Muslims?

What peace? If you are saying we are unable to live in peace in our own countries because we violate human rights, then what about the ongoing racism against us in Europe? Whose rights are we violating here?

If I were to make up a hypothetical country with laws making it legal to take Muslims out, roll them in bacon, and force feed them pork chops and beer before drawing pictures of Mohammad to defecate on -- and then torture the Muslims for being Muslim I would expect that outside forces would enter the country and assist in protecting the rights of it's citizens.

Maybe worse than this, is still going on in some Muslim countries (which I have named several times by now), where are these 'Western saviours' regarding those countries being oppressed? Or is it because those countries oppressing them (the ones being oppressed) benefit for the US for which they had rather do nothing about it?

Why was a non-believer putting forth the effort to convert people? And then to make the anecdote more confusing you admit that the converter *was* religious, after all.

You didn't really get the point, did ya? There are enough people who call themselves Muslims, but don't even know the basic rules of Islam. There are enough people who say they are strict Catholics, but wouldn't even know how their religion came to life. Some people just feel the need to make others follow their religion, without even caring what his/her religion is exactly about. These soldiers very clearly were commanded to do this 'task' which was never said to be a part of the NATO agenda in order to 'fight terrorism' in Afghanistan.

All people are better off now that a violent, repressive dictator is removed, and a true, just government can be set up. Now that the regime has been ousted, and people have access to education and political voices *AND BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS* they are all doing better.

All people? Is that the reason why situation between Shias and Sunnis got worse? Is that the reason why both sides put bombs near each other's mosques more often? Is that the reason why problems like corruption, prostitution, etcetera rise drastically?

You need to allow everyone a say in rejecting that democracy, and for everyone to have a say, you need to educate them, and let people exercise their human rights to discuss the issue.

People of Afghanistan do not want to discuss this issue, which they made clear with their protests. Their country, their rules, their wish.

Even if the entire population unanimously voted in a theocratic government, that government does not have the right to restrict the basic human rights of it's citizens.

And still this is happening, and in European a.k.a. 'democratic' nations to start with. Just wait and watch what rights will be left to Muslims in near future and this is exactly what majority (non-Muslims) here support. These people despite of being educated want to forbid a particular religion in their country, then why complain about illiterate people back in Islamic nations?

Given the way you are acting and the common sense and common decency things you are ignoring, it might actually be relevant to the discussion.

If age indeed decided your intelligence, then it would have been our previous generation making us understand what's right and what's wrong. Not the other way round like it's happening in Afghan families today.

Once again, all humans have universal rights, no matter what a government says, and it is the moral obligation of all people to defend those rights.

Those Dutch voters didn't vote for such a party for nothing and if that party becomes stronger, than those Muslims have got absolutely nothing to say any more. Who is left to 'defend' now?

Or do you think that generations of poverty, a culture of rejecting education, and embracing ideals counter-productive to increasing wealth is *simple* to over come?

Are you talking about the USA here? If yes then with all the money USA put in making others fight each other, or either 'rent' countries with it, they could easily have rebuild their entire state. So yes, it could have actually been very easy for them.

Funny. Again, you can swap the words 'koran' and 'bible' and you are no different than a Christian evangelical.

Even funnier than that is that I am having the feeling you are trying to point at the Quran-e-Sharif being edited too? Or am I mistaken here?

Because I would like to see *proof*, not anecdotes.

Proves regarding the rape if the Iraqi girl and treatment of Iraqis and Afghans by our civilised Americans? Here just few examples which did get recorded;

CNN.com - Five soldiers charged in Iraq rape-murder case - Jul 9, 2006
Youtube.Com/Watch?v=hH1gmzGKFxw
Youtube.Com/Watch?v=_5Sg1k1hlGg