No announcement yet.

Indonesia will be “alcohol free” soon ?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    OK - so Muslims shouldn't have other religions for friends. If that's the way they want it, it's sad; but well, have it their way. What I don't get is them then trying to impose all this and more on others who have no interest in any of it and are peaceful and happy doing their own thing...
    Things happen for a reason...


    • #92
      Originally posted by Donting101 View Post
      Nyon, you're gonna have to backup your posts with some actual content before you trash talk people like that. You sound like a tool.
      You don't appreciate someone else cutting in on your turf?
      [FONT=Comic Sans MS]Warden: "What we got here ... is failure to communicate."

      The Dude: "Oh yeah? Well that's just, like, your opinion, man."[/FONT]


      • #93
        maybe some suggested reading material for Dan?


        • #94
          Why does it always have to come back to Islam ?? What happened to simple freedom of choice for everyone muslim or not ??
          I know many muslims' that like to have a moderate drink now and again and I am sure they would not like to have to sacrifice this personal freedom for the sake of a few religious bigots.


          • #95
            Originally posted by Donting101 View Post
            it is impossible for this to happen when the majority are muslim and are poorly educated

            the Christians, Hindus and Buddhists around the world can get along with each other just fine, but by definition islam is not tolerant and it goes against the grain of the teachings of the Quran to even have these people as your friends. If Indonesia was made up of a balanced mixed bag of an equal amount of the 'six recognised religions' then we wouldn't have the bullying of the mosques and Muslims in minority areas, I dare say it would be one of the most awesome countries in the world culturally.
            I actually agree that Islam is intolerant. That is indisputable. All Abrahamic religion is intolerant by default, because that is the default position of monotheism. It cannot accept the possibility of other deities. Probably other all faiths and religious points of view can accommodate the idea of other deities or forces or spirits or whatever... monotheism alone cannot do that. If it does accept their existence, they are demonized (see Leviathan, Baal etc). The idea that Christians and Hindus all get along is absurd and easily dismissed with facts.

            However the bold part is a common misconception born out of the difficulties in translation. However, this should be easy to explain as you probably are already familiar with the troublesome word in question.

            Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) says, "[SIZE=3]Ya 'ayyuha al-Ladhina 'amanu la tattakhidhu Al-Yahuda Wa An-Naşara 'Awliya'a [COLOR=#BB0000]ۘ[/COLOR] Ba`duhum 'Awliya'u ba`din [COLOR=#BB0000]ۚ[/COLOR] wa man Yatawallahum Minkum fa'innahu minhum 'Inna Al-Laha la Yahdi Al-Qawma zz-zalimina" [/SIZE]

            Awliya, protectors, you would know the singular as in "wali." It means guardians, in this case, and Allah (subhana wa ta'ala) urges the Muslims to be cautious in their dealings with Jews and Christians, because they "only guard one another." It does not mean friend, and refers to military action rather than friendship. Don't allow these people to have power over you, is perhaps another way to put it.

            If Indonesia had more or less of other religions or views you'd have other problems. Honestly, it's fun for expats to dream about an Indonesia that remained Hindu and Buddhist, but ignoring all of the terrible aspects of dharmic religion (let's burn some widows!) ain't gonna make it any better. The trouble, wherever you go, is fanatics. They could even be fanatical atheists, as surprising as such a thing is.


            • #96
              Originally posted by ScooterIndo View Post
              Why does it always have to come back to Islam ?? What happened to simple freedom of choice for everyone muslim or not ??
              I know many muslims' that like to have a moderate drink now and again and I am sure they would not like to have to sacrifice this personal freedom for the sake of a few religious bigots.
              I dunno. I have been arguing about this from a public health perspective.


              • #97
                Originally posted by mike lampung View Post
                So Dan,

                could you give us light on some Acehnese strange habit
                to by all means avoid alcohol consumption while enjoying
                mie goreng with marihuana?

                Is it like that that both can be a gun when lets say you sit after
                that in the car or drive a motorcycle? (provided that you are an irresponsible idiot of course).

                daily hypocrisy on the plate?

                Or better said, all this fuss about banning alcohol in Indonesia is just to show to other Muslim brothers that we are better Muslims. But there is important fact to be remembered: Indonesia is not a Muslim country, neither by constitution nor by reality. And where is then the respect? Where is the respect for Bali, Flores, Medan, Sulawesi, Manado, Papua? Where is the respect for millions of people from other religions living in Indonesia?

                I would suggest a different issue. Balinese, please just ban the halal food in Bali. Some reason can be found easily. And Bataknese, just do send only pork meat on your markets...But there was mentioned something about respect...
                Have you read my posts concerning marijuana before, mike? To start with, I don't support the consumption of marijuana either. It too is more malignant than its boosters, who need to get back to their bongs, are willing to accept. With that said, the Acehnese do use marijuana seeds in their traditional cooking. Is it enough to get someone high? Not from my experience.

                With that said, the Islamic view on marijuana is murky. Remember that Islam is a religion of extreme legalism, and marijuana is not mentioned. In fiqh, jurisprudence, it is forbidden to forbid that which is not forbidden. As marijuana has not been forbidden, it falls into more of a gray area. It may be considered an intoxicant, and it is almost certainly makruh (disliked). However, it is unlikely that it is haram (forbidden). There are multiple levels of permissibility. I have discussed previously that some older schools of Muslim thought believed alcohol to also be murky, as it is wine that is literally prohibited. Is only wine prohibited? A majority says no, but there are arguments for its permissibility so long as you do not get intoxicated (which is forbidden no matter what you consume).

                Now then, I want to be clear about something, since all of you apparently suck at reading comprehension. I AM ARGUING AGAINST ALCOHOL BASED ON CONCERNS FOR PUBLIC HEALTH. Please, stick to the actual debate.

                Also also, Indonesia really IS a Muslim country and really does have some laws informed by our shari'a. You're living in your own private Indonesia if you believe otherwise.


                • #98
                  Quoting an avowed Muslim hater, lantern? Yes, I'm sure that information gleaned from Ali Sina will be objective. It's a bit like quoting from David Duke (an avowed anti-Semite) when speaking of Jews. He too suggests that societies without Jews live closer to the principles of Godliness than those with. Shall I quote from David Duke, or do you get the point?


                  • #99
                    Originally posted by SomeoneHere View Post
                    I never said that i believe that Indonesian are pluralist Dan. Never even once i showed at my previous statement or any before that i believe so, since it is indeed "not yet" achieved. But what most Indonesian (include Papua) wanted to believe is that we could be a pluralist nation that support all cultural identities as the heart of our nationwide identity. It is indeed difficult, and probably almost imposible, but that is what we wanted to achieve, that is our nationality goal.
                    When you use this "we," as in "our," who are you speaking of? This is you again, assuming that these people share your view. Do they actually view themselves as being Indonesian, or do they view themselves as being other identities first? The mythology of nations demands that there be a shared identity, a unified people, who seek to overcome the odds and defeat some foreign influence. While defeating a foreign influence was real, minority populations sometimes (but not always) feel that they rejected one colonial interloper only to get a new one closer to home.

                    Originally posted by SomeoneHere View Post
                    Aceh and Papua are 2 different case Dan, the different lies on the reason to remain at the concept. Ever since the first time, Aceh already made a conditional support for Indonesian independence, while Papua give an unconditional support. Aceh never even once felt that they need to be integrated with Indonesia, while Papua see Indonesian unity concept as a solution to also unite the whole West Papua. You can clearly see like this, among Indonesian civil society is there any famous person from Aceh that also gain support from Acehneese? While contradictive to this, almost everyone who is famous from Papua also gain support from their homeland? (Thats why i put Indonesian Idol winner at our previous discussion).
                    Papuans sought to remain under colonial authority, their land was annexed by your country. Papua NEVER gave unconditional support, and was annexed later in 1969. I don't know what sort of cracked history they teach in Indonesian schools, but it's contradictory to what actually happened. This harga mati ideal, one common among Indonesians, is propaganda.

                    The Acehnese were among the few who truly fought the occupiers and made life hell for them. Their heroes, particularly their women, were fighters who engaged in jihad to rid their lands of the interlopers. In their view, Aceh existed prior to Indonesia and was a wealthy and cultivated kingdom. Their resources were excised from Aceh to enrich the Central Government, a bureaucracy that makes its home in Java. To their minds, this has been theft of their resources. There is unequal distribution of wealth and funding for infrastructure among the islands. Why should formerly natural gas rich Aceh and mineral rich Papua tolerate such an arrangement?

                    To the minds of the Acehnese and Papuans, the Javanese are the colonial invaders. And this is true, particularly in Papua where the indigenous people are being replaced. They are no longer the majority population in their lands, and this is by design. That is ethnic cleansing. For all of Indonesia's horseshit speech about resistance to colonial powers it has gone and created the exact same scenario with the exception being that now the colonial masters live in Java rather than the Netherlands.

                    And this is why I support armed resistance to Indonesian occupation. These peoples will slowly be erased to make way for an Indonesian identity, that is the kind of "diversity" that Indonesia espouses.

                    Originally posted by SomeoneHere View Post
                    Now why i mention Jokowi is one of Papuan source of hope (and probably the source of hope from some of Acehneese and by many Indonesian minority). Despite what most people think, i never see Jokowi as an Obama "wanna be". Both of them had very different goal and also different approach on how to achieve that goal. The only 1 thing that i see both of them share, is the fact that both of them are a "media darling", but thats all. Even i dont know exactly what is Obama goal for his presidency (that set him apart from US previous presidency), Jokowi goal is to provide a good system that can reach the basic humanitarian rights for all Indonesian equally, this kind of approach never been done at the previous presidency probably because its mythically imposible. Soekarno approach for unity in Indonesia is by ignitiate an Ultra-Nationalist concept, Soeharto approached with social-capitalist concept, Gus Dur approachment is base on tolerance, while SBY approach with his economic concept. Humanitarian concept (in exception of during Gus Dur era) is always overlook, this is what Jokowi wanted to offer, and this is also the reason why most Indonesia are having a "high hope". Please dont compare Indonesia to US in terms of system, theres not much of a chance for Obama to actually change anything in a system that had forged for almost 250 years. Indonesia is very much a newbie at terms of system, on which it also provide opportunity for the right leader to give his fresh idea to be implemented. Will jokowi succeed? i dont know, but i do know this as long as hope and faith still exist (even at a glimpse), there would always be a way.
                    What you described regarding Jokowi is nearly identical to the conditions that allowed that moron, Barack Obama, to become President of the United States. "Hope" is indeed the word, because that is essentially what his campaign ran on. He was an idealist, a community organizer who stepped into shoes too big for him to fill. He began to "waffle" (go back and forth) immediately, and he has kept very few (possibly none) of his promises. He has probably been the most inept president since Jimmy Carter, possibly worse, all because of this.

                    Jokowi is cut from the same cloth. He is not ready to grapple with the realities of the presidency, and for Aceh that is terrific news. You see, he may actually be the great humanitarian you think him to be on the inside, but politics does not always allow someone to live by their proclaimed code. He will find himself bound every which way he looks, because he's frankly out of his league. This is good for Aceh because it means now is the time to strike for independence. I do not know if the Acehnese are ready and willing to fight again at the moment. They want independence, but they know it will be a struggle, that it must be jihad. If they were to strike again, to detail the atrocities that would occur again (as a footnote, my relatives have their own harrowing accounts of what the government forces did) would be of paramount importance. The world is different now from their last struggle. We can easily document atrocities, we can make the world aware of how Indonesia actually operates. International sympathy for their cause would give Aceh the leverage it needed to leave, and Jokowi would not be strong enough to force the issue.

                    So now is the time, if they are willing to take it. Decades of fighting have made them exhausted, but the will remains.

                    Originally posted by SomeoneHere View Post
                    Dont get me wrong, i never tell or force anyone to stay or to live in Indonesia (i'm not even sure yet to live here for the rest of my life). Even the unity concept is not my own, its Indonesian basic national concept. How many people who wanted to be free from "Indonesia"? a lot, how do i know? because i might be one of them. You see both of my parents is from Manado and i'm also a Christian, so i do know all the mistreatment by being a minority here in Indonesia, i know how it feel when someone mock my minority status, i've been there Dan, and probably far worst then you could've ever imagine. But regardless all that, me and most of those "independent seeker-Indonesian unity apatist" are still willing to give Indonesia another chance that might the last chance if its being mistreated (alcohol bill would show more of mistreatment then a "good cause" if it is implemented now). I am sure that most of the minority would share this feeling of mine, "what we want is progress treatment, and not some restrain order"
                    Excellent, then should fully support calls for independence from every corner. Does Indonesia need to exist? Who does Indonesia benefit? Let me give you some salient examples, so you may understand my perspective.

                    In America, we have a concept called white privilege. It is a concept that white people in America are largely unaware of the benefits they have solely from being white, the majority. For example, as a white man I have never received special searches at airports in the United States. Never. Despite being Muslim, despite espousing what some deem radical views here, I never get the special searches. Contrast this with my wife, who ALWAYS gets extra searches.

                    Similarly, Indonesia has something I like to call "Java privilege." The Javanese may feel that they have it the same as others, but I disagree. I have seen, with my very own eyes, discrimination against my wife due to her province. Harassment from police and military is more frequent for her. I also noticed, in my professional career in Indonesia, that promotions and advancement were given to less qualified Javanese individuals. I would suspect that an analysis of this, an analysis of benefit and wealth, would demonstrate conditions not unlike the United States.

                    Don't you ever wonder at the "face" of Indonesia abroad, Someone? What culture is represented? Is it YOURS? Or is it always Java? I invite you to visit ANY Indonesian embassy or consulate to see what I speak of. Who is represented? What kind of artwork is it? Who works there? Who represents you, politically? These are questions you should ask yourself. Do you need to be "Indonesian" at all? When you erase the dissimulation of Indonesian propaganda, you will see what I speak of.


                    • Here, so you can understand how telling your use of the word "hope" was...


                      I am pleased that Jokowi is to be president, as it means that the dissolution of Indonesia is on the table.


                      • Originally posted by nyonyahbesar View Post
                        DaninAceh, you're an Indonesian noob. Stop talking like you're the the expert of all things Indonesian and/or moslem Indonesian (I read your other posts).
                        I love to hear that I an unqualified to have an opinion, because _______. Not enough "Indo credpoints," you see. Did I say things that hurt your delicate feelings?

                        Too bad. You can grow a pair and contribute or you can wallow in offense. Poor you.


                        • You never fail to amaze me, Dan. Always thinking that everyone in the world fits the mold that you've created in your head.

                          While you claim to argue from the public health perspective (from a weak, indefensible position at that), you're really just hoping and wishing that the world would bend to your will, which is influenced by your interpretation of Islam. And from what I've seen from your posts here, you don't have much if any respect to other people as human beings.


                          • Originally posted by rabbit_39 View Post
                            You never fail to amaze me, Dan. Always thinking that everyone in the world fits the mold that you've created in your head.

                            While you claim to argue from the public health perspective (from a weak, indefensible position at that), you're really just hoping and wishing that the world would bend to your will, which is influenced by your interpretation of Islam. And from what I've seen from your posts here, you don't have much if any respect to other people as human beings.
                            How amusing it is when mind readers like rabbit can put words in our mouths. To say that my argument is weak and indefensible is humorous, as I back up my statements with facts from reputable sources while my opponents summon up blogs and legalize everything morons who stopped smoking out of their bongs long enough to write a screed against substance prohibition.

                            Again, if alcohol were any other substance it would be banned for being unsafe. A cost/benefit analysis of alcohol demonstrates that it's totally not worth it. Most people on this forum would agree we're be better off without tobacco, but alcohol? Oh no, no, no... THAT is a bridge too far. It's ludicrous.

                            I'm also fairly certain you spoke in favor of regulating weapons during that last school shooting. Despite the fact that guns kill fewer people than alcohol most years, they are dangerous and should be highly regulated or outright banned. Do you agree with that sentiment? I'll have to revisit that thread...


                            • If alcohol is banned, I’ll ask for a 50% raise, this hardship post has become a lot harder for drinkers. Imagine if this country goes shariah, I won’t work here even with 100% raise. For sure, my wife doesn’t want to be forced to wear hijab (in this hot & humid climate). Foreign companies will find it more difficult to assign people to work here, their costs go up, then they’ll ask themselves “is it worth it”?.