Whipped in public just for going on a date: Unmarried couples flogged for violating Sharia law in In

It's probably because I actually had positives things to say about Muslims and you weren't having it...

 

This is the first point at which I reply to you in this thread. From then on your entire narrative was from a Resa Aslan spiel about how religion can't be 'good' or 'evil'. Stop flat out lying.

 

OK, I am convinced: OP really hates Islam.

 

Irony, you are moving around your own perception to what you believe is a reality , that is your personal choice, but to dictate which narrative to use is just absurd

 

Did any of you actually read the article?

This is a small, violent minority that has been appeased and allowed recently to roll back civil rights in their little province so that they don't start an Islamist insurgency against the Indonesian government.

I'm sure they appreciate all your support.

 

Well yea... These sort of threads are old.

Well actually... You accused me of whitewashing history before accusing me of being Resa Aslan (who I had to google to figure out who he was).

 

I didn't accuse you of whitewashing history. I accuse Islamic scholars of white washing history.

 

Calling Reza Aslan a religious scholar is a bit of a stretch.

 

Well that wasn't clear to me.

Based on what?

 

so basically they are treated like those Settlers in West Bank

 

Actually...yes. And I think we can agree it's not a model to be admired. It's one of the vilest things I've ever witnessed.

 

Wow.I guess it is true about dominating thoughts and emotions from dredging up a six year old thread.

That said I stand by what I said then and having been to Indonesia a few times since my experience hasn't been any different. Yes I didn't go to Banda Aceh. I actually was going to go in 2005 following the Indian Ocean Tsunami with a relief group but I couldn't arrange logistics for the trip. For those who don't know Banda Aceh was the hardest hit place by the tsunami being that it was the closest populated area to the epicenter. It was devastated by both the initial earthquake and the tsunami. 167,000 people died in that disaster. More than half of the total of all victims of the tsunami.

I have been close though to Banda Aceh and was in Lake Toba and Medan in 2011 which is the capital of North Sumatra (which includes Banda Aceh). I can tell you for certain that Sharia law wasn't enforced there and literally had a beer in the shadow of the main mosque of Medan. Also the area around Lake Toba is Batak which is mostly Christian and saw many churches there.

It is true that Banda Aceh is under Sharia law and it is the most Islamic part of the Indonesia but it isn't all of Indonesia and forms a very small part of Indonesia. If we're talking about problems facing Indonesia Banda Aceh is low on the list. Rampant and endemic corruption is by far the biggest problem and having been shaken down by Indonesian police I find that a far greater danger for anyone visiting Indonesia than being subjected to Sharia, forced to convert or beheaded for being an infidel. What I've heard from people who've been to Banda Aceh is that it is one of the least corrupt places in Indonesia.

 

I wouldn't be able to visit anyway, because I have a decade of Israeli visas in my passport. But I'm not concerned about how I would be treated in Indonesia. I'm concerned with how Indonesians are treated in Indonesia. When conditions are such that the government is bullied into letting locals establish a mini-theocracy, they are clearly not treated well. Their fate is thrown under the bus by a government that's willing to permit harm to it's own people because it is THAT afraid of it's own religious extremists.

 

Actually there was a very active Acehnese insurgency up until the 2004 tsunami. Both the government and the Acehnese realized that they needed to deal with the aftermath of the tsunami and couldn't keep fighting. The Acehnese insurgents worked with both the Indonesian government and international groups to provide aid following the tsunami. Because of that experience is one of the reasons why Aceh has been granted special status. The article refers to 2001 but while there was an agreement negotiated then my understanding is that agreement never was fully in effect and both sides violated it. It wasn't until 2005 that a peace was established between the government.

This is in contrast to the Tamil Tigers who had been fighting a protracted insurgency in Sri Lanka. Even though Tiger held territory was among the worst parts of Sri Lanka to be hit by the tsunami. They refused to allow both the government and international aid groups into their territory.

Another thing regarding Aceh. While very conservative Islam is a minority in Indonesia which mostly practices a moderate form of Islam with large populations of Christians, Buddhists, Hindus and Animists. It is the majority in Aceh. Further the Acehnese have for centuries prided themselves on their independence and fought the Dutch, the British, the Japanese along with the rest of Indonesia. For them maintaining autonomy wasn't solely about religion but about Acehnese identity.

 

Frankly corruption is a far larger burden on Indonesians than religion. Read my other post about Aceh. The Acehnese are a unique people among Indonesians. I personally don't agree with Sharia law but it is what they chose for themselves. It doesn't apply to anywhere else in Indonesia.

It's odd that you're placing the blame on the government for giving the local people what they want. During the Acehnese insurgency when Banda Aceh was under martial law the government was actually bullying people and government forces were accused of and suspected in many atrocities. Would you think it would've been better for the government to continue torturing and disappearing people rather than give them self-determination?

 

Aceh - 4.7M. 98% Muslim.
Indonesia - 255M. 87% Muslim.

 

I really don't understand your point? Did anywhere I suggest that EVERY Muslim region on the planet is dictated by Sharia Law.

I would say there is a correlation and causation with a larger concentration of Muslims giving rise to a larger percent chance the region is governed by draconian Islamic laws.

 

It's a country with a very high % of follower of Islam. But a small northwest tip of it is under Sharia law. Why?

My understanding is Indonesia rejected Islamic law when it gained independent and its early leaders wanted religion to stay out of politic. In term, my guess is that help with "keeping" extreme outdated religious views from creeping into politic and allow moderation among the population. The region, being fairly successful, independent, is self govern and has wide range of freedom help keeps the extremist views from gaining power. I think that all contribute to the reason why the nation isn't under Sharia law, even if many of the followers think it should be.