George Pinto <georgejpinto@...> wrote: > >In a democracy, one can make the same arguments in an open public forum, as >vigorously and robustly as in a court of law. >
George, The above is indeed the definition of a debate, and women are perfectly capable of debating as robustly as men. In fact, they are also capable of shouting over an opponent in a shouting match, as you saw in that TV9 YouTube video. The problem with your proposal is that the religious fanatics who filed the blasphemy lawsuit are not interested in a debate. They certainly are not interested in a civilized discussion. They only want to seek revenge and give vent to the hatred they feel in their bones, as is true of all religious and ideological fanatics. That is why we have communal riots, suicide bombings and genocides. Here is the progression of expression of hatred among religious and ideological fanatics: 1. Name-calling and demonization of the target(s) 2. Mass hate propaganda emails, websites and newsletters. 3. Aggressive public protests, and encroachment on the rights of others, including bystanders. 4. Issuance of indirect and/or direct threats in public and/or by phone calls. 5. Filing of blasphemy lawsuits and/or issuance of fatwas. 6. Engagement in violent retribution through communal riots, murders, remote control bombings, suicide bombings and genocides. Cheers, Santosh ----- Original Message ----- From: Gabriel de Figueiredo <[email protected]> > > Your rationale is all very good, George, but my gut feeling is that any such > "discussion" would very soon come to an exchange of verbal and > physical violence. ................................................................ From: George Pinto <[email protected]> >> >> My view is that the Sanal Edamaruku case should not be adjudicated in a > court of law but in an open public forum with both sides presenting their > views > and moderated by an independent person. The Indian courts are clogged enough > and > emphasis should be on violent crimes, including where real injury of life and > limb is suffered like murder, rape, etc. and measurable like financial loss > and > theft of property, etc. ............................................................... >> George >> P.S. I have intentionally not used the word "debate" for such a > proposed forum, a male-oriented word which implies confrontation as opposed > to > discussion. In fact, most of the voices on this issue are male, and they seem > to > prefer to resolve this issue as they do war - the tone and language > unmistakeably hostile. Perhaps it is time to seek civil resolutions - again, > for > one aggrieved party would that be the Christian thing to do? >>
