Definisi Pornography dan Penodaan agama itu sulit dibuat definisinya untuk 
dapat memuaskansemua golongan.

Makanya dlm negara==civil society==semua orang berhak berexpressi dan 

Dalam Agama Islam juga mereka memilih jalan hidupnya, tidak ada paksaan sama 

Tugas Rasul datang hanya untuk==PEMBERI PERINGATAN SAJA==  bukan untuk 
memaksakan peraturan2 ALLAH.

PokoKnya peraturan2 ALLAH itu adalah ==BERSIFAT ANJURAN SAJA==

1.And shown him the two highways? QS.90:(10)
(One is ALLAH's way, Two is Satan's way) (You are free to choose between two 
path )

2.Let there be no compulsion in religion.QS.2:256

Tidak ada paksaan untuk beragama 

3.Tugas kamu ( Muhammad) hanya menyampaikan saja. kami lah yang menghisab / 
menghukumnya perbuatan2 mereka dan...QS.13:40.

Your duty is to make (the Message) reach them: it is Our part to call them to 
account. QS 13:40

Jika mereka tetap berpaling,maka sesungguhnya kewajiban yang dibebankan atas 
kamu(Muhammad) hanyalah menyampaikan (amanat ALLAH ) dgn terang Qs 16 :82.
But if they turn away, thy duty is only to preach the Clear Message. QS 16:82

Makanya masarakat Amerika adalah masarakat YANG DAMAI. Justice for all
and non discrimination based on; religion, race, gender, age, nation etc.

Masarakat Amerika adalah ==MASARAKAT RAHMATAN LIL'ALAMIN==untuk semua orang.


Indonesia: Law's definition of pornography open to multiple interpretations
Jakarta Globe

The Constitutional Court on Thursday ruled to maintain the controversial 2008 
Anti-Pornography Law, but failed to put an end to a debate that has divided the 
nation for years. "The postulations of the applicants have no legal base," 
Mahfud MD, the chief of the Constitutional Court, said on Thursday in the 
405-page ruling. The decision comes more than a year after the court began 
hearing three judicial review requests filed by 47 applicants ranging from 
representatives of youth groups and churches to housewives, women's activists 
and legal aid foundations.

In seeking a judicial review, the applicants argued that the law's definition 
of pornography was vague, misleading and open to multiple interpretations.

The law defines pornography as "sexual material made by people in the forms of 
pictures, sketches, illustrations, photos, writings, voice, sounds, motion 
pictures, animation, cartoons, poems, conversations, body movements and other 
forms of communication through various mass media or public displays that can 
arouse sexual desires and/or violate public moral values."

The applicants also contended that the law, which forbids the production, 
distribution or sale of anything that can be categorized as pornography and 
bans displays of nudity, intercourse or any other "pornographic" actions, was 
unconstitutional. The law stipulates sentences of up to 15 years in jail and 
fines of up to Rp 7.5 billion ($795,000).

Achmad Sodiki, one of the judges, said the law's stated definition of 
pornography was clear.

"The first article of the Anti-Pornography Law is a definition that adheres to 
the aim when the law was drafted," he said.

The court's sole female judge, Maria Farida Indrati, gave a dissenting opinion, 
arguing that the law's first article "opposes the people's right to legal 
certainty according to the Constitution," and "that the law could lead to 
public judgments among the people because of different definitions of the term 

Critics of the law were quick to slam the decision, with many saying they would 
ignore it.

One applicant, Tenny Assa, said the people of North Sulawesi would not 
implement the law. "It gives us more reason to free ourselves from Indonesia," 
he added.

Critical voices could also be heard in Bali.

"Bali is the island of peace. We reject the evil of pornography, but the law 
cannot be applied to the variety of sociological conditions in Indonesia," Bali 
Governor Made Mangku Pastika said in Denpasar.

"If the law was effective, there would be no more television or Internet 
content that is close to the definition of pornography in the law. But we still 
can see it."

Taufik Basari, a lawyer for the applicants, said they would seek a legislative 
review at the House of Representatives. "The court only tried to please a 
certain group, but it did not solve the problem," Taufik said.

Constitutional expert Refly Harun said he believed the court had played it 
safe. "Because the public desire to see the law annulled is not really strong, 
the court did not dare to annul it."

He said experience showed the strongest groups had the greatest influence on 
court rulings.

Ifdhal Kasim, head of the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM), 
said: "The court should have seen this from a progressive point of view, to 
protect individuals in pursuing their rights." He warned the law would 
especially hinder the rights of women and minority groups.

The law has already been used to jail at least eight people, mostly female 
erotic dancers.
March 25, 2010

Kirim email ke