<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?><rss version="1.0"><channel><title>Diary of Babychen Mathew</title><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/</link><description>Diary of Babychen Mathew</description><language>en-us</language><item><title>My god vs yours</title><description><![CDATA[<BR><span style="font-family: Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">You know, this is something I usually talk about when I am with VT. We usually have a good laugh over it. Once I mentioned this to my ex-boss - he did not particularly like it, but smiled dutifully!Anyway, given the times, I think I will apologise in advance to everyone who might issue a fatwa on my head after reading this. <br><br>Assume there is a competition between the respective gods. For the sake of simplicity, I will stick to the main three - the Christian God, Hindu Gods, and the islamic God.<br><br>Who is <span style="font-style: italic;">da </span>best? The God on top?<br><br>Let me start with Hindu Gods (or God, depending on which philosophical stream you belong to. If you try to tackle in the Advaita route, there is nothing much I have to say, thats stuff beyond me. <br><br>The thing is, your regular Hindu Gods get jacked ever so often. They take panga with each other, often fall prey to jealousy, sometimes gang up, the Asuras often have them on the run, they are in bad shape overall. They can grant some wishes and have some powers, but sorry - they are all on the level of say, a Superman 100x. Things change quite a bit if you tackle the Trimurthi - but even they get into major shit often enough. Powerful alright, but not omnipotent. And often their political strategies curiously seem to reflect what happens on earth! <br><br>Now to the Christian God. Here, things are totally strange if you look at the Old testament and the New Testament. The God in Old Testament - Yahwe - is super angry. Vengeful, revengeful, and more. He demands loyalty and complete subservience, and he will take it. He punishes at the drop of a hat, and pray to another God (even a non-existent God) and he won"t wait for your afterlife - he will have you right here, right now!!<br><br>But the new Testament presents God as someone who has kissed those days Goodbye. With Jesus the son of God, no more anger is needed. All you have to do is be good and spead the word. God now is all forgiving - as long as you ask for mercy honestly. It is all sweet and stuff, and stick with him, and he will take care of you. Did I mention he is omnipotent? Yup, he can do ANYTHING. (That explains that question of Immaculate Conception - the Christian God can make a rock conceive, and a virgin is too easy).<br><br>The Islamic God. This is in my opinion, the toughest. Assume that the Christian God did not undergo that metamorphosis - and continued on the same track. Thats what you get with the Islamic God. Tough. Vengeful, if you mess with him or his followers. Demanding. AND omnipotent. I have read on islamic sites that you should not even bother to understand the logic of what he demands. Because his logic is beyond you, his senses are beyond you, and his idea of justice and right and wrong are defintiely beyond you. I can understand that, the Universe is huge, and whoever runs this place knows the complexities we cant even begin to fathom. But that is one school, there are other equally popular schools of thought I am sure.<br><br>So who is the big guy here? My feeling is, omnipotence and discipline and toughness is one difficult combo to beat.<br><br>If it all turns out wrong, and in the afterlife we discover that there are only Hindu Gods, you still have a chance. They can probably understand you are an idiot, and therefore, might pardon you. And God forbid if you have gone against the Islamic God!<br><br>Tough luck, baby!<br></span><BR>]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 27 Sep 2007 22:00:20 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/09/27/My-god-vs.html</link></item><item><title>Notorious B.R.A</title><description><![CDATA[I had abandoned this blog - and now I am back. The problem basically is that I end up doing a lot of writing here and there and sometimes just write rubbish :)<br><br>Anyway this is a pointer kind of post actually. I have just started another blog <a href="http://www.dancewithshadows.com/nuts/" target="_blank">Going Nuts</a><br><br>This is where I want to post the occasional funny stuff that enters my non-artificially enhanced brain! I am a bit of a sci-fi fan, and so very captivated with such ideas as man-machine integration and technology singuality and all.. Will try to post stuff here in the future as much as possible..<br><br>Anyway, my latest post in the new blog <a href="http://www.dancewithshadows.com/nuts/" target="_blank">Going Nuts</a> is about the Attack of the Bra Straps. Please read!<br><br><br><span style="font-weight: bold;"></span><BR><BR><br><img src="http://ri.rediffiland.com/homepimages/home3/646/5edb4ec7e76bd8bbe21baa878103b49c/homep/images/1190629905">]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 24 Sep 2007 15:55:35 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/09/24/Notorious.html</link></item><item><title>No threat, dear sir!</title><description><![CDATA[<P><BR><FONT face=Arial size=4>"I think your comment about Prudent Indian was not fair. You write that it was not a threat, but readers understand. You were not threatening the Prudent for that, but actually you were threatening the readers! Putting facts and figures in public, like Prudent has done, does make a lot of people uncomfortable." This is what Kumar Rahul said in one of the comments. I thought this deserved a clarification.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>You are making the same mistake that everyone who is on one side or the other make.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>To begin with, let me say that I talk of artist's freedom DESPITE that picture. I am a Christian (at least my Hindu friends say so!) My entire point is that even if I think it is vulgar, it should be permitted. I believe freedom of speech is more important than my feelings. I feel offended seeing that picture, but I am defending Prudent's freedom in putting up that picture completely. That is what everyone should have done.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>The media did not do that. Media talked about artistic freedom without showing people what the artist did. I think that is treatiung people like fools.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Prudent showed that picture, and said if a picture is so offensive, one should not make such creations. I objected only to that point of view. Not the picture!</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>My point is that offense or not, one should publish such a picture and then defend freedom.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>I am a journalist in some ways - I run a news website - but if I publish that picture on my front page I will go to jail. Simple. If I say that see this pic, its offensive, still I will go to jail. if I say, see this pic, its offensive but publishing it is important for freedom of ex-pression, still I will go to jail. I object to that.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Threat to Prudent? NO WAY.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>I was only pointing out that despite the motives, publishing such a picture is enough to send anyone to jail in India. Prudent survives because his is a blog, my site gets thousands of visitors, and one oftem, FROM MY OWN COMMUNITY, will get offended and file a complaint against me. So I applaud Prudent's courage, but it is dangerous nevertheless.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Unlike you say, the motive is not important in India. The court may finally release you looking at your motives, but you still get arrested. </FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>So, here I am, defending the right of the artist to offend me and my religious feelings. Am I making myself clear?</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Sirji, (I am learning delhi hindi nowadays!) I am on the side of freedom of ex-pression, and against my own community. I am against ban on da Vinci Code. I am against ban on satanic verses. I am against ban on husain's paintings. </FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>And I am not threatening readers! Readers or even Prudent have done nothing wrong. If people understand it wrong, they need to stop thinking about as enemies and friends. </FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Worldwide, freedom of ex-pression is gaining more ground every day. So I don't think any code of conduct would work. In fact, the moment we have a code of conduct, we will be compared to Saudi Arabia or China. No government would do that.</FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>I understand the psychology of demanding a ban, Rahul. I feel the same way often, but I go against my feelings. That is what makes me human, I think. That I can overcome my emotions with my logic. </FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>The world is overall coming over to the point of view that the only way to tackle problems arising out of artists' 'dangerous' ex-pressions is by allowing it, and by allowing others also to protest creatively as they see fit, and drown out what they don't like. </FONT></P><P><FONT face=Arial size=4>Here are some interesting links on the topic</FONT></P><P><BR><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment"><FONT face=Arial size=4>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment</FONT></A></P><P><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_versus_blasphemy"><FONT face=Arial size=4>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_versus_blasphemy</FONT></A></P><P><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy"><FONT face=Arial size=4>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy</FONT></A></P><P><A href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ"><FONT face=Arial size=4>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ</FONT></A></P><P><BR><FONT size=4> </FONT></P>]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 15 Jun 2007 19:51:14 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/06/15/No-threat-dear.html</link></item><item><title>In memory of a a girl killed in an 'honour killing'</title><description><![CDATA[Du'a Khalil Aswad was only 17 years old.<BR><BR>She was killed on 7 April, 2007 in Iraq. This was an honour killing. She belonged to the Yazidi cult. She made the mistake of falling in love with a Sunni Arab boy. Nobody is sure if they got married or not.<BR><BR>Anyway there was a threat to her life and she went into hiding. Her own relatives or own people convinced her to come back, and when she was back, dragged her out and stoned her to death. Probably her own family did it.<BR><BR>People were recording the entire gory sequence using mobile cameras, there were police watching who did not do anything, and she tried to sit up in the middle of the stoning, and one man finally hit her on the face with a concrete block and finished her off.<BR><BR>The outside world came to know of the murder only when video clips surfaced on the internet.<BR><BR>Before we feel all superior about this, remember that honour killings happen here too, though obviously a lot fewer in numbers that an Iraq. Fathers and brothers kill women for similar crimes here too, and once in a while, we may notice a small news story in the newspapers. <BR><BR>Wherever people are not allowed individual freedoms, honour killings can happen and do happen. <BR><BR><br><img src="http://ri.rediffiland.com/homepimages/home3/646/5edb4ec7e76bd8bbe21baa878103b49c/homep/images/1181216367">]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:15:45 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/06/07/In-memory-of-a-a-girl-killed-in-an-honour.html</link></item><item><title>Post a Blog or Add a Post?</title><description><![CDATA[<BR>How old is Rediff iLand? A couple of years, at least?<BR><BR>The other day, when i had logged into iland, i noticed this little button -- Post a Blog. If you go to your own blog while logged in, you get a button called Add a Post. Both do the same thing.<BR><BR>So, here is hoping that Rediff gets this right - a Blog is the entire collection of posts, so you don't post a Blog. You Add a post. Post - single. Blog - collection of posts. Simple na? Please to change, dear Rediff!<BR><BR>]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2007 18:15:18 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/06/06/Post-a-Blog-or-Add-a.html</link></item><item><title>Gujjar agitation, law and order, and our own confusion</title><description><![CDATA[Two days back, Dilip Krishnan had posted a picture of some Gujjar (Or is it Gurjar? I have sene both spellings) agitators vandalising a train. He wondered why nobody does anything even when the faces of the vandals are clearly visible. <BR><BR>Makes sense. They come on TV, they are lighting up and burning cars and scooters on TV, they are turning over hardcarts of vegetable vendors (how does that help in getting ST status?!) on TV, laughing on TV - why don't we just arrest them using all this as proof?<BR><BR>This is unfortunately not practical on two levels. <BR><BR>One, if you arrest every protestor who in front of TV cameras indulge in violence and arson, our jails will overflow. Remember that we have some major protest happening somewhere in India all the time. Often it includes some kind of breaking the law. There are not enough policemen to arrest everyone, not enough place to keep them once arrested, not enough courts to sentence them or file chargesheets in. I remember when I was in Kerala, often cops would arrest protestors, let most of them go, and just keep a few in the station or jail. <BR><BR>Two, social unrest. Today, there is a rumor that an attempt to murder case has been filed against the Gujjar leader Bainsla. If it is true, it is a dangerous trend. Mind you, I am not saying he is responsible or not responsible for the deaths that occurred. It is dangerous because every major political and social leader in India is responsible for violence. Do we arrest all of them?<BR><BR>During every political agitation, there is a party leader or leaders who announce the hartal, bandh, rasta roko, whatever. And often many lose their property and some lose their lives in the ensuing violence. If we follow the principal of arresting the leaders who started the agitation, every party and every community in India would have its top leaders in jail. Often under attempt to murder!<BR><BR>Not practical at all, is it? So even when they are responsible for deaths, they stay happily out of it. This what we have managed to do with our democracy! Super, I say!]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:56:50 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/06/06/Gujjar-agitation-law-and-order-and-our-own.html</link></item><item><title>Mor Tor video</title><description><![CDATA[<FONT face=Arial size=4>One of the most famous chutney music videos in West Indies.</FONT><BR><OBJECT height=350 width=425><PARAM NAME="movie" VALUE="http://www.youtube.com/v/phSIrBLSR6M"><PARAM NAME="wmode" VALUE="transparent"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/phSIrBLSR6M" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></OBJECT>]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 08:51:49 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/05/24/Mor-Tor.html</link></item><item><title>The right to speak bakwaas should be respected</title><description><![CDATA[<FONT face=Arial size=4>Today, I came across this news item in rediff.<BR><BR></FONT><P><A href="http://in.rediff.com/news/2007/may/23raj.htm" target=_blank><FONT face=Arial size=4>Jamshedpur court issues arrest warrant against Raj Thackeray</FONT></A></P><FONT face=Arial size=4>I started off my blog talking about freedom of ex-pression, and how it affects everyone. No just the ones who insult you today, but also your own freedom of ex-pression tomorrow. The Raj Thackeray case is an example of that.<BR><BR>Here is the quote from the rediff story:<BR><BR>A local court on Wednesday issued an arrest warrant against Maharashtra Navnirman Sena chief Raj Thackeray for his alleged provocative statement against Bihari community two months ago.<BR><BR>What was the actual statement? Here it is:<BR></FONT><FONT size=4><FONT face=Arial><SPAN id=comment_content-48><FONT color=#800000>"I have never changed my stand since the Kalyan incident. Biharis should remember that if they abuse us our hands will rise. If they try it again we will hit them again. We will hit them everyday for breakfast, lunch and dinner. They can stay here but they should treat Marathi people with respect."<BR></FONT></SPAN><BR><BR>There are several ways to look at this issue, from different perspectives:<BR><BR>1. Raj Thackeray's perspective: My people are angry, they are being discriminated against, we have to make our anger very clear, and threatening to beat up Biharis is just expressing our anger. Sometimes our people may beat them up too - but that may not be my intention in saying this.<BR><BR>2. The Bihari's and outsiders' perspective: We are citizens of this country, and we have a right to go look for a job wherever we please. If Raj has a problem with it, he should deal with it politically. Saying that we would be beaten up is not right, and in fact it is provocative, and exhorting people to harass us. He should be arrested, thrown in jail.<BR><BR>I have another perspective to offer. In the words of my friend VT, it can be simply termed the 'gaali de, gaali le' principle. It suites my position as a classical liberal (not a leftie liberal. Lefties, in my own home state, are brilliant at beating up anyone who offers perspectives that offend them!).<BR><BR>In my view, whether Raj Thackeray is justified or not, he has a right to express his anger. And a so-called 'provocative' statement does not exist. Why? If he makes a 'provocative' statement, and people are actually provoked, the state is there to deal with it. The duty of the state is to deal with it. Not to go around censoring peoples' ex-pressions. (I will come to the state's capability to deal with it in a moment).<BR><BR>Now, I know that Raj Thackeray belonged to the party that started off harassing South Indians with their infamous slogan "lungi uthao, pungi bajao". (I am a South Indian.) Then, the Sena moved on to newer targets for their anger, like the Bangladeshis, then Muslims, then Christians (I am a Christian too), then North Indians, then North Indian muslims only when approaching elections, and it continues. At any moment, the only thing we can be sure about is that Sena does not want to throw Maharashtrians out of Maharashtra. Everyone else is fair game!<BR><BR>So why am I supporting Raj's statement which is offensive to Biharis? And might provoke to his supporters?<BR><BR>Because I support Raj Thackeray's freedom to make a fool of himself. In a free country, everyone has the right to be an idiot, and express his idiocy in whichever way he feels fit. <BR><BR>(I personally think raj is smart and this is just for popularity but thats another post)<BR><BR>So, let Raj offend Biharis. Provoke his followers. But it is the country's duty to control the result of that provocation. So if MNS workers go around beating people up, it is the state's job to ensure it does not happen.<BR><BR>But can our country control anything? Ha!<BR><BR>Our country can't provide toilets for people to crap - are we going to control crowds? No way. Not when we are a country which has foodgrains rotting in its godowns, and can't figure out a way to get that food to hungry, starving people. We can't do shit.<BR><BR>It is when a nation state can't do its job that they resort to easy fixes. Like ad-hoc laws against provocation. Because that is all we can do. A cult leader wears flowing robes and to some it looks like Guru Gobind Singh, and they are provoked! Some others are provoked when they see couples walking hand in hand! More are provoked when some cartoonists in a faraway country (whose name they can't pronounce) draws a few cartoons. And more retards from my own community think the world will crash down on their heads and everyone will abandon Christianity if Da Vinci Code is shown in Indian cinema halls. Recently, Mumbai's police was provoked enough to warn a 60-year old husband and wife against intimacy when the wife rubbed her coughing husband's back. <BR><BR>There is too much of provocation and provoked. And very little rspect for the individual.<BR><BR>It is easy to fight for values you hold dear. It is difficult to fight for values some idiot holds dear, but true classical liberals know that freedom is not only about good things, but also about freedom to offend. Civilization demands it, and saying no to it is just going back to the dark ages.<BR><BR>So coming back to Raj. Let him, and his uncle, and the angry ones who think all Muslims are terrorists, and the terrorists who think that all non-Muslims should be converted - let them all say what they want.<BR><BR>Can we hold together as a country if everyone says what they want? I doubt it. That only means that we are an immature, unstable state - and we better become stable and mature fast. And telling everyone to shut up and not kiss is not the way to grow up.<BR><BR></FONT></FONT>]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 01:07:07 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/05/24/The-right-to-speak-bakwaas-should-be.html</link></item><item><title>From gulping to grinding</title><description><![CDATA[<FONT face=Arial><FONT size=4>Those days:<BR><BR>You would walk up, on wobbly knees, to that sweet thing over there. The motivating powers include 1) hormones, 2) potential humiliation by friends and 3) 'love'. And then you will GULP. "Hi.. err.." and fumble and gulp, till somehow you manage to get a few words out of your throat, not making any sense and thoroughly confusing the poor girl. And then you almost run frantically back, hoping that despite the mess and drool, you have at least managed to strike the girl as cute.<BR><BR>I know one character: Toughie, roughie, but a romantic at heart, David. At some Church youth club moments, he started feeling the palpitations; there was a dance, there was a sexy babe, and yes, he wanted to dance with her. (This happened in Delhi, the city where the poshest looking people talk in happy Punjabi, unlike in Bombay where people abuse in Angrezi when someone thrusts their sweaty armpits in your face in a local train. Anyway, back to David) So he approached and asked her, </FONT><FONT size=4><EM>"Nachegi Kya?"<BR></EM><BR>Needless to say, the dance never happened.<BR><BR>Such are the perils of approaching girls, women and trying to "make friendship."<BR><BR>I know things are different now, and I am a dowdy fuddy duddy with the way things operate now. Once in a while, listening to some teen talk about his or her love life makes me jump out of my skin. I suppose the DPS MMS was the harbinger (what the hell does it mean?) of many changes. Many shocks to my system are on the way; and I would advise everyone to prepare for amazing revelations from their children in the days to come!<BR><BR>But today I came across something that is even more interesting. Any of you seen MTV Grind? I suppose you are sorta familiar with the grind, and some of you can even grind well. Anyway, it seems that a study of some 143 women somewhere near Queen's University, Kingston was conducted. And they said most men introduce themselves to the women by grinding against them, from behind. "84% of the women in the survey say this is how they have personally experienced new men introducing themselves." And "about 30% said "grinding" is an acceptable way to pick someone up."<BR><BR>You can read the full story </FONT><A href="http://calsun.canoe.ca/News/Columnists/Lautens_Stephen/2007/05/19/4192447.html"><FONT size=4>here </FONT></A><BR></FONT>]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 May 2007 15:40:32 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/05/21/From-gulping-to.html</link></item><item><title>How the ban you ask for will come and bite you in the butt</title><description><![CDATA[<STRONG><FONT face=Arial></FONT></STRONG><FONT class=f12 color=#000000><P><IMG height=330 src="http://www1.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/351735/2/istockphoto_351735_does_your_dog_bite.jpg" width=380 border=0></P><P align=justify>Yes, really. Seems we are all getting offended all the time. Everyone. Today it is the Akalis, before that it was some people in Vadodara about some paintings, before that it was Gere kissing Shetty, then someone in Mumbai who was bothered about a jokebook on sardars, before that it was a book on Shivaji, then Da Vinci Code, then Satanic Verses. <BR><BR>Mind you, these are the ones we know about. In every corner, every <EM>char-rasta</EM>, there are even more people getting offended all the time.<BR><BR>I mean I get offended when I am watching TV, and then an ad for sanitary napkins appears and a gaggle of women go "Ooooh" and marvel at the speed at which the said pad sucks up some blue colored liquid. In another there is an innovative pad which doesn't spread odours, and a man in the cinema hall looks pleasantly pleased while a woman's waist passes by his face in slow motion. Bloody hell I am offended!<BR><BR>Before that there were some who were offended by the ad for strawberry flavoured condoms. My father - I think - is very offended every time we watch TV and suddenly some girl swirls by on screen displaying flurescent <EM>chaddi</EM>s. Or may be he is not, I don't know; never asked him.<BR><BR>I was in Mumbai for 12 years, working as a journalist. My boss was offended by me having coffee on the office stairs with fair-skinned girls. He was never offended by me having coffee with dark-skinned girls, wonder why. <BR><BR>When I was in college, someone mentioned my village in the Parliament as an example of communal harmony. We have a famous temple there, and pilgrims from all over the country land up in my village. The Christian and Muslim schools provide parking space and sleeping areas; the colors to sprinkle and photos of Sri Ayyappa are sold by Muslim shopkeepers, and the Hindu pilgrims take a dancing parikrama around the sanctum sanctorum of the mosque situated right opposite, across the street. When this was mentioned in Parliament, BJP MPs protested - they were offended by something about the entire idea. I am sure if you mention this in Saudi Arabia, many Muslims too would be offended about allowing Hindus to dance around a mosque.<BR><BR><FONT size=4><STRONG>The point I am making here is; everyone is offended. It is natural and human to be offended; If you tell me you are never offended, I will treat you with some amount of suspicion!<BR></STRONG></FONT><BR>However, the entire idea of freedom of speech is that speech will offend. Freely expressed opinions always hurt, always offend. Speech, when self-censored or censored by others, is not free at all.<BR><BR>What we need to do is understand the concept of freedom of speech well. And then decide if the benefits of freedom of speech are worth it or not. <BR><BR>Indian laws do not give us freedom of speech in its true sense. It is pretty much limited in its nature; otherwise a man who publishes a jokebook on sardars would not end up in jail. Or a court issue an arrest warrant against Shilpa Shetty and Richard Gere.<BR><BR>What most of us who say that something should be banned, whether it is a movie, or a book, or a painting, is that it will all come back and bite you in the BUTT! With every one of our demands, we are encouraging laws which restrict our tongues, our looks, our ways of life.<BR><BR>Let me tell you - the Da Vinci Code protests and demands for a ban was entirely because my co-religionists were truly inspired by other communists. Everyone thinks that if Muslims can demand a ban, so can I. If Christians can ask for that, I can ask for this. If they can get angry and their people can burn a few buses, my people can get angry and burn a few shops.<BR><BR><STRONG>There is no limit to the culture of taking offense</STRONG>.<BR><BR>Say, many of us are married. Many of us have boyfriends or girlfriends. There are many who think that public display of affection is bad, offensive, immoral. So we ban smooching in public. Then once we get used to that, people will get offended by hugging in public. Then, they will get offended by people holding hands. Then it will be about a male and female under an umbrella. Then it will be that mixed, co-ed classes are immoral. <BR><BR>The way to go forward is, support freedom. If someone else's ex-pression of freedom offends us, grit our teeth and move on. Because, the way we ask for restricted freedoms for someone else, tomorrow our freedoms too will be restricted by another, someone more conservative than you. <BR><BR><STRONG>The artist in Vadodara was treated exactly the way Christians have treated philosophers and scientists (science was often blasphemy), terrorists in Kashmir treat Tv channels and women in jeans. We don't like what you, we are offended, and now we will punish you. This is not a new attitude, history is full of incidents like that. Remeber McCarthyism in US, when everyone who said anything was a communist spy?</STRONG><BR><BR>This brings me to PrudentIndian, and that 'offensive' picture of Jesus with a commode. I will agree that the art installation by Chandramohan is offensive. Now, what about the picture on PrudentIndian's blog? He was making a point by showing us that picture. But, do you know that even that picture is enough to put someone behind bars? I am sure that if a hardcore fundamentalist Christian sees that pic, he will be extremely offended. And if he files a case in any court, the courts will probably order an investigation into it and ask Rediff to disclose the details and IP etc of the blogger. <BR><BR>Do you get my point now? PI had to make a point, and that pic was necessary for that. I fully support his right to publish that picture. However, legitimate reason or not, it is still enough to get you a few weeks' stay in jail. <b>(This is not a threat in anyway!)</b> <BR><BR>See how restrictions and bans come and bite you in the back!</P></FONT>]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 16:50:31 +0530</pubDate><link>http://ithinkoffensivestuff.rediffiland.com/blogs/2007/05/20/How-the-ban-you-ask-for-will-come-and-bite-you-in.html</link></item></channel></rss>