In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act – George Orwell

First of all, we need to say that human rights protect human beings: not the ideas that human beings might hold on the origins and subsequent order of the world or any other matter.

What this seems to say first is that what we will refer to as criticism, whether reasoned, satirical or contemptu…ous, of the content of certain beliefs (religion in this case) affronts the dignity of those who believe. Certainly an affront may be felt by a believer encountering some form of criticism. In the defence of such ‘affronts’, we should say that human progress has been built on the replacement of untenable ideas by more solidly-based versions, even though in the process there is a chance that sound ideas will have been attacked by proponents of the unsound. This is the challenging intellectual environment that freedom of expression seeks to defend. Dignity in the defence of one’s views involves the potential for dignified withdrawal from a position that proves indefensible. It certainly calls for tolerance of those who criticise or attack one’s views.

Article Eighteen supports the right to believe and proclaim belief in anything we choose, whether stupid or wise. There is no restriction of freedom contained in criticism: quite the opposite. Criticism offers the freedom to change one’s views, or retain them if one so chooses. The suggestion that incitement to religious violence is implicit in criticism of religion is more problematic. This seems to mean that a critical assault on religion might be followed by a physical assault on the adherents of a religion by the supporters of the criticism. Those who drafted and supported the resolutions may be able to cite instances in which it is completely provable that verbal attacks on ideas, as such, incited subsequent physical attacks on people and property. Be that as it may, what is definitely likely is that the adherents of a criticized religion might attack the critics. What is certain is that communal violence based on religious disputes is sadly common in many parts of the world. What needs to be asked is whether freedom of expression should be curtailed in matters of religion because religions harbour so many hotheads and bigots? Frankly, responding to criticism, or even insult, with violence is regressive and cannot form the basis for any interpretation of human rights.

Indonesia signed the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on February 23 2006. With the arrest of and charges brought against of Alex Aan, they are violating articles 18 and 19 of that agreement, amongst other articl…es. They have the power to have these charges dropped, but have not yet chosen to do so. Why? The government is made of primarily Muslim members. They WANT him to spend 5 years in prison. They WANT to use him as an example, to keep other Indonesian citizens ‘in line’, to keep their mouths shut.

Each and every one of the members sitting in government are also very much afraid of the fanatical Muslim groups such as the FPI, who very much want to institute shariah law in Indonesia. Which is why every time these groups murder somebody, harass other religious groups, harass businesses etc, they spend no time in jail. No charges are brought against these religious lunatics. They literally get away with murder, with the police and government looking the other way.

When Indonesian government signs international agreements under the UN, that would fall under International Law. The last time we checked, Indonesia was not it’s own planet, that then makes the Indonesian government look like liars and manipulators. They sign an international agreement, make a promise to the International communion, and then run around and give everybody the finger and say ‘Fuck you, we will do whatever we want to’. Nice….and very typical.

Alexander Aan, a civil servant in Dharmasraya, West Sumatra, was beaten and charged with blasphemy after writing “God does not exist” on his Facebook page. An enforced disappearance is a crime against humanity which must never to be repeated in history.

The response has ranged from condemnation by several international organizations to support by local citizens and the Indonesian Council of Ulema. Many people have invoked the first principle of Pancasila, the state ideology, to make the argument that atheism — and Alexander — have no place in Indonesia.

I am obliged to speak. For the Indonesia is under threat of Islam. As I have argued many times, Islam is chiefly an ideology. An ideology of hatred, of destruction, of conquest. It is my strong conviction that Islam is a threat to values of our founding father, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers.

All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.

We must live in the truth, said the dissidents under Communist rule, because the truth will set us free. Truth and freedom are inextricably connected. We must speak the truth because otherwise we shall lose our freedom. Alex Aan is risking his life in defense of freedom in his own homeland. Of all our achievements freedom is the most precious and the most vulnerable. Many have given their lives for freedom. We have been reminded of that in the commemorations of the independence. But the struggle for freedom is much older.

The trial is not about Alex Aan only. It is about something much greater. Freedom of expression is the life source of our progressive tailored civilization.

Do not let that source go dry just to cosy up to a totalitarian regime. “Freedom”, said the American President Dwight Eisenhower, “has its life in the hearts, the actions, the spirit of men and so it must be daily earned and refreshed – else like a flower cut from its life-giving roots, it will wither and die.”

I have spoken, I speak, and it is my duty – I cannot do otherwise – to continue to speak. -Geert Wilder-

God: Like one second.

Mortal: What is a million dollars like to you?

God: Like one penny.

Mortal: Can I have a penny?

God: Just a second.

-dimuat di majalah Pandji Islam, 1939

Bagi saja tabir itu adalah satu simbul perbudakan, jang tidak dikendaki oleh Islam. Saja ingat bahwa dulu H. A. Salim pernah merobek tabir di salah satu rapat umum, – ja merobek, terang-terangan! Di dalam pandangan saja, perbutan beliau itu adalah satu perbuatan, jang lebih besar misalnja daripada menolong orang dari pahlawan air laut jang sedang mendidih atau masuk pendjara karena delik sekalipun. Sebab perbuatan sedemikian itu minta keberanian moril jang besar. Apakah jang saya perbuat? Bukan menundjukkan keberanian jang besar, tetapi…keluar dari itu rapat moril “sebagai protes”,- al seen laffe hond!

Saja tidak boos sahadja, saja tidak marah. Saja toch tidak bisa marah kepada sesuatu adat jang kolot, pun tidak marah kepada saudara-saudara jang berlainan faham dengan saja itu. Mereka tidak sengadja mau menghina kaum perempuan. Mereka ada merdeka didalam kejakinan mereka dan sajapun merdeka djuga. Saja adalah murid dari Historische School van Marx. Hal tabir itu saja pandang historisch pula, zuiver onpersoonlijk. Tampaknja seperti soal ketjil, soal kain jang remeh. Tapi pada hakekatnja soal mahabesar dan mahapenting, soal jang mengenai segenap maatschappelijke positie kaum perempuan. Saja ulangi: tabir adalah simbul dari perbudakan kaum perempuan! Meniadakan perbudakan itu adalah pula satu historische plicht!

“Di dalam surat kabar Pemandangan 8 April j.l. saya membaca satu perkabaran yang ganjil: seorang guru agama  dijebloskan ke dalam bui tahanan karena ia memperkosa kehormatan salah seorang muridnya yang masih gadis kecil.
Bahwa orang dijebloskan ke dalam tahanan kalau ia memperkosa gadis itu tidaklah ganjil. Dan tidak terlalu ganjil pula kalau seorang guru memperkosa seorang muridnya. Bukan karena ini perbuatan tidak bersifat kebinatangan, jauh dari itu, tetapi oleh karena memang kadang-kadang terjadi kebinatangan semacam itu. Yang saya katakana ganjil ialah caranya si guru itu “menghalalkan” ia punya perbuatan. Sungguh, kalau reportase di surat kabar Pemandangan itu benar, maka benar-benarlah di sini kita melihat Islam Sontoloyo….!!! Suatu perbuatan dosa dihalalkan menurut hokum fiqh.”

“Cobalah kita mengambil satu contoh. Islam melarang kita makan daging babi. Islam juga melarang kita menghina kepada si miskin, memakan haknya anak yatim, menfitnah orang lain, menyekutukan Tuhan Yang Esa itu. Malahan yang belakangan ini dikatakan dosa yang terbesar, dosa datuknya dosa. Tetapi apa yang kita lihat? Coba Tuan menghina si miskin, makan haknya anak yatim, menfitnah orang lain, musyrik di dalam Tuan punya pikiran dan perbuatan. Maka tidak banyak orang yang akan menunjuk kepada tuan dengan jari seraya berkata: tuan menyalahi Islam. Tetapi coba tuan makan daging babi, walau hanya sebesar biji asam pun dan seluruh dunia akan mengatakan tuan orang kafir. Inilah gambarnya jiwa Islam sekarang ini, terlalu mementingkan kulitnya saja, tidak mementingkan isi. Terlalu terikat kepada “uiterlijke vormen” saja, tidak menyalah-nyalahkan “intrinsieke waarde”. ”Ah”, saya meniru perkataan Budiman Kwadjda Kamaludin: alangkah baiknya kita disamping fiqh itu mempelajari juga sungguh-sungguh etiknya Quran, intrinsieke waardennya Quran. Alangkah baiknya pula kita meninjau sejarah yang telah lampau, mempelajari sejarah itu, melihat dimana letaknya garis menaik dan dimana letaknya garis menurun dari masyarakat Islam, akan menguji kebenaran perkataan Prof. Tor Andrea yang mengatakan bahwa juga Islam terkena fatum kehilangan jiwanya yang dinamis, sesudah lebih ingat kepada ia punya system perundang-undangan kepada ia punya ajaran jiwa. Dulupun dari Ende pernah saya tuliskan: “umumnya kita punya kyai-kyai dan kita punya ulama-ulama tak ada sedikitpun “feeling” kepada sejarah. Ya boleh saya katakana kebanyakan tak mengetahui sedikitpun sejarah itu. Mereka punya minat hanya kepada agama khusus saja, dan dari agama ini, terutama sekali bagian fiqh. Sejarah, apalagi bagian “yang lebih dalam”, yakni yang mempelajari kekuatan-kekuatan masyarakat yang menyebabkan kemajuannya atau kemunduran suatu bangsa, -sejarah itu sama sekali tak menarik mereka punya perhatian. Padahal di sini, di sinilah penyelidikan yang maha penting! Apa sebab mundur? Apa sebab maju? Apa sebab bangsa ini di jaman ini begini? Apa sebab bangsa itu di jaman itu begitu? Inilah pertanyaan-pertanyaan yang maha penting yang harus berputar, terus-menerus di dalam kita punya ingatan kalau kita mempelajari naik turunnya sejarah itu.

Tetapi bagaimana kita punya kyai-kyai dan ulama-ulama? Tajwid membaca Quran, hafal ratusan hadits, mahir dalam ilmu syarak, tetapi pengetahuannya tentang sejarah umumnya nihil. Paling mujur mereka hanya mengetahui “tartich Islam” saja.  Dan inipun terambil dari buku-bukunya tarich Islam yang kuno, yang tak dapat tahan ujiannya ilmu pengetahuan modern.Padahal dari tarich Islam inipun saja mereka sudah akan dapat menggali juga banyak ilmu yang berharga. KITA UMUMNYA MEMPELAJARI HUKUM, TETAPI TIDAK MEMPELAJARI CARANYA ORANG DULU MENTANFIZKAN HUKUM ITU. “fiqh pada waktu itu hanyalah kendaraan saja, tetapi kendaraan ini dikusiri oleh rohnya etik Islam serta tauhid yang hidup, dan ditarik oleh kuda sembrani yang di atas tubuhnya ada tertulis ayat Quran: “janganlah kamu lembek dan janganlah kamu mengeluh sebab kamu akan menang, asal kamu mukmin sejati”. Fiqh ditarik oleh agama hidup, dikendarai oleh agama hidup, disemangati agama hidup, roh agama hidup yang berapi-api dan menyala-nyala. Dengan fiqh yang demikian itu umat Islam menjadi cakrawati di separuh dunia.

Kebalikannya, bahwa sejak islam studie dijadikan fiqh studie garis kenaikan itu menjadi membelok ke bawah. Menjadi garis yang menurun. Di situlah lantas islam membeku menurut kata Essad Bey, membeku menjadi satu system formil belaka. Lenyaplah ia punya tenaga yang hidup. Lenyaplah ia punya jiwa penarik, lenyaplah ia punya ketangkasan yang mengingatkan kepada ketangkasannya harimau. Kendaraan tiada lagi punya kuda, tiada lagi punya kusir. Ia tiada bergerak lagi, ia mandeg!

Dan bukan saja mandeg! Kendaraan mandeg pun lama-lama menjadi amoh. Fiqh bukan lagi menjadi petunjuk dan pembatas hidup, fiqh kini kadang-kadang menjadi penghalalnya perbuatan-perbuatan kaum sontoloyooo…! Maka benarlah perkataannya Halide Edib Hanoum, bahwa Islam di zaman akhir-akhir ini “bukan lagi agama pemimpin hidup, tetapi agama prokol-bambu”

Benar, ini sah, ini halal, tapi halalnya Islam Sontoloyo! Halalnya orang yang mau main kikebu dengan Tuhan, atau orang yang mau main “kucing-kucingan” dengan Tuhan. Dan kalau mau memakai perkataan yang lebih jitu, halalnya orang yang mau mengabui mata Tuhan!

Seolah-olah Tuhan diabui matanya! Seolah-olah agama sudah dipenuhi atau sudah diturut, kalau dilahirnya syariat saja sudah dikerjakan! Tetapi tidakkah yang demikian itu sering kita jumpakan! (Di Bawah Bendera Revolusi Jilid Pertama Halaman 493-494)

Verifikasi Sejarah

Dalam Kamus Besar Bahasa Indonesia (2003), kata “sontoloyo” diartikan sebagai: konyol, tidak beres, bodoh, dan dipakai sebagai kata makian (umpatan). Tetapi, dalam ungkapan istilah Jawa, kata sontoloyo artinya penggembala bebek.

Konon, umpatan “sontoloyo” ini kembali dipopulerkan oleh Presiden pertama Republik Indonesia (1945-1967), Soekarno (1901-1970), pada 1940. Melalui sebuah artikel yang ditulisnya di sebuah majalah yang terbit di Medan, Panji Islam (8 April 1940), berjudul “Islam Sontoloyo”. Dalam tulisannya itu, secara sengit Bung Karno mengkritik para guru, ustadz, dan kiai yang dinilainya terlalu literer, fiqh oriented, dalam berfikir dan dalam praktik keagamaan.

Melalui ungkapannya yang penuh sarkastis, Bung Karno memang terkesan boros menyerang paham dan praktik keberagamaan yang dianggapnya jumud (beku) dan irasional. Ketika berada di Bengkulu, tempat pembuangannya setelah diasingkan penjajah Belanda ke Ende, Flores beberapa tahun, Bung Karno berang membaca berita yang ditulis surat kabar Pemandangan (6 April 1940).

Semasa masih dalam pembuangannya di Ende, Flores, Bung Karno seringkali ‘berdiskusi’ (lewat korespondensi surat-menyurat) dengan Ustadz A. Hassan, pemimpin Persis di Bandung kala itu. Namun sekembalinya Bung Karno dari tanah pengasingannya itu, ia aktif menulis artikel di media massa pada sekitar 1940-an.

Bung Karno menulis banyak hal. Kebanyakan yang dibicarakannya tentang bagaimana mengoperasi Islam dari bisul-bisulnya, bagaimana memerdekakan alam pikiran dari kejumudan, taklidisme, hadramautisme, dari sikap dan praktik ‘mengambing’, kolot bin kolot, mesum mbahnya mesum, dan dari lingkungan dupa serta korma, jubah, dan celak mata. Baginya, Islam is progress. Harus ditafsir ulang (reinterpretasi) dari zaman ke zaman, supaya tetap up to date.
Dalam kata-katanya sendiri, Bung Karno ingin menangkap Islam sebagai “api” bukan sebagai “abu”, apalagi Islam sebagai sontoloyo.

Sejumlah kaum wartawan muslim di sekitar 1935-an di Medan, mendirikan Warmusi (Wartawan Muslimin Indonesia), dipelopori oleh Mohammad Yunan Nasution (Pedoman Masyarakat), Zainal Abidin Ahmad (Pandji Islam), dan di Jawa Soerono Wirohardjono (Adil, Solo), Wali al-Fatah dan Ghafar Ismail.

Seperti yang diharapkan, protes Soekarno itu mengundang komentar pers. Koresponden Antara lalu mewawancarainya—dan hasilnya dimuat di majalah Pandji Islam dengan judul “Tabir adalah Lambang Perbudakan”. Majalah ini, yang dipimpin Zainal.Abidin Ahmad, bersama Pedoman Masjarakat di bawah pimpinan Hamka dan Yunan Nasution, dua-duanya di Medan, pada 1959 nanti dilebur menjadi Pandji Masjarakat (Pandjimas). sedangkan majalah pemandangan di dirikan oleh Mr. Sumanang

http://www,pwi.or.id/index.php/Pressedia/S-dari-Eniklopedia-Pers-Indonesia-EPI.html

Catatan Waktu Manusia Angkasa

Sebelum big bang, tidak ada yang namanya waktu. Waktu baru ada setelah perluasan jagad raya dimulai. Maka keberadaan Tuhan itu tidak mungkin, karena tidak ada waktu baginya untuk menciptakan jagad raya.

via 420 banks demand 1-world currency.

Vilification of homosexuality, resulting in discrimination, parent…s disowning their children, murder, and suicide.

People and animals sacrificed as an offering to gods.

Food destroyed because it doesn’t comply with specific religious beliefs.

Women treated like second class citizens, or even slaves, based on religious teachings.

Children growing up without music.

Children growing up to hate and fear science and scientists, because science disproves their parents’ religion – leading to appalling scientific illiteracy.

Tens of thousands tortured and killed as witches (a practice which still continues today).

Millions of cats killed in the belief that witches use them as familiars, leaving rats free to spread the black death throughout Europe, killing millions of people in turn.

People bothered and sometimes woken up by door-to-door religion salespeople.

People dying because they believe their faith makes them immune to snake venom, or other lethal aspects of reality.

People dying – and letting their children die – because their religion forbids accepting medical help.

People choked, starved, poisoned, or beaten to death during exorcisms.

Female genital mutilation endorsed by religious texts.

Psychological and physiological conditions blamed on demons, preventing believers from seeking medical care.

People disowning family members for leaving their religion, in some cases symbolized by mock funerals.

Friendships and romances severed or never started over religious differences.

“Abstinence-only” sex education, resulting in five times the amount sexually transmitted diseases and teenage pregnancies – often leading to ill-fated “emergency” marriages.

Campaigns against safe sex, with similar results – responsible for much of the AIDS epidemic in Africa.

Women having septic abortions — or being forced to have unwanted children they resent — because religious organizations have gotten laws passed making abortion illegal or inaccessible.

Censorship (often destructive) of speech, art, books, music, films, poetry, songs and, if possible, thought.

The discouragement of rational, critical thought.

Believers whipping, impaling, poisoning or crucifying themselves during religious festivals as a demonstration of their faith and piety.

Children spending the period of their lives when the brain is most receptive to learning new information reading, rereading, and even memorizing religious texts.

People who believe the world is about to end neglect their education, are not financially responsible, and in extreme cases take part in mass suicides.

Environmental issues ignored because of beliefs that God will magically fix everything.

Wives told they will be tortured forever if they leave their abusive husbands.

People in times of trouble relying on advice from religious leaders without any sort of training in counseling or therapy.

Holy wars – followers of different faiths (or even the same faith) killing each other in the name of their (benevolent, loving and merciful) gods.

The destruction of great works of art considered to be pornographic/blasphemous, and the persecution of the artists.

Persecution/punishment of blasphemers (Salman Rushdie still has a death sentence on him), and blasphemy laws in general.

Slavery condoned by religious texts.

Children traumatized by vivid stories of eternal burning and torture to ensure that they’ll be too frightened to even question religion.

Terminal patients in constant agony who would end their lives if they didn’t believe it would result in eternal torture.

School boards having to spend time and money and resources on the fight to have evolution taught in the schools.

Persecution of Heretics/scientists, like Giordano Bruno (burned at the stake) and Galileo Galilei.

Blue laws forcing other businesses to stay closed so churches can generate more revenue.

Mayors, senators, and presidents voted into office not because they’re right for the job, but because of their religious beliefs.

Abuse of power, authority and trust by religious leaders (for financial gain or sexual abuse of followers and even children) – but hey, atheists are the immoral ones.

People accepting visual and auditory hallucinations unquestioningly as divine, sometimes with fatal results.

Suicide bombers, who are certain they will be rewarded in heaven.

Discrimination against atheists, such as laws stating they may not hold public office or testify in court.

Missionaries destroying/converting smaller, “heathen” religions and cultures.

Hardship compounded by the guilt required to reconcile the idea of a fair god with reality (“why is God punishing me? What have I done wrong? Don’t I have enough faith?”). Source(s): Mother Teresa, prolonging the agony of terminal patients and denying them pain relief, so she can offer their suffering as a gift to her god.

Suppression of logical and critical thought.

Billions spent to build, maintain, and staff houses of worship.

Grief and horror caused by the belief that dead friends and family members are tortured as punishment for disbelief.

Opposition to scientific (especially medical) progress on religious grounds.

Whole societies divided by minor differences in belief or doctrine, often resulting in violence.

Natural disasters and other tragedies used to claim God is displeased and present demands to avoid similar events (it’s like terrorism, but without having to plan or do anything).

The attempted genocide of followers of a particular faith (e.g. the Jewish Holocaust, “ethnic cleansing” in former Yugoslavia).

Ku De Ta 2010