Pretty sure Mohammad didn't have strong opinions regarding internet privacy.
I'm pretty sure Mohammad, Jesus, Buddha, and all the other gods would be concerned if they saw my porn history.
As it should be. You haven't lived till you've seen a dude stuff live black soldier fly larvae into his pp hole!
No it isn't. The right to privacy is protected in Shariah law. Either something nefarious is at play here, or the religious body was misled on what VPN is.
Sources for those not familiar with Shariah law, I actually studied it and was tested on it:
https://www.al-islam.org/islam-and-rights-privacy-territory-abbass-khajeh-piri/realm-privacy-islam
and this is from a Pakistani university:
I'm really interested in reading the part of the Quran that forbids VPNs.
"Thou shalt not taketh sponsorships from NordVPN"
NordVPN is a scam, they will prevent you from cancelling your plan
"In this religion, we use ExpressVPN!"
Quran, probably
Something something sneaking into other people’s houses is haram therefore VPN is haram?
For context: this "religious body" is governmental.
In pakistan, military has gotten so powerful that they literally kidnap and torture you for being critical of them. And if you live outside pakistan they kidnap and torture your family members, demanding you to remove your posts.
And recently pakistani people have started to become more and more anti-military. So they are using VPNs to hide their identity to protect themselves.
This "religious body" is making it seem like this is to stop porn but in reality its about stopping people from being critical of military rule.
Edit: they banned twitter in february because people were organizing anti-military protests there. So the people started using VPNs and now they want to ban VPNs.
I wonder if me, and American, looking at Pakistan is like how Europeans look at America... Government and police are crazy. But the food, culture, and people are probably nice.
US Christians: "write that down!"
Won't be long now, unfortunately.
Really wish our species could evolve past this moronic, religious bullshit.
Its not about religion, its politics. A few years ago the Pakistani military overthrew a very popular prime minister who publicly said that it was the military behind his removal. Then slowly and gradually there was more and more evidence behind military involvement which as a result, made the public anti-military. They have been kidnapping and torturing anyone critical of them.
But the more they oppress, the more people become anti-military. It got to the point that in february the government blocked access to twitter because of anti-military sentiment, so people started using VPNs. Now this "religious body" which is government appointed claims to block VPN because "people are watching immoral things via VPN". But in reality, it is to stop people organizing protests.
Also a governmental body can not decide what is islamic or not, thats not how islamic law works. It has to come from islamic scholars and there needs to be consus on it.
I don't think any major islamic scholar who lives inside pakistan has signed or approved this message even though they want to stop porn they know its not about stopping porn, its about making it difficult to criticize the military.
Its not about religion, its politics.
It's about religion. In a theocracy religion is politics, and law, and culture too.
Religion isn't something that empowers people to do more or live more freely. Religious dogma is nothing more than a set of arbitrary laws and norms, written and decided by man, but given the weight and authority of god(s)--the fear of eternal damnation in the afterlife being the only way that people knew to keep others in line in a world devoid of secular laws.
How did we convince women that they were lesser beings throughout human history? Why do we consider some forms of consensual adult sexuality to be morally wrong? Why do we believe that human beings are destined and entitled to live on this planet forever no matter how poorly we treat it?
The answer is religion. Religion is mass delusion, used mainly as a tool of oppression. Socrates was sentenced to death by a jury of Athenians for thought crimes against Athena, showing that religion, democracy and justice simply do not mix. Thousands of years ago (or more) gods and religious law were the inventions that ushered humanity into the post-truth world that we live in today.
Look we can criticize religion for its issues all we want but in this specific case, they are using religion as a tool to get what they want. If it weren't for religion, they would use something else.
"Terrorists are using VPNs to evade law enforcement"
Or maybe something racism related
Fascist/authoritarian governments always use something to control the public.
Call it "stories that people are taking way too seriously". I'm sure that you can think of other stories that people take way too seriously too, that have nothing to do with religion.
I think that we might be seeing the power of propaganda there. Consider that the science of propaganda is very old. Thousands of years old. There's population-control psychology there. It's got hooks.
(On the flipside, imposing a set of rules for moral behavior is a good thing. People can be animals. And if you need to cite an old story about gods and wizards to give those rules some oomph then so be it.)
No, it's definitely religion. Always has been.
Do you understand that they are using religion as an excuse? If that wasn't an option, they would just use something else.
It serves a need. Get rid of the need and you'll get rid of the religious bullshit. But if you get rid of the religious bullshit without getting rid of the need, some other kind of bullshit will crop up.
Nobody needs religion.
Religion isn't the need. Social interaction and the feeling of belonging and belief are the needs. Religion can and does fill that for many.
And before you attack me, I'm atheist.
But other things can and do too, so religion isn't necessary. That's the point.
Nobody said it was. Just that it does meet some needs.
Until you somehow convince those who have those needs that religion isn't the correct way to meet those needs, you're not going to get anywhere screaming that religion isn't necessary. Those people firmly believe it is as it meets those needs for them and don't have something else to do so.
Nobody said it was.
Well that's just not true, but ignoring that...
I didn't scream anything, neither did the OP that started this. They stated it calmly and plainly. Obviously religion serves a function in society, but so does slavery. I'm not trying to convince anyone to give up their long-held beliefs, I'm simply defending my interpretation of reality as objectively as I can. Just like coffee, alcohol, and black market sex rings, no one needs religion. The only reason I could think of that you would want to argue against that position is if you believed it wasn't true. But it is. 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️
Well that’s just not true, but ignoring that…
No. Let's not ignore that. If you're going to call someone a liar, own up to it. The comment that spawned this chain says verbatim
It serves a need.
It being "religion" and "a need" would imply another, different "need". Otherwise it would have been simpler and more direct to say something like "Religion is a need".
I didn’t scream anything
Coming back and repeating the same shit that I just addressed from the previous comment ... Constant repetition is literally someone shoving fingers in their ears and scream "LALALALALALA". You even did it again in this post by stating "no one needs religion" when I already addressed that and even agreed with that sentiment, but wanted to specifically caveat why religion would count for "It serves a need".
Nobody said that anyone "needs" religion. Quite the contrary. The statement is "religion fills needs" to put it another way. I even clarified and made it clear that if you can find something else that fills the needs for those people that you could likely replace religion. But for some reason you keep trucking forward with your comments acting like someone said something they didn't.
The only reason I could think of that you would want to argue against that position is if you believed it wasn’t true.
What the fuck logic is this? So I must believe that Religion is a need then? I'm atheist. I stated that outright from the beginning in my first post on this thread. Fuck "God", "Yahweh", "Mohammed", or any other god that you or anyone else believes in, they're all fake. I clearly don't believe that religion is a "need".
Given its vast popularity, I expect that some would argue otherwise.
Painting baby toys with lead was pretty popular for awhile, so was filling your house with asbestos. Don't confuse popularity with necessity, you might get cancer.
The lead paint and the asbestos both served a need. For colored toys and insulation, specifically. And then we found a better way to serve that need. It isn't a dumb need.
Don't assume that everybody who sees things differently is an idiot.
I didn't call anyone an idiot, I just made the point that something being popular in society doesn't even make it good for society, much less necessary. Just look at fentanyl, or network primetime television.
"It is not enough that Allah knows everything you do. We must also know."
"That sounds like blasphemy to me."
"Uh..."
someone should point out to them that a vpn is the technological equivalent of the burqa.
either ban both, or allow both.
Encryption is totally and completely haram
Which is super fucking ironic:
David Kahn notes in The Codebreakers that modern cryptology originated among the Arabs, the first people to systematically document cryptanalytic methods.[15] Al-Khalil (717–786) wrote the Book of Cryptographic Messages, which contains the first use of permutations and combinations to list all possible Arabic words with and without vowels.[16]
The invention of the frequency analysis technique for breaking monoalphabetic substitution ciphers, by Al-Kindi, an Arab mathematician,[17][18] sometime around AD 800, proved to be the single most significant cryptanalytic advance until World War II. Al-Kindi wrote a book on cryptography entitled Risalah fi Istikhraj al-Mu'amma (Manuscript for the Deciphering Cryptographic Messages), in which he described the first cryptanalytic techniques, including some for polyalphabetic ciphers, cipher classification, Arabic phonetics and syntax, and most importantly, gave the first descriptions on frequency analysis.[19] He also covered methods of encipherments, cryptanalysis of certain encipherments, and statistical analysis of letters and letter combinations in Arabic.[20][21] An important contribution of Ibn Adlan (1187–1268) was on sample size for use of frequency analysis.[16]
Ahmad al-Qalqashandi (AD 1355–1418) wrote the Subh al-a 'sha, a 14-volume encyclopedia which included a section on cryptology. This information was attributed to Ibn al-Durayhim who lived from AD 1312 to 1361, but whose writings on cryptography have been lost. The list of ciphers in this work included both substitution and transposition, and for the first time, a polyalphabetic cipher[23] with multiple substitutions for each plaintext letter (later called homophonic substitution). Also traced to Ibn al-Durayhim is an exposition on and a worked example of cryptanalysis, including the use of tables of letter frequencies and sets of letters which cannot occur together in one word.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cryptography#Medieval_cryptography
But then Pakistanis aren't Arabs....
The Council of Islamic Ideology said the technology was being used in Pakistan to access content prohibited according to Islamic principles or forbidden by law, including “[...]websites that spread anarchy [...].”
So they admit it's not (only) about morals, but also (or mostly) about their position of power not being threatened.
BTW: By blocking access to the internet, they stop people from following the order in the Quoran which states that people should educate themselves.
It’s almost as if they would tailor their religious doctrine to suit their own needs. Who could have imagined such a thing could happen.
Thank the Biden administration for overthrowing Imran Khan in Pakistan to install this dictatorial regime.
God would never use VPN, he has nothing to hide.
Aren’t prophets basically god using a VPN?
Nope
A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/