20 April 2010

Earthquakes and heretics

What would we do without exotic clerics (assisted or not by low-grade journalists)?

This morning's coffee was enlivened by a report from Iran about a senior cleric's pronouncement that an earthquake is on the way and that women who wear revealing clothing and behave promiscuously are to blame. (Nice to see that for once they're not blaming the demonic Zionists.)

Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi is quoted as revealing that -
Many women who do not dress modestly ... lead young men astray, corrupt their chastity and spread adultery in society, which (consequently) increases earthquakes. What can we do to avoid being buried under the rubble? There is no other solution but to take refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam's moral codes.
When the earthquake does arrive - clearly the Great Flying Spaghetti Monster is most displeased - the eminent cleric can presumably quote some Justinian, the Byzantine monarch and patron of the Corpus Juris Civilis who attributed floods, fires, famines, earthquakes and plagues to the sodomites.

Justinian's Novella 77 referred to "diabolical and unlawful lusts" and condemned sodomites to death "lest, as a result of these impious acts, whole cities should perish together with their inhabitants". In case anyone missed the point (earthquakes continued, so clearly someone was being rather naughty), Novella 141 in 544 referred to homosexuality as the "very madness of intercourse", a "plague", a "disease" and "conduct so base and criminal that we do not find it committed even by brute beasts". Such criminals needed to be put to death to avert seismic unpleasantness.

One Chinese contact questions Justinian's explanation, claiming - with equal certainty - that the recent earthquake in the south west of the People's Republic is attributable to the Great Turtle having an itchy back.

Meanwhile Human Rights Watch has highlighted the decision by Indonesia's Constitutional Court upholding a 1965 blasphemy law (article 156a of the criminal code), prioritising the protection of 'orthodox religions' over basic freedoms.

The court rejected a petition by moderate Muslims, religious minorities, democracy advocates and rights groups. The law provides criminal penalties (up to five years in prison) for those who express religious beliefs that deviate from the central tenets of Indonesia's six officially recognized religions ('Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Catholicism, Protestantism and Confucianism'). The law also serves as the legal basis for a number of government regulations that facilitate official discrimination on the basis of religion.

The court held that the law is a legitimate restriction of minority religious beliefs because it allows for the maintenance of public order. It held that although 'imperfect', the law did not contravene the constitution of the world's most populous Muslim country. Article 28(E) of Indonesia's 1945 constitution expressly guarantees freedom of religion. That freedom is reflected in Indonesia's 2006 ratification of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which provides that states are to respect the right to freedom of religion, including "freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching".