Demi Tuhan Saya Atheis

[Mohran Hakim]

Demi Tuhan Saya Atheis

Jumat, 13 April 2012 | 10:30

 

Judul di atas adalah kutipan dari kaus yang sering dipakai Dadang. Seorang pria yang mengenalkan dirinya sebagai pelukis dan mendirikan sebuah organisasi bernama Jaringan Kafir Liberal—disingkat JAKAR. Akronim yang ingin dinisbatkan pada kelamin laki-laki, namun karena Dadang memiliki lidah Sunda maka pengucapan ”z” terpeleset menjadi ”j”. 

 

Kaus ”Demi Tuhan Saya Atheis” dipakai ke mana-mana oleh Dadang, baik pada acara-acara diskusi, pertemuan di hotel-hotel mewah, hingga lesehan-lesehan santai atau seperti pengakuan Dadang sendiri pengajian-pengajian yang dihadiri orang berjubah dan berjenggot. 

 

Tidak hanya memaklumkan bahwa dirinya ”atheis” dan ”kafir liberal” Dadang juga memberikan kritik yang tajam -- yang disertai gurauan dan cengengesan -- terhadap agama-agama yang disebutnya ”impor”. 

 

Agama-agama yang diklaim resmi di negeri ini dalam kategori Dadang -- dan saya pun bersetuju -- semua adalah ”agama-agama impor”. Dadang pun menyatakan, pengikut-pengikut dari ”agama-agama impor” inilah yang tak sedikit membuat keributan, dan menyingkirkan agama dan kepercayaan ”asli” di negeri ini.

 

Setelah menarik perhatian dengan diktum dan organisasi yang dibentuknya, Dadang pun menawarkan kaus hasil sablonannya itu. Dadang juga aktif di media sosial: facebook dan twitter. 

 

Kemunculan Dadang bersama penyataan, kaus, komentar dan ”jaringan”nya di acara-acara umum ditanggapi santai, penuh gurau dan geli. Tak ada yang menganggap Dadang melakukan penodaan agama. Tak ada yang menganggap serius atau diambil hati. 

 

Meskipun tak jarang kemunculan Dadang seperti sabotase terhadap acara diskusi yang serius. Yang sebelumnya kening sampai berkerut, dan para narasumber berdebat sampai urat leher benjol-benjol, ketika Dadang muncul tertawa terbahak-bahak mendengar komentar Dadang itu.

 

Meskipun  aktif  ”berkampanye” via kaus, facebook, twitter, dan ”berkhotbah” di diskusi-diskusi, adakah yang terpengaruh menjadi atheis atau tertarik masuk JAKAR versi Dadang? Setahu saya belum ada. 

  

Namun nasib Alexander Aan seorang pegawai negeri di Dharmasraya, Sumatra Barat tak semujur nasib Dadang di Jakarta. Kini ia diadili dengan dakwaan menistakan agama hanya karena pengakuannya sebagai atheis melalui akun di facebook. 

 

Proses Aan menjadi atheis terlihat alamiah, ia mempertanyakan kuasa Tuhan di tengah kezaliman-kezaliman yang ditemui di sekelilingnya. Kalau manusia bisa berbuat apa saja, jahat, buruk, kejam, brutal, dan seperti dibiarkan, di mana Tuhan yang Mahapengasih dan Mahapenyayang? 

 

Pertanyaan yang klasik dan tua, setua gugatan manusia terhadap konsep agama, keadilan, dan kuasa Tuhan. Namun ternyata bagi masyarakat sekitarnya ditimpali dengan kehebohan dan ancaman fisik. 

 

Polisi yang awalnya dengan dalih mengamankannya dari amuk massa, ternyata menetapkannya sebagai tersangka, proses pun bergulir hingga kini ia duduk di kursi pesakitan, hanya gara-gara ia mempertanyakan lagi kuasa Tuhan dan agama dalam merespon kezaliman dan kejahatan yang terjadi dalam kehidupan dunia ini.

 

Karakter dan tulisan Aan mungkin tidak seperti Dadang yang penuh gurau dan galau, ia dianggap serius dengan pernyataan-pernyataannya, kalau serius mengapa tidak ditanggapi dengan serius juga dengan bantahan balik dan argumentasi yang bisa mematahkan klaim-klaimnya?  

 

Kalau Aan dianggap ”tersesat” karena mengaku dirinya sebagai atheis, mengapa pihak yang superior yang menganggap dirinya paling benar dan beriman tidak menunjukkan jalan yang lurus dan benar? Dengan cepat-cepat ingin membungkam dan memasukkan Aan ke dalam penjara secara tidak langsung mereka menganggap bahwa pendapat dan komentar Aan bisa menaklukkan dan mematahkan keyakinan mereka terhadap Tuhan dan agama. 

 

Saya teringat ucapan Gus Mus (KH Mustofa Bisri), hal yang ironis ada pihak yang dianggap tersesat, tapi bukan ditunjukkan jalan yang benar justru dikamplengi (ditempeng, dipukul).

 

Apakah dengan intimidasi melalui massa, jeratan pasal-pasal karet, ancaman mendekam dalam jeruji lima tahun bisa mengubah keyakinan Aan? Saya yakin tidak. Kekerasan terhadapnya hanya akan mempertebal apa yang sudah ia yakini sebelum ini. 

 

Justru saya merasa dengan melakukan kekerasan, intimidasi, dan penghakiman terhadap Aan secara tidak langsung kita sudah membenarkan sangkaan atheisme, bahwa kekerasan dan kezaliman sering diatasnamakan oleh pengikut yang mengaku bertuhan dan beragama. 

 

Tiba-tiba saya mendengar Dadang berkata sambil terkekeh-kekeh, ”karena itu, demi Tuhan, Saya Atheis”    

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NB dari saya: Dadang ini seniman nyentrik yang sering ikut diskusi di Utan Kayu, Freedom Institute, Salihara, dll

Mohran

[Daniel Sabirin]

'I can't be sure God DOES NOT exist': World's most notorious atheist Richard Dawkins admits he is in fact agnostic.

By SUZANNAH HILLS - MailOnlline

24th February 2012

Professor Richard Dawkins today dismissed his hard-earned reputation as a militant atheist - admitting that he is actually agnostic as he can't prove God doesn't exist.

The country's foremost champion of the Darwinist evolution, who wrote The God Delusion, stunned audience members when he made the confession during a lively debate on the origins of the universe with the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Professor Dawkins, the former Oxford Professor for the Public Understanding of Science, is a dedicated admirer of Charles Darwin, regarding the Victorian pioneer of evolution as the man who explained ‘everything we know about life’.

He said: 'On a scale of seven, where one means I know he exists, and seven I know he doesn't, I call myself a six.'

Professor Dawkins went on to say he believed he was a '6.9', stating: 'That doesn't mean I'm absolutely confident, that I absolutely know, because I don't.'

(Lucu juga, dengan menulis buku The God Delusion harusnya dia tepat berada pada angka 7)

This latest admission by Professor Dawkins comes after he was left lost for words to name the full title of his scientific hero’s most famous work during a radio discussion last week in which he accused Christians of being ignorant of the Bible.

In his frustration, he resorted to a helpless: ‘Oh God.’ 

- - - 

Belajar dari 'kesalahan' Firaun yang berubah pikiran saat sekarat, seorang ateis garis keras meninggalkan pesan khusus; lampiran 'deathbed conversion'.

- - - 

Dua karikatur terkait Pascal's wager.

- - - 

Apa yang diucapkan seorang ateis saat bercinta; atheists-sex.

- - - 

Last but not least, seorang ateis tentu juga tak akan pernah mengucapkan TGIF,

/ds

2012/4/13 Mohran Hakim <mohra...@gmail.com>

[Ele/Adley]

Di bukunya, Dawkins sudah bilang kok kalau di gak di skala 7.0.

So I'm not sure what the big deal here :)

The point is, dari keseluruhan bukunya, meskipun tuhan memang ada, she/he/it is irrelevant to our condition. That's all.

Agree? Disagree? :)

Thanks and Regards,

=ele=

~It is enough to appreciate that rainbows are beautiful without having to assert that they lead to a sky palace where a god resides~

2012/4/13 Daniel Sabirin <dan...@gmail.com>

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Forum Quranic Study" group.
To post to this group, send email to forum-qur...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to forum-quranic-s...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/forum-quranic-study?hl=en.

[Daniel Sabirin]

I thought it was crystal clear, albeit no big deal at all:

 

Unless you're absolutely sure God doesn't exist, or a straight "7"  (preferably with evidence), you can't say believe in God is a delusion. Plain and simple. 

Logika sederhana, dan Dawkins terpeleset. Buku2 Dawkins hanya berguna sebagai rujukan untuk memahami struktur pemikiran seorang ateis (setidaknya bagi saya). Bila Tuhan terbukti ada (bukti telak tentu tidak akan pernah diberikanNya karena semua orang akan beriman     -bahkan istilah beriman tidak relevan lagi- and our whole existence would become meaningless), screw Dawkins' books :)

Cheers,

/ds

2012/4/13 Ele/Adley <adle...@gmail.com>

[B. Adley E.]

Well, ini sih jadinya kembali ke Russell's teapot donk :)

Thanks and regards,

Brahnda Eleazar (Ele)

~This world was shaped by fantasies and it will be ultimately destroyed by them~

(sent from my mobile phone)

[Daniel Sabirin]

Depends on what you equate with the china teapot here, if it's Dawkins' assertion that believe in God is a delusion then he is being terribly sloppy with it. 

"If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes" - Bertrand Russell.

In Dawkins' case he's being careless by revealing that he's only a 6.9, meaning he's not entirely sure with his own suggestion.

Peace,

/ds

2012/4/14 B. Adley E. <adle...@gmail.com>

[B. Adley E.]

That I agree. 

But we theists have to be careful. And honest as well. 

We can't say that we believe in God but ask the ones who don't wish to share our faith for evidence denying our God's existence. 

At least that's how I think. 

I have my faith. 

But I can't with a conscious mind shift the responsibility of providing proof to someone who doesn't share my faith. 

It's probably semantics. 

For example, a person who says "I believe God doesn't exist" might be perceived differently than another who says "I don't believe God exist". 

The first person would be required to provide evidence for his "belief" whole the second one is not. 

Now, if an atheist mentions it in the first way, s/he might be compelled to provide an evidence for that statement. But if an atheist mentions it in the second way, the responsibility of providing evidence rests on my shoulders and mine alone. That's my challenge as a theist, the way I see it :)

The signs are there. As Abdus Salam quoted:

"...you do not see any imperfection in the creation by the Almighty. Keep looking; do you see any flaw? Then look again twice; your eyes will come back humiliated and tired." (QS 67:3-4)

But again, it all comes back to faith :)

Thanks and regards,

Brahnda Eleazar (Ele)

~This world was shaped by fantasies and it will be ultimately destroyed by them~

(sent from my mobile phone)

[Daniel Sabirin]

Couldn't agree more. As I said  Buku2 Dawkins hanya berguna sebagai rujukan untuk memahami struktur pemikiran seorang ateis (setidaknya bagi saya). Ketika mendiskusikan keyakinan, rujukan yang digunakan akan seluruhnya berbeda.

To me atheists are not mean, malicious people, in fact I find them rather amusing :)

[Ele/Adley]

Well, ada sih atheis yang tingkat kebencian dan amarahnya bahkan melebihi FPI :))

Lihat aja di Twitter :p

Thanks and Regards,

=ele=

~It is enough to appreciate that rainbows are beautiful without having to assert that they lead to a sky palace where a god resides~

[amifta...@yahoo.com]

Kayaknya kajian menarik untuk dibahas di copy darat foQus... Hehehe

Sent from mobile email

---

From: "Ele/Adley" <adle...@gmail.com>

Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2012 12:36:09 +0700

To: <forum-qur...@googlegroups.com>

Cc: Mohran Hakim<mohra...@gmail.com>; Firma...@fmi.com<Firma...@fmi.com>; affan...@gmail.com<affan...@gmail.com>; gadi...@gmail.com<gadi...@gmail.com>; Rusdia...@gmail.com<Rusdia...@gmail.com>; irwan....@gmail.com<irwan....@gmail.com>; erie.h...@gmail.com<erie.h...@gmail.com>; Dwi_Pu...@yahoo.co.id<Dwi_Pu...@yahoo.co.id>; affan...@kodeco.co.id<affan...@kodeco.co.id>; ahmadh...@cbn.net.id<ahmadh...@cbn.net.id>; Haryo_...@fmi.com<Haryo_...@fmi.com>; Nurhadi...@fmi.com<Nurhadi...@fmi.com>; Sriyo...@fmi.com<Sriyo...@fmi.com>; Sugeng...@fmi.com<Sugeng...@fmi.com>; yonsup...@gmail.com<yonsup...@gmail.com>; suyono_y...@yahoo.co.id<suyono_y...@yahoo.co.id>; amba...@gmx.de<amba...@gmx.de>; santi...@yahoo.com<santi...@yahoo.com>; Wijayon...@kpc.co.id<Wijayon...@kpc.co.id>; Wahyu_...@fmi.com<Wahyu_...@fmi.com>; de...@petrolab.co.id<de...@petrolab.co.id>; Eko_N...@fmi.com<Eko_N...@fmi.com>; astrinis...@yahoo.com<astrinis...@yahoo.com>; mutia....@gmail.com<mutia....@gmail.com>; lind...@yahoo.com<lind...@yahoo.com>; mrfa...@live.co.uk<mrfa...@live.co.uk>; pa...@intermitra.co.id<pa...@intermitra.co.id>; Joko_B...@fmi.com<Joko_B...@fmi.com>; Amifta...@yahoo.com<Amifta...@yahoo.com>; ratna_n...@yahoo.com<ratna_n...@yahoo.com>; Amal_...@fmi.com<Amal_...@fmi.com>; Bashir_...@fmi.com<Bashir_...@fmi.com>; endang_...@yahoo.com<endang_...@yahoo.com>; kwa...@yahoo.com<kwa...@yahoo.com>; gadi...@yahoo.com<gadi...@yahoo.com>; ulma.n...@gmail.com<ulma.n...@gmail.com>

Subject: Re: [FoQus:144] Re: Demi Tuhan Saya Atheis

[Erie Haryanto]

Aa Miftah , notes from the latest foQus meeting in Ramadhan 1435 H:

Ele has been responsible to drag one or two atheist' (amusing and also good lookin ones) to the next foQus meeting to enlighten us on Atheist & Being Agnostic.

:-))

Selamat menTAFAKKURi keberadaan TUHAN mu dalam semangat memberi/berbagi , kelengangan jalan-jalan di JaBoDeTaBek, liburan HARI RAYA, serta nikmat-nikmat lain yang kita rasakan.

Salaam D-B-A-S

[Daniel Sabirin]

Here comes the all-atheist TV network,

http://www.salon.com/2014/07/24/here_comes_the_all_atheist_tv_network/

Are you ready for all godlessness, all the time? 

...

But Atheist TV so far looks a little, well, dry.

( 'dry' bisa diterjemahkan langsung dengan 'garing' ?)

Lupa apakah saya pernah menulis seperti ini; jika tidak senang musik keroncong harusnya bersikap EGP aja / couldn't care less, buat apa berlaku parasitik dan membuat identitas diri sebagai 'a-keroncong' , seringkali lalu merongrong keroncong ? Get a life !

salam,

/ds

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to forum-quranic-s...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to forum-qur...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/forum-quranic-study.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[Chandra Wibowo]

Di dunia ini tidak ada yang tidak berTUHAN. Hanya saja memahami konsepnya yang berbeda. Mungkin dia tidak beragama, tetapi tidak TIDAK BERTUHAN. Tuhan berasal dari kata "ALIHA" yang artinya menentramkan. Saat orang itu mengatakan tidak percaya TUHAN tetapi lebih percaya kepada dirinya sendiri, maka dia telah bertuhan kepada dirinya karena lebih tentram dengan dirinya. Saat dia mengatakan tidak percaya Tuhan tetapi lebih percaya kepada tekhnologi, maka dia telah berTUHAN kepada tekhnologi karena lebih tentram dengan dirinya. Mengapa orang yang mengaku tidak berTUHAN dipermasalahkan? Bukankah lebih banyak orang yang mengaku berTUHAN dan menganggap jalan menujuNya (agama) terbaik di dunia lebih suka melanggar aturanNya dan melupakan bahwa dia berTUHAN? -----------------

QS. 45 ayat 23, QS. 25 ayat 43...(Angka ayat dan suratnya berpindah tempat 45:23 menjadi 25:43)

Salam.

[as_kusuwardono]

Pak Chandra Wibowo,

Bagus sekali 45:23.Mencerahkan. Sesuai dg isu yg lg hangat di negeri ini. Keroposnya budi luhur akibat syahwat kuasa tak terkendali.

Terimakasih.

Salam,

-anang-

Sent from Samsung Mobile

[Daniel Sabirin]

Sejauh menyangkut orang yang mengaku tidak berTUHAN, buat saya 'Untukmu din-mu, untuk din-ku' sudah cukup, tak ada waktu mempermasalahkan pilihan orang lain, karena masalah sendiri sudah cukup banyak.

Ibarat 2 kelompok pengembara yang seharusnya bisa berpisah jalan secara baik2, satu ke utara, yang lain ke timur, mungkin tak akan pernah bertemu kembali.

“They parted with mutual civility, and possibly a mutual desire of never meeting again.”  ― Jane Austen.

Masalahnya, setelah berpisah sebagian dari mereka senang mengganggu dengan berbagai teriakan 'arah ke utara penuh fatamorgana, jurang, jebakan dst...' - alih2 mengurus masalah mereka sendiri.

Misal;

Yang ringan, pendapat 'if a religion fails to make someone a better person, then atheism make more sense' seperti didiskusikan tahun lalu.

Kenapa apel dan jeruk harus diperbandingkan, mana yang lebih enak ?

(Yang senang makan jeruk, silakan makan jeruk sepanjang waktu, tak usah pikirkan buah lain).

Yang TSM, terstruktur, sistematis dan masif (pinjam istilah MK) seperti Dawkins dengan buku The God Delusion-nya.

Judulnya saja sudah menyesatkan, mengikuti alur diskusi di atas, judul yang selaras dengan posisi Dawkins seharusnya 

God Is Probably a Delusion.

salam,

[erieharyanto]

MantaFFF C X, uDA Niel.

Mind your own neck; uuuups, my own neck then set up example

Sent from Samsung Mobile

[Daniel Sabirin]

Voltaire bilang 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'.

Apakah sebagai filsuf Voltaire benar bersedia membela ungkapan sevulgar apapun (misal le coran c'est de la merde) ?

Kekasaran ekstrim dan tidak perlu seperti ini akan mengundang tindakan setara dari orang2 yang sama ekstrimnya (you wanna play hardball? I'm game / lu jual, gue beli).

Sebagai sesama pengembara di dunia, setelah berpisah jalan, lebih baik 'mind your own business', mengganggu orang berarti mengambil resiko diganggu balik...

salam,

/ds

 

[Denny JA]

Ketika ditanya apakah ia percaya atau tidak dengan Tuhan, Einstein mulai dengan definisi: Tuhan yang mana yang dimaksud? Jika yg dimaksud dengan Tuhan itu adalah kumpulan hukum alam, jelas ia percaya. Dan ia bahkan ingin ikut memahami pikiran Tuhan dengan menyelidiki hukum alam. Namun jika yang dimaksud dengan Tuhan itu adalah personal God, yang menurunkan kitab suci kepada nabi, lalu membela kelompok manusia yang satu, dan menghukum kelompok manusia yang lain, ia tak percaya.

Sudah banyak buku yang menulis soal The history of God, atau the Evolution of God. Betapa God ternyata punya konsep yg juga berevolusi sesuai dengan evolusi mindset manusia. Pertanyaan yg lebih maju lagi: konsep Tuhan yg bagaimana yg kini harus kita percayai?

Denny JA

Sent from my iPad3 4G

> On 8 Jan 2015, at 10.15, Daniel Sabirin <dan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> the

[wibowo n]

sebelum kita ke konsep Tuhan yg bagaimana yg kini harus kita percayai....

ada baiknya kita mengingat Tuhan dalam kondisi apapun,insyaAllah kita bisa berkomunikasi langsung dan dapat jawaban langsung, jd akan tahu  konsep Tuhan yg bagaimana yg kini harus kita percayai......

salam

[Gatut Adisoma]

Salam,

Sejalan dengan pemikiran Uda Niel, berikut ini tulisan yang saya copy dari milis Tambang ITB. Mudah2an masih lebih banyak orang2 yang berpikiran seperti penulis artikel ini di Eropa dan di dunia.

Silakan dikomentari..

Wassalam,
Gadis

----------------------------------------------

https://www.facebook.com/cherumaz/posts/10152641904118424:0

JESUIS AHMED

By: Che Brandes-Tuka

As I hear mosques have been attacked, shot at and fire bombed throughout the night across France, all over Europe I see Muslims and their friends, barely having the chance to mourn the dead, who are already now grappling with how to respond to the imminent reaction of fear, blame, and hate towards them instigated by the ‪#‎CharlieHebdo-attack.

I read stories of young men walking into buses or stores as they are stared at with loathing and contempt, stories of young women at work wearing their hijabs as they are being told by people that they should be ashamed of themselves for wearing it, stories of children being bullied at school because parents or teachers told the children of the class that the bad men in Paris were of the same religion as theirs. 

I see a lot of resilient and eloquent responses from young people who are of a generation that grew up with having to respond all their lives to a society that problematizes their presence, having to respond when an act of violence perpetrated by individuals was generalized to their whole ethnic/ cultural/ religious community, having to respond to the one-sided media narratives that stigmatizes and criminalizes them and having to respond to the corresponding opportunist right-wing backlashes that reduce them to "terrorists"; and turn them into scapegoats. 

Unfortunately I also see a lot of that kind of hysteria being internalized by some, as society imposes a certain kind of self-blame for the racism and Islamophobia they endure. Fortunately others keep their backs straight, rejecting the routine of having to distantiate from and apologize for acts they didn't commit nor condone, refusing to have to first say sorry for their religion or to have to praise racist satire and say they are also Charlie before they can sympathize with their losses. 

We have to be honest with ourselves here, Charlie Hebdo with its "satire" attacked the weak more often than the strong and defended the dominant in the guise of attacking convention. Condemning their murder does not require the embrace of their racism. The ‪#‎JeSuisCharlie hashtag makes unanimity compulsory: i.e. we must all be Charlie, we must all agree, we must all be one. If you are not Charlie, you are not ours, you are alien. That is not a defense of freedom of the press, it's an affirmation of us against them. 

Of most of those people I have never seen expressions of a similar angst to the massacre of press and civilians in thousand-fold numbers in far off places where people have brown skin like Iraq, Pakistan or Palestine. As a reminder, twelve journalists were murdered by Israel last summer in Gaza as well. Attacks that were sponsored by the US and UK governments. And it's Western leaders like Cameron, Obama and Hollande who have led the assault on the freedom of press and protest under the guise ofthe Orwellian 'War on Terror', whose toll of human misery in drone strikes, invasions, torture, and occupations dwarfs the #CharlieHebdo-attack 1.000.000 : 1. 

One tends to forget this world that has been made into one giant battlefield, one that is expanding now also to the streets of Paris, is a result of extreme ignorant hatred that is motivated by an enormous lust for money and power, founded by a global system that is degrading and abusing human life and putting humanity on a crash course to mass destruction. One tends to forget that those who are the real danger to "civilization" are not the immigrants and minorities, but the politicians and the businessmen who try to profit from this system and its crises. One tends to forget that the majority of those victimized by this system are generally not Charlie, but Ahmed. 

So I am not saying I am Charlie. I am Ahmed the 3-year-old Syrian refugee who froze to death because his homeland has been plunged into chaos by power hungry maniacs and foreign meddling. I am Ahmed the 10-year-old Palestinian who was seen as a threat and thus shot in the head and killed by an Israeli soldier. I am Ahmed the17-year-old French-Algerian that faces daily police harrassment and has a bigger chance of landing in jail than finding a job. I am Ahmed the 35-year-old whose mosque or kebab shop has been bombed or will be bombed by racist extremists. I am Ahmed the 42-year-old police officer whose faith and culture was ridiculed, but died defending Charlie's right to do so.

 #‎JeSuisAhmed

[Daniel Sabirin]

The saga just took a new (and ugly) turn -tepatnya enam bulan lalu. 

Unicef secara tak terduga menjadi 'partisan' dalam dinamika interaksi 2 kubu pengelana di atas, dengan mengadopsi lagu John Lennon "Imagine' untuk kampanye baru mereka.

UNICEF has launched a new campaign, #IMAGINE, to draw attention to the challenges children face around the world and help raise money for the organization.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/unicef-launches-john-lennon-inspired-imagine-campaign-20141121

Tampaknya pemilihan lagu ini kental nuansa 'politis'-nya, lirik lagu We Are The World sebenarnya lebih 'siap pakai' untuk tujuan di atas,

"We're The World (USA For Africa)"

There comes a time when we heed a certain call

When the world must come together as one

There are /children/ dying (instead of /people/)

And it's time to lend a hand to life

The greatest gift of all

We can't go on pretending day by day

That someone, somewhere will soon make a change

We all are a part of /world's/ great big family (jika /God's/ dinilai mengganggu)

And the truth, you know,

Love is all we need

[Chorus:]

We are the world, we are the children

We are the ones who make a brighter day

So let's start giving...

Daripada lirik provokatif "Imagine",

Imagine there's no heaven

It's easy if you try

No hell below us

Above us only sky (i.e. no God)

Imagine all the people

Living for today (as there's no hereafter)

Imagine there's no countries

It isn't hard to do

Nothing to kill or die for (OK, admittedly some people did kill others in the name of God, but Stalin the confirmed atheist butchered millions of his people for completely different reasons)*

And no religion too

Imagine all the people

Living life in peace...

You may say I'm a dreamer

But I'm not the only one

I hope someday you'll join us (in imagining there's no heaven -the punchline delivered)

And the world will be as one

(*) Dyadkin estimated that the USSR suffered 56 to 62 million "unnatural deaths" during that period, with 34 to 49 million directly linked to Stalin.

Sangat tidak bermanfaat mengangkat logika amburadul ini dalam konteks anak2, apa hubungan kausalitas antara "the world will be as one" dengan Imagine there's no heaven, no hell below us, above us only sky, and no religion too etc. ? 

Tak masalah jika para petinggi Unicef ateis, tapi mengarahkan Unicef ke salah satu golongan jelas abuse of power...

Saya justru samar2 menangkap lirik lagu lain di latar belakang, dari sesama penyanyi Inggris, dan seangkatan dengan Joh Lennon,

...

Pleased to meet you

Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah

But what's puzzling you

Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby

Pleased to meet you

Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah

But what's confusing you

Is just the nature of my game

Just as every cop is a criminal

And all the sinners saints

As heads is tails

Just call me Lucifer

Cause I'm in need of some restraint

...

("Sympathy For The Devil" -THE ROLLING STONES)

salam,

/ds

 

[Ele/Adley]

For me personally, the problem is this:

"UNICEF has launched a new campaign, #IMAGINE, to draw attention to the challenges children face around the world and help raise money for the organization."

Kalau pendekatan murni sekuler karena untuk semua anak dari segala jenis lingkaran kehidupan, itu bisa dimengerti. Malah bisa diargue bagus. Tapi kalau udah tujuannya "sumbangan" nah ini... organized religion lagi ujungnya.

Dan setuju dengan ini: "Tak masalah jika para petinggi Unicef ateis, tapi mengarahkan Unicef ke salah satu golongan jelas abuse of power..."

I guess in the end it all depends on intention.

I will gladly work together with a theist or an atheist, as long it's for the betterment of the children.

But maybe, kampanye ini punya tujuan lain.
Maybe...

Thanks and Regards,

=ele=

~Ignorance is never a bliss~

[Erie Haryanto]

LOVE walks farther and longer than HATRED......

LOVE brings blissful happiness faster than HATRED can deliver.

Syalom

[rusdian lubis]

 Tuhan bukan konsep sebab konsep itu adalah konsepsi manusia yang dikonsep berdasar logikanya yang terbatas dan dikelabui oleh panca indra yang juga terbatas. 

R