Expose fake miracle, get arrested

[arthwollipot]

Indian rationalist Sanal Edamaruku is being harrassed by the Catholic Church after he exposed a fake "miracle".

http://www.rationalistinternational.net/

[bozothedeathmachine]

Quote:

Catholic Church leaders vow to harass Sanal Edamaruku with an array of blasphemy cases.

On the plus side, if/when this is laughed out of court it will highlight what a joke "blasphemy" laws are. If easily demonstrable facts can be considered blasphemy, we have a lot more to worry about than a broken water drain.

[MrBooglemaumau]

Who wrote the first "blasphemy" laws , during which century ? , I'm not familiar with these "laws" . Could someone help out a bit please ?....My guess would be around 2000 years ago [ after watching "The Life of Brian "]...!

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by MrBooglemaumau

Who wrote the first "blasphemy" laws , during which century ? , I'm not familiar with these "laws" . Could someone help out a bit please ?....My guess would be around 2000 years ago [ after watching "The Life of Brian "]...!

There are laws against blasphemy in the Old Testament, and this dates back a lot more than 2000 years.

For India, I'd guess they inherited the blasphemy laws from the British (back when India was under British rule for close to a century). It shouldn't be a surprise they're still on the books in India. Blasphemy was still illegal in Britain until 2008.

[Orphia Nay]

Sanal Edamaruku is a great person. I've enjoyed several of his debunkings over the years (on Sai Baba, Prahlad Jani, Mother Theresa).

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by arthwollipot

Indian rationalist Sanal Edamaruku is being harrassed by the Catholic Church after he exposed a fake "miracle".

http://www.rationalistinternational.net/

Really?

It doesn't even make sense. The style of that piece of writing is more the woo woo kind. The story doesn't stand as it is told.

Searching in news.google about Sanal Edamaruku ---> 3 entries, blog like

There's an entry in en.wikipedia.org about Sanal Edamaruku plenty of details, which means nothing. I deleted a longer entry about a fake "Pedro Fiorito", the supposed creator of pastrami who, according to that entry, travelled in the 1500s to South America as a conquistador, but he was from Jewish ancestors and son of a contemporary solicitor and notary from Buenos Aires. This time traveller had also died from high blood cholesterol, according to serious wiki. So Wikipedia articles about Joe Schmoe don't impress me at all.

The new Carlos?

[Yuri Nalyssus]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

Really?

It doesn't even make sense. The style of that piece of writing is more the woo woo kind.

I know what you mean about the style - I wonder if the church people really were "foaming with rage"? Might be a cultural thing.

Yuri

[Ian]

Randi got in trouble for pointing out similar flummery when he was a teenager.

[Brian-M]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

Really?

It doesn't even make sense. The style of that piece of writing is more the woo woo kind. The story doesn't stand as it is told.

Ah, now you've got me curious enough to actually look at the link.

I was expecting some kind of news article, but it appears to be little more than a promotional piece by Rationalist International to solicit donations.

[Orphia Nay]

Brian, perhaps if they received more donations, they could afford a better website.

Opinion: Rationalist International and Sanal Edamaruku do good work for skepticism.

[aleCcowaN]

Well, I'm not worried about some demonization of Christianity, which is dealt as an alien mysterious element -fair enough within an Indian context, I suppose-, but about the edition of the story to sketch "the enemy". That, including 'our' arthwollipot doubling the bet ("Expose fake miracle, get arrested"). "Expose and get arrested", really, arthwollipot? That's what you conclude from "As he exposed the “miracle” of the drippling Jesus in Mumbai, revengeful Catholic Church leaders vow to harass Sanal Edamaruku with an array of blasphemy cases. The harassment has started. Sanal can be arrested any moment."? (add some music we call "cha-chán", like Mission Impossible's -composed by Argentine Lalo Schifrin-)

In my country, if you shout "dirty n*****" to a black person or you call "f****** moron Jehova's testicle" (the Spanish word for witness is close to the word for testicle) to a Jehova's Witness, you might be arrested (probably fined and forced to apologize publicly) as we consider unacceptable any behaviour that diminishes and scorns people for what they are or believe (practical enforcement or it is a horse of a different colour). Is not that "blasphemy" something along the same lines?

Besides, I suppose some native forum member can read the "headlines" in the video and tell us what is said in Hindi. By the way, why does Rationalist International have an address in New Delhi, is "owned" by some Sanal Sharma or Gupta or Singh, but has no Internet site in Hindi as it does have in Polish or Finnish? Something fishy there.

I'm still bemused about the amount of woo woo and uncritical approach within forums.randi.org

[Brattus]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

Well, I'm not worried about some demonization of Christianity, which is dealt as an alien mysterious element -fair enough within an Indian context, I suppose-, but about the edition of the story to sketch "the enemy". That, including 'our' arthwollipot doubling the bet ("Expose fake miracle, get arrested"). "Expose and get arrested", really, arthwollipot? That's what you conclude from "As he exposed the “miracle” of the drippling Jesus in Mumbai, revengeful Catholic Church leaders vow to harass Sanal Edamaruku with an array of blasphemy cases. The harassment has started. Sanal can be arrested any moment."? (add some music we call "cha-chán", like Mission Impossible's -composed by Argentine Lalo Schifrin-)

In my country, if you shout "dirty n*****" to a black person or you call "f****** moron Jehova's testicle" (the Spanish word for witness is close to the word for testicle) to a Jehova's Witness, you might be arrested (probably fined and forced to apologize publicly) as we consider unacceptable any behaviour that diminishes and scorns people for what they are or believe (practical enforcement or it is a horse of a different colour). Is not that "blasphemy" something along the same lines?

Besides, I suppose some native forum member can read the "headlines" in the video and tell us what is said in Hindi. By the way, why does Rationalist International have an address in New Delhi, is "owned" by some Sanal Sharma or Gupta or Singh, but has no Internet site in Hindi as it does have in Polish or Finnish? Something fishy there.

I'm still bemused about the amount of woo woo and uncritical approach within forums.randi.org

A simple turn of the cards say consider the source.

Have a great day!

[defaultdotxbe]

Originally Posted by bozothedeathmachine

On the plus side, if/when this is laughed out of court it will highlight what a joke "blasphemy" laws are. If easily demonstrable facts can be considered blasphemy, we have a lot more to worry about than a broken water drain.

wouldnt faking a miracle be considered more blasphemous than exposing the fake?

[Orphia Nay]

The story has been picked up by Cory Doctorow and Stephen Law:

http://boingboing.net/2012/04/13/ind...rged-with.html

http://stephenlaw.blogspot.co.uk/201...a-defence.html

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

That, including 'our' arthwollipot doubling the bet ("Expose fake miracle, get arrested"). "Expose and get arrested", really, arthwollipot? That's what you conclude from "As he exposed the “miracle” of the drippling Jesus in Mumbai, revengeful Catholic Church leaders vow to harass Sanal Edamaruku with an array of blasphemy cases. The harassment has started. Sanal can be arrested any moment."? (add some music we call "cha-chán", like Mission Impossible's -composed by Argentine Lalo Schifrin-)

Actually as it turns out, it seems that the church has filed a blasphemy case against him, and the police have told him to come down to the station so they can arrest him (what, no free ride with the sirens blaring?).

So it looks like exposing miracles as fake very well might get you arrested.

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by Paul2

Actually as it turns out, it seems that the church has filed a blasphemy case against him, and the police have told him to come down to the station so they can arrest him (what, no free ride with the sirens blaring?).

So it looks like exposing miracles as fake very well might get you arrested.

Where did you got those 100%_accurate_in-context_facts? If you have time, please identify too who tagged it as a miracle and when.

I'm used to hear here mothers saying "it's a miracle" in the news and thanking "god" because their children got a heart-lung transplant, or had a severed arm reattached, all of it free of charge. They seldom thank the surgeons, the institution where the surgery was made, and the institution's contributors -mainly Juan Pueblo (John Q. Public) via taxation-. Donor's relatives are thanked when the reporter asks "What would you say to the donor's relatives?".

So, a transplant is not a miracle and a dripping statue is not a miracle, but stupid people is claiming miracle. How would react my surgeon neighbour if some Sanal Pérez accuses him of deceiving people by telling he performs miracles and his hand is guided by god itself, all of it said in the most insulting and calumniatory way, just in order to attract attention by a publicity stunt? How do you know that is not the case with this silly story in the OP?

And about the "press (repercussions|echoes|whichever word is used)" like boingboing's, it all looks pretty similar to a denialist site claiming that a famous climate scientist plotted with some windmill tycoon to deceive the authorities, and a few denialist site (in fact, hundreds of them) copying it.

The more I give the story a thought, the more lame and BS it seems to be. And all the pretended skepticism in these fora, it boils to a naïvité worse than a five years old about Santa when it comes to attack the chosen enemy. What a sham!

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

How do you know that is not the case with this silly story in the OP?

Well, there is a link to a YouTube video of a priest arguing that it is a miracle and not capillary action in the article cited in the OP. That certainly substantiates that priests have claimed that it's a miracle. I've not watched all of the video and, as it's all a bit of a free-for-all I'm not sure I'm going to, but the article in the OP also claims that this is where the threats of harassment were made. Of course I'd want to watch it for myself before making a definite declarative statement about it, but I think it's reasonable to have as a working hypothesis that this sceptic site wouldn't make a claim and then link to a video which completely refutes that claim.

You seem to be complaining that things might not be what the article in the OP claims they are without first having looked at the evidence provided in the article in the OP. I'm not sure that lecturing people about their failures of scepticism is entirely appropriate under those circumstances.

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Well, there is a link to a YouTube video of a priest arguing that it is a miracle and not capillary action in the article cited in the OP

If you heard the bold part, can you tell us the exact time in the video? Your texts implies you did. I promise to look for the "harassment part". I have half a dozen contacts in language forums that are Hindi native speakers and that I helped much learning Spanish. I could ask some of them to hear short parts of the video and tell me what they're saying.

You have to have hints of some elements of the story being real before speaking of "working hypothesis". It's clear that there's a dripping statue in some place and this Sanal was around there. All the rest, is unclear. I'm surprised how many people in the world don't know that telling lies is most of the time legal everywhere, specially in TV.

By the way. Here's Article 295 of Indian Penal Law

Quote:

CHAPTER XV

OF OFFENCES RELATING TO RELIGION


295.


Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to insult the
religion of any class.


295. Injuring or defiling place of worship, with intent to
insult the religion of any class.--Whoever destroys, damages or
defiles any place of worship, or any object held sacred by any class
of persons with the intention of thereby insulting the religion of any
class of persons or with the knowledge that any class of persons is
likely to consider such destruction, damage or defilement as an insult
to their religion, shall be punished with imprisonment of either
description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or
with both.


295A.


Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings
of any class by insulting its religion or religious beliefs.


5*[295A. Deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage
religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or religious
beliefs.--Whoever, with deliberate and malicious intention of
outraging the religious feelings of any class of 6*[citizens of
India], 7*[by words, either spoken or written, or by signs or by
visible representations or otherwise] insults or attempts to insult
the religion or the religious beliefs of that class, shall be punished
with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to
8*[three years], or with fine, or with both.]

I have a hard time believing that Indian Code of Criminal Procedure provides arrest on a supposed crime that may cause a fine to be imposed once the accused is found guilty. That the chap can be brought to some precinct in order to be asked about the charges, are you surprised? is that to be detained in legal custody?

I'm not diminishing Hypatia or Miguel Servet, dead by instigation of Christian priests (John Calvin in the last case) by not buying the story of this Sanal, nor making miracles less BS than they are (but I don't go to the altar of the nearest church to shout that).

[Paul2]

Sheesh, I'm happy to admit that what has been reported may not be 100% accurate, or have a misleading context, etc. That's very easy to imagine.

[Drs_Res]

I hear the term capillary action twice starting around 2:04 (linked below) but it is the narrator saying it and this is not my language.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUqhq9MuRG8#t=2m04s

A translation of the whole video would be cool though.

[gnome]

Originally Posted by defaultdotxbe

wouldnt faking a miracle be considered more blasphemous than exposing the fake?

From a legal standpoint, it would depend on how well politically connected the faker was

[aleCcowaN]

By the way, some of "them" are saying -from the source in OP, the description on their youtube videos and in other parts- "Several petitions on the base of Article 295 of Indian Criminal Procedure Code (Indian Blasphemy Law) are already filed against Sanal" (see "watch?v=kUqhq9MuRG8" on Youtube)

Where's the blasphemy within the text of that law? Read if you like that article -I provided the text above- or the whole chapter about "Religion" -I provided the link above-. "Blasphemy" is not the misconduct those articles address but just the respect of group beliefs and sacred places, which is not surprising in a country with so many religions, that suffered one and a half million deaths driven by religious affiliation, and having periodically temple and church bombings with dozens and even hundreds killed, as we all can read in the news. I'm not surprised any disorderly conduct regarding religious places is heavily prosecuted in such a cultural and historical context, and I agree with that, in spite I consider gods or only god -personal or impersonal- to be false notions coming from early primitive stages in human development, as well as heaven, hell, soul and other niceties. But ethics is not a ghost of our past. Not at all.

[JoeBentley]

On a broader scope it just speaks to a wider problem. Woo slingers of all kinds have learned the power in playing some variation on the "tolerance" card.

On social level this has become the "You're being mean" chestnut. We ask for some simple evidence that whatever fluff you believe is true, suddenly we're big meanies that want to take all the joy out of life.

On a legal level this is starting to manifest as people trying to legally, in one for or another, to prevent people from disagreeing with their Woo by calling it "hate speech" or even the monumentally backwards idea of bringing back blasphemy as a legal concept.

TL; DR version: Long story short, wrong people have a vested in interest in promoting the idea that it's wrong to tell people that they are wrong.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

If you heard the bold part, can you tell us the exact time in the video? Your texts implies you did.

It's within a couple of minutes. I sat through all the pointless text at the beginning (seriously, why start a video off with text telling you what you're about to see in the video?), then they started speaking in Hindi, so I moved the pointer forwards a minute or two to get a picture of an anchor standing to the left of the screen (our left, her right), with 4 boxes to the right arranged in a square with 4 different people shouting at and over each other, one of whom was the priest who was shouting (paraphrased) "if it were capillary action, then water would be dripping from everywhere, not just the feet"). As everybody was shouting over the top of each other and I've had a long and stressful week, I turned the video off very quickly afterwards. So within the first 5 minutes or so.

Quote:

I have half a dozen contacts in language forums that are Hindi native speakers and that I helped much learning Spanish. I could ask some of them to hear short parts of the video and tell me what they're saying.

There's no need. Only the very beginning is in Hindi, the rest is in English.

Quote:

You have to have hints of some elements of the story being real before speaking of "working hypothesis".

I'd suggest that you need to have examined the evidence presented in an article before declaring that article to be "lame and BS", especially if you're going to be disparaging other people's critical thinking skills while doing so.

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Originally Posted by aleCcowaN

Where's the blasphemy within the text of that law?

They could claim that 295A covered blasphemy. Whether such a charge would stand up or not is another matter, but the law is worded ambiguously enough to allow it.

[MG1962]

I have a few concerns about this whole case. Who declared the event a miracle. Local Church leaders do not have that right or ability. It is submitted to the Vatican and they make the final call

The Church of Our Lady of Velankanni appears to have nothing official or unofficial about the miracle

http://www.velankannichurch.com/

This may not be an official website, so I am happy to be corrected

I tried to watch the video but the language is beyond me. We really have no idea what the debate is about, or who said what exactly. The criminal code posted seems to suggest a charge could be laid, however the non-official condition of the miracle suggests (To me anyway) the arrest is more about placating the local church leaders and little to do with the process of law.

Finally I would suggest code 295 is aimed more towards Hindu and Muslim followers who in the day had a great tradition of invading each others temples and defacing carvings statues etc

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

They could claim that 295A covered blasphemy. Whether such a charge would stand up or not is another matter, but the law is worded ambiguously enough to allow it.

Don't you forget that who is calling it "blasphemy" is the very person who supposedly can be arrested any second, or people close to him.

Why could someone distort bonafide a legal situation to show "the counterpart" as a medieval bigot? Malafide, I have no problem to answer the same question. That's the whole point. The article linked in the OP is just gruesome malafide, as much as people claiming miracles is just gruesome primitive. Two wrongs doesn't make a right.

[aleCcowaN]

Wait a minute

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

Well, there is a link to a YouTube video of a priest arguing that it is a miracle and not capillary action in the article cited in the OP.

<snip>

Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim

It's within a couple of minutes. I sat through all the pointless text at the beginning (seriously, why start a video off with text telling you what you're about to see in the video?), then they started speaking in Hindi, so I moved the pointer forwards a minute or two to get a picture of an anchor standing to the left of the screen (our left, her right), with 4 boxes to the right arranged in a square with 4 different people shouting at and over each other, one of whom was the priest who was shouting (paraphrased) "if it were capillary action, then water would be dripping from everywhere, not just the feet").

<snip>

And the miracle part of your previous post? I exactly heard the same as you, that's why I asked you about in the first place. The miracle part is still missing. How do you know he is a priest? Which religion would he be (as it stands from that video)? Otherwise you would be trying to elevate to the category of fact what seems to be apparent just to you.

And don't get me wrong. I not only call into question the critical thinking skills of a bunch of people in these fora. I call into question their ethics too.

[aleCcowaN]

Originally Posted by MG1962

The Church of Our Lady of Velankanni appears to have nothing official or unofficial about the miracle

http://www.velankannichurch.com/

This may not be an official website, so I am happy to be corrected

Here, the whole story briefly told by journalists -I suppose-:

AsiaNews

Al least this text doesn't trigger a dozen alarms when I read it (it doesn't contain "heuristic negative cues" as they use to call them) as the Indiana Jones like tale from "rationalistinternational" did.

[Wudang]

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

It's a bit chaotic as most of the time 3 people are shouting at once. Start at 08:40 and hope for the best. I'm not sure anyone comes off well.

[aleCcowaN]

As you say, starting about 8:20 (the parts I understand)

Bishop (of Mumbai, I presume): "Can I speak in En.? I'll speak in English ... dripping .... it might possibly? Yes ... it might have natural causes. It is possible it is natural. The Church has not said it is a miracle. We would never say it's a miracle unless it's been investigated very carefully, scientifically ... What we object to is to state that this has been created by the priest to make money. This cross is in a compound that don't belong to the priests and there's no collection of money. This is a false charge against the priest ..."

Then it comes a reply by Sanal E. I can't fully understand. He refers to a judge I think and later says "basically believe it's a scam". Could someone transcript the essential parts of this reply (00:09:30 to 00:10:00)?

EDIT: Later Sanal E. says he's happy the claim of a miracle has been withdrawn while the bishop and the lady on screen shout repeatedly no claim about a miracle had been made. The bishop adds he doesn't think it's a miracle.

I keep expecting the part where they "vow to harass" S.N.

[Wudang]

Sanal says something about "priests approached me saying it's a miracle" which could be clearer, especially given the news report that xians, hindu and muslim praying together was "a miracle". Unfortunately it's a shouting match not a debate.

[Ian]

Sanal Edamaruku discusses being harassed for his work:

http://www.slate.com/articles/health...s_miracle.html