Here we go again – The SLC Good Friday Bru-Ha

In the wake of the “Buddhists” Vs Akon incident, another storm is brewing around the SLC World Cup Mascot and Ticket launch event to be held at the Colombo Hilton on Good Friday (02/04/2010). The event is tagged a ‘Tamasha’, which I had to look up, and apparently is a Urdu word for ‘show’ or ‘spectacle’. Well you learn something new everyday, I guess. Here are some very creative excerpts from the letters written to The Daily Mirror;

“We therefore request the President to intervene as he is the only one who can and has the power, capability, leadership and understanding to cancel this event as he did in the Akon show. After all does not the UPFA depend a lot on the Catholic and Christian votes?

I would like to request all those decent men and women who have been invited to this tamasha on Good Friday to show their protest by boycotting the event which is not about promoting the world cup but about boosting the egos of some individuals who are basking in political patronage. I appeal to our Buddhist friends who have also been invited to boycott the event.

Sadly today cricket is no more the gentleman’s game and is no longer run by the white man. Cricket is today run by the black new rich Asians and the game has fallen to appalling levels. Just look at the Indian IPL and the number of times the four letter word beginning with F is used when bowlers take a wicket.

Now Sri Lanka is being dictated to by these new rich black Asians and some people running Sri Lanka Cricket have become slaves to them.

The Island reports that the event will be going ahead as planned.

There’s nothing else to say but as watch these good people get their knickers in a twist. It has become a well enjoyed past time of Sri Lankans now, might as well enjoy the show.

[Thanks to Raj for bringing this to our attention and for posting the news article]

Advertisements

22 Responses to Here we go again – The SLC Good Friday Bru-Ha

  1. Raj says:

    Okay… so they are upset over this cricket program happening on Good Friday, but what interests me is they seem to be even more upset because there is going to be meat, liquor and ‘ill clad’ women at the show. Like Christians don’t eat meat, drink liqour or dress up as whores on Christmas day, New Years Eve or when they go partying? I mean seriously? The hypocrisy of Sinhala Christians amazes me.

    Anyway, I’m going to be eating meat, drinking liqour and partying today on Good Friday! 🙂

  2. Raj says:

    Checkout these gems as well:


    Christian leaders attack atheism in Easter messages

    Religious leaders have used their Good Friday sermons to launch an attack on what they call a recent surge in atheism.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/04/02/2863269.htm?section=justin

    Atheists are believers who hate God, says Anglican Archbishop Peter

    A day after Sydney Catholic Archbishop Cardinal George Pell criticised non-believers, Dr Jensen said in his Good Friday sermon at Sydney’s St Andrew’s Cathedral that atheism was a form idolatry.

    “As we can see by the sheer passion and virulence of the atheist – they seem to hate the Christian God – we are not dealing here with cool philosophy up against faith without a brain,” Dr Jensen told worshippers.

    http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/atheists-are-believers-who-hate-god-says-anglican-archbishop-peter-jensen/story-e6frfku0-1225848925206

  3. But who exactly is really upset? So far as I can see, it seems to be a few news editors trying to stir things up. The Daily Mirror ran consecutive outraged pieces on this, without a byline. The second piece quoted unnamed ‘analysts’ and anonymous letters to the editor, and sounded a bit desperate, since no Christians had shown up to stone ITN.

    There is no actual command in the Bible to fast or be frugal in the runup to Good Friday and Easter. The period of Lent is largely an enforcement by the Roman Catholic church and the Church of England.

    I don’t think it’s necessary for Sri Lankan Christians to make idiots of themselves in the way the Buddhists have about these things. why should we have an attitude of “hey, they don’t let us drink on Poya, so why should we let ’em drink on Good Friday, so there”. Bars were never closed on Christmas Day before around 2003, I think, but now it seems everyone must suffer equally.

    I guess people feel that one religion shouldn’t lag behind another in the moron scale. Equal idiocy for all.

    • Raj says:

      But Sri Lankan Christians already made themselves look like idiots when they campaigned to ban The Da Vinci Code and The Last Temptation and suceeded (long before the Akon affair). No worries about the drug trade, murder, rape, abortion, thefts, child abuse by the clergy but two hollywood movies… yeah now that is the sky falling down and the apocalypse. Even the US with its hordes of Christian fundamentalists didn’t ban the movies; I guess this shows that SL Christians are even angrier, more extremist Christians….hmmmm……yet another ‘only in Sri Lanka’ thing….

      • I think ‘The Da Vinci Code’ should have been banned simply because it’s one of the crappiest movies of all time 😀 but seriously, Raj, it wasn’t the Sri Lankan Christians — whom you seem to dislike intensely — who campaigned for the banning of that movie. It was the Roman Catholic church, which felt that the film threatened the celibacy of the priesthood. Most objective Christians will not be offended by the movie’s theme — just by its rubbish script. It was the same with ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’, which is actually a great movie. The Church decided it was blasphemous and called for it to be banned. Most Christians in SL haven’t even seen it, though it is available here on DVD.

        However, on the point of this post, there’s a difference between the calling for the banning of material deemed offensive to a religion, and trying to prevent people of other religions exercising their freedom to drink, fuck hookers, or whatever takes their fancy on any day of the year, regardless of whether it’s one of your own religion’s holy days. It’s still another level of idiocy to actually get thugs to stone a TV station in order to defend a religion that preaches peace and tolerance, while ignoring the rampant homosexuality, promiscuity, child abuse, and general corruption of the Buddhist clergy in this country.

        Bottom line is, practice your religion according to your beliefs and leave others to get on with their lives according to their own beliefs. So far there hasn’t been any protests about this cricket party, which means the majority of Christians don’t really care, and the only people so worked up seem to be a couple of newspaper editors. Wonder why, no?

  4. Lahiru. says:

    David I agree with the following statement you made

    David Blacker :

    I think ‘The Da Vinci Code’ should have been banned simply because it’s one of the crappiest movies of all time but seriously, Raj, it wasn’t the Sri Lankan Christians — whom you seem to dislike intensely — who campaigned for the banning of that movie. It was the Roman Catholic church, which felt that the film threatened the celibacy of the priesthood. Most objective Christians will not be offended by the movie’s theme — just by its rubbish script. It was the same with ‘The Last Temptation of Christ’, which is actually a great movie. The Church decided it was blasphemous and called for it to be banned. Most Christians in SL haven’t even seen it, though it is available here on DVD.
    However, on the point of this post, there’s a difference between the calling for the banning of material deemed offensive to a religion, and trying to prevent people of other religions exercising their freedom to drink, fuck hookers, or whatever takes their fancy on any day of the year, regardless of whether it’s one of your own religion’s holy days. It’s still another level of idiocy to actually get thugs to stone a TV station in order to defend a religion that preaches peace and tolerance, while ignoring the rampant homosexuality, promiscuity, child abuse, and general corruption of the Buddhist clergy in this country.
    Bottom line is, practice your religion according to your beliefs and leave others to get on with their lives according to their own beliefs. So far there hasn’t been any protests about this cricket party, which means the majority of Christians don’t really care, and the only people so worked up seem to be a couple of newspaper editors. Wonder why, no?

    • Lahiru. says:

      This is not the correct post please read the one below.
      Thanks.

  5. Raj says:

    Hi David,

    Thanks for your reply. But last time I checked Catholics are classed as Christians – unless you want to open a whole can of worms and say that Catholics aren’t Christians (which quite a few people actually seem to believe). I think it was idiotic for Sri Lankan Christians to be offended by the Da Vinci Code and The Last Temptation. I remember during that time there were plenty of letters written to the newspapers by angry Sri Lankan Christians frothing at the mouth over the ‘blasphemy’. It didn’t matter that the clergy was molesting little boys, or selling babies (like that nun at some hospital down south), or sticking their fingers in the Negombo drug trade, or engaging in politics….but a movie was enough to get the clergy up in arms and the faithful soon followed.

    I think you’re just angry because Christians are getting critiqued here… but look at the other posts, there have been plenty of post criticising Buddhists/Hindus. I know your father was a Christian priest of some sort, but that doesn’t mean Christian hypocrisy shouldn’t be held up to the light or that you have to try and justify it. And Sri Lankan Christians are quite hypocritical people. They will attend church every Sunday, pray like there is no tomorrow but go about doing the most nasty things to other human beings. I have met many Christians from other countries who are not nearly as fervant and fundamentalist as Sri Lankan Christians, but who are far more Christ-like than our islanders. This is of course my experience.

    BTW, I would say writing angry letters to newspapers expressing outrage over something like a cricket program on Good Friday is a means of protest. You may think otherwise. The Daily Mirror says they have been getting numerous calls from outraged Christians.

    But like I said, I have eaten meat, had a drink and am going out to party tonight… Sri Lankan Christians like Jay Fernando and Clive Gunasekara can sue me if they like!! 🙂

    Hope the SLC show goes ahead full steam!

    PS There is nothing wrong with homosexuality. They shouldn’t be stoned to death like it is taught in the Bible. If Sri Lankan Christians actually practiced that particular teaching, then half of the Christian clergy in the country should be stoned to death.

    PPS Totally agree that people should do what they want on whatever day of the year… poya, id-ul-fitr, good friday, Christmas, deepavali.

    • Raj, I am disappointed that you feel it necessary to bring my father into this. But then I guess this IS Sri Lanka, and it’s not possible to have a civilised conversation on anything without having one’s parents dragged in.

      There’s clearly no sign of ANY protest about this Good Friday party by anyone outside of a couple of newspaper editors and you on this blog. The papers in question haven’t published any of the letters they CLAIM to have received, and their so called ‘analysts’ remain anonymous.

      I think many Buddhists are keen to pick on this party and create a strawman to attack in order to show that religious intolerance isn’t confined to the Buddhists. Luckily, you and they have been unsuccessful in sowing these seeds of disharmony.

      I notice that you’ve also attempted to put words into my mouth in order to muddy the water as to the true subject. I haven’t said homosexuality is wrong, so the stoning issue is irrelevant. However you Buddhists seem fond of stones these days, no? 😉 Neither have I said that promiscuity is either right or wrong. The point is, that both homosexuality and promiscuity is forbidden to Buddhist clergy (and Roman Catholic clergy too) who must remain celibate, and that is why I pointed it out. In a country where corruption and abuse of Buddhism by the clergy and politicians (some of whom are both) is widespread, it seems patently absurd to pick on this party and try to create a storm in a teacup over the Christians.

      I really don’t care about your other posts, just this one, so saying that you criticize Buddhists and Hindus as well, is quite pointless. Also, accusing me of defending hypocrisy is a bit silly, since what I’m basically doing is accusing YOU of being a hypocrite 😀

      I’ll not bother taking up the stuff you’ve accused the Roman Catholic clergy of since it’s more or less what the buddhist priests themselves are doing. The same goes for your comments on Christian church-goers. SL is a country of hypocrites, of all religions, but again, that’s not the point is it?

      I’m not sure which countries these foreign Christians you’ve met come from, but you’ll find that the same applies to foreign Buddhists too. Do you see a comparable level of Buddhist intolerance anywhere else in the world? The only countries that come anywhere close is Burma and Thailand, both Theravadha countries, and in the latter the abuse and corruption is as bad as in SL.

      Bottom line, Raj, isn’t which religion is better or worse. My point is why are you creating a ‘bru-ha’ when there clearly isn’t one? I can bet you anything you like that if the Christian clergy wanted that party stopped, they only had to snap their fingers and it would have been history. That they haven’t is telling.

  6. Lahiru. says:

    Sorry,the above comment went terribly wrong.
    It should have been,David I agree with the following statement you made “Bottom line is, practice your religion according to your beliefs and leave others to get on with their lives according to their own beliefs”.But there is a principle problem with it,since most religions demand not only private conduct to be inline with the teachings but also public conduct of citizens.The bottom line is religion does not have provisions which allow others do anything they like and one main objective of religion is to grow which they do by conversion or suppression of non-believers.The believers of religion X likes to see the believers of the region to Y to convert and if they do not convert,to see then punished on earth or in hell.
    This is the true state of all religious minds both moderate and fundamentalist.An alleged moderate believer of a religion is like that because of few reasons.Either because they really do not believe in it and only follow it to avoid social consequences that would arise as a result of no believing or because they still have a degree of devotion and allegiance to the human race more than what he has for imaginary stories.

    The word religious tolerance brings humor to me as how could a X believer who is certain that Y believer would go to hell,as he does not accept his religion,respect Y and vice versa.How could one respect another who he believes to be a sinner.It’s impossible to do that but then you might ask me how come people from different religions live in relative harmony in multi-religious society like ours.It is because the majority of us are faithful to humans more than to a particular religion.Our natural and instinctive love for our kind,for now, is collectively higher than the collective love that different sects have for their beliefs.When this threshold is exceeded we experience a phenomena called war or more precisely holy wars.These occur time to time,in different places with different magnitudes but it is happening as we speak.
    We do not have anything call religious tolerance only something called human tolerance as we all know at the end of the day we are all one human family only to be separated mainly by religions.
    There are lot of other reasons for us to kill our own kind such as nationalism, political ideologies,race,ethnicity and even personal affairs but history is evidence that the main and the underlaying motivator for most of the wars is religion.I hope your above statement can be true but sadly it cannot manifest in reality.

    • Lahiru, I must disagree. I won’t speak on behalf of other religions, but Christian teachings cover only the believers. All instruction and suggestions are for those who believe themselves to be Christians. Nowhere is there any obligation to compel non-believers to conform to Christian teachings. Yes, there is a clear command to convert (though defenders of anti-conversion laws argue that it isn’t clear), but none to suppress other religions. The historical suppression and forced conversion that has taken place in history, is at best misguided, but often merely a tool for political and national interest. Sort of like Saddam Hussein and Muhammar Gaddafi cloaking themselves in Islam, or George W Bush with democracy, to gain and hold power. Also, while punishment in the afterlife is promised for non-believers, in Christianity there is no such punishment on earth.

      In contrast to your opinion that believers of one religion cannot respect those of another religion since the other is condemned to Hell, Jesus Christ specifically taught that his followers must love their enemies, and not just their friends. The New Testament is also replete with parables to this effect, such as the story of the Good Samaritan. Christ’s teachings are to convert the non-believers in order to save them, and to do so with love and compassion. You cannot have the latter two qualities if you first do not respect and tolerate the followers of other religions.

      In my opinion, there have been no holy wars, just wars disguised as holiness in order to gain willing cannon fodder.

      • Lahiru. says:

        So what you are saying simply sums up to this,that all non Christians are any how going to hell but Christians should sympathetically try to convert them without using any physical coercion as it is there duty to salvage the the infidels who belong to other faiths.Do not you see a contradiction here.How can one respect a sinner especially after he has refused to convert and receive forgiveness.It is like respecting and impliedly permitting something what you believe is wrong.Does Christianity teach hypocrisy and according to my knowledge of the bible and the old testament it does not,specially in respect of its faith and commandments yet imposes a duty on the believer to fight against things that are against Christianity.When it comes to fighting it could be physically aggression or in the form of missionaries.When the later does not work,as in most occasions,the former not only becomes an option but a necessity..
        ” The historical suppression and forced conversion that has taken place in history, is at best misguided, but often merely a tool for political and national interest. Sort of like Saddam Hussein and Muhammar Gaddafi cloaking themselves in Islam, or George W Bush with democracy, to gain and hold power”
        The above statement shows that you have failed to understand the relationship between religion and politics nor the partnership between power and religion.They cannot exist without one another and if you read history you will encounter the fact that from tribal religions of Africa to more organised religions of the day have created and facilitated the power of rulers and served them as a source of authority.E suggest you read the naturalists’ perspective of the rule of law.Politics and religion are not two entities they depend upon one another for their existence as both seeks power by employing manipulation and misrepresentation as the key mode of action.You might say Jesus said love your enemy but the you seem to have missed the issue,that is whether this is really possible as the word enemy in terms of both its literal definition and psychological attributes requires from the other to have towards the enemy emotions such as hate and vengeance which are the complete opposite of love.This contradiction might give philosophical euphoria to you but for a rational person it sounds ridiculous just as the statement “every cat is a mouse”.Furthermore it’s not only Christianity that has vagaries as these,for example Buddhism say practice compassion on every one and Islam dictates that its the religion of peace which they have managed to prove beyond reasonable doubt in respect of their historical and reason activities.
        Apologist such as you try to imply that all the massacres that religion had brought about occurred because it was abused and misinterpreted by rulers.But what you fail to see is that at the times those massacres took place the believers of those religions did not see wrong in what they were doing as divine authority has justified their slaughtering of children,women and men.(The Bible and the old testament provides more than enough examples though the status of those might be deemed fictional).Religion and politics are like two sides of the same stick which feeds on weakness of the innocent misinformed man converting them into fanatics that believe in imaginary friends.
        The nature of your comments suggests your attitude towards your fellow human beings who does not share your faith since you write as if Christians are superior and the rest are maggots awaiting their all loving God in hell.
        I do not want get into the theological aspects of religions therefore I will pause here.
        Finally,I would most humbly ask you to read and study about other religions in detail most of which will sound convincing as your current faith and hopefully if you are aware of the distinction between sense and truth and provided that you are a genuine person there is a high probability that you would adopt a world view more or less similar to that of mine which is not absolute but is the most productive and reliable method still known to man;the scientific method in connection with secular humanist values.
        Take care

  7. Sorry that should have read the have not published any of the letters in the papers.

  8. crdesilva says:

    David Blacker :

    I think ‘The Da Vinci Code’ should have been banned simply because it’s one of the crappiest movies of all time :D

    @ David,
    I cannot agree on the point you made. It’s up to the audience to decide whether the movie is good or bad. So if the government decides to ban it then they are blocking the right of the audience of deciding whether the movie is useful or not.

    In my opinion even if the movie is “the crappiest movies of all time” it should not be banned.

    This is not only for movies it should be for anything. Of course we should ban things like firearms, drugs, etc… because it’s PROVEN to be harmful.

    • It was a tongue-in-cheek comment, not a serious one.

  9. Looks like my comments are now being blocked.

    • tharindra says:

      Sorry about that, your comments have diverted to the spam queue for some unknown reason…apologies

  10. @David Blacker. I respect your views. You seems to be from sensible and sensitive side of the religion. Just like I said to one of the Buddhist commentors the other day. I am glad you are here and reading this stuff and commenting. Certainly refreshing to see such views as opposed to a stone throwing and name calling mob.

    Besides, you are only promising us eternal damnation in hell afterlife, and in this life you promise that we can go unharmed. OK, that is bit of a foot in mouth comment from me. Such beliefs are not your fault, but the fault of what you believe in. And you are entitled to believe.

  11. Lahiru, on your point that it is illogical to think that a Christian can respect or care for someone he believes to be a sinner, I agree. It IS illogical. But love is illogical; and so is religion. If one is to strictly use reason and logic, both religion and emotion cannot be accepted. So it is pointless to debate it, but let me try to explain further. Christianity does not ask Christians to judge non-Christians and pass a verdict of guilt of innocence. That is upto God. Christians are called on to love their neighbours; regardless of religion. And it is possible to hate the sin, but not the sinner.

    All of the monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity, and Islam) are intrinsically unreasonable and seemingly unfair to a non-believer. It seems unreasonable to think that a god who claims to love creation would condemn all non-believers to hell. But Christianity isn’t about reason, it is about belief and faith, as is all religion. There is no proof of an afterlife, of punishment or reward, good or evil. One must simply believe, and that is beyond all logic 🙂

    Your comments on the connection between religion and politics more or less reflect what I’ve already said (though you seem not to understand that). The organisation of religion (eg the vatican) has always been about power, disguised as religion. Jesus never suggested that there should be any organisational structure, much less a pope or even a priesthood.

    As for your “love your enemy” comment, the word enemy was used by Jesus in the context of the time he lived in, where his followers considered themselves Jews, and in which most Jews considered all Gentiles to be the enemy. So enemy did not have the same meaning we give it today. The Gentiles were non-Jews with whom the Jews had no social dealings.

    That not withstanding, Jesus demonstrated his view on the subject when he healed the ear of the guard who came to arrest him, which had been cut off by Peter in his defence. Again, I will refer you to my first paragraph, where I explain that this is not about logic. Yes, it seems illogical and even impossible for someone to change feelings of hate to love, but that is what Jesus asked his followers to do, and Christians believe that through prayer this is possible.

    I have already told you that the Bible has been misinterpreted and corrupted to justify many atrocities and massacres, and your argument that Christians (and other adherents) justified these crimes does not change that, but in fact supports my argument. They justified these things because they were misguided by both their political and religious leaders, or they themselves misinterpreted the scriptures.

    The Old Testament may or may not be fictional (and the same goes for the New), but again that portion of scripture must be taken in the context of the times. There are many arguments for and against the acts carried out by the Israelites, but I won’t get into that now, beyond saying that the New Testament and Jesus’ teachings were for a changed time and people, and the latter often (but not always) continues and supersedes many of the Old Testament teachings.

    Whether Christianity or any other religion is as you say a mere fabrication to take advantage of the masses is a different argument, and rather pointless to take up in the context of this discussion. The point is, religion has its believers who believe that their religion is true.

    I fail to see where I have given you cause to think that I believe non-Christians to be maggots. Nor have I ever said that Christians are superior to anyone else. To the contrary, the Bible says that all men are loved by God equally. Also, I have merely told you what the Bible says; and at no point have I put forward my own beliefs. It is you who have assumed that I am even a Christian 🙂

    Finally, contrary to your assumptions, I have in fact read widely about other religions, and they have neither made me believe more or less in any religion. You, on the other hand, while claiming not be an absolutist, make such absolute comments such as “a world view more or less similar to that of mine which is not absolute but is the most productive and reliable method still known to man”, and “religion and politics are like two sides of the same stick which feeds on weakness of the innocent misinformed man converting them into fanatics that believe in imaginary friends”.

    You inquire whether I know the difference between sense and truth, but I must ask you if you know the difference been sense and belief, because the two are not necessarily compatible. And it is precisely because I believe that science (or sense if you like) should govern secular activities, that I find blog posts such as this objectionable, where it is suggested that secular activities (such as cricket and hookers) be governed by religious law.

  12. Lahiru. says:

    Sir,as to your comment”One must simply believe, and that is beyond all logic”I have to say it the other way logic is beyond belief and one does not have to believe in it as it clear exist.If were not for logic we would have still be believing thunder occurs when Gods are made.

    As for all you other comments I have no response as I see no positive outcome in responding.
    Tc mate.

    • “logic is beyond belief”

      You mean like apples are beyond oranges? 🙂

  13. Lahiru. says:

    Apologies for the sloppy gamer.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: