Islam - What's your view on it?

[TenEightyOne]

Are you suggesting they're being attacked because of their religion?

Impossible to say, but the attacks I refer to are all by Christians in Christian areas... are they part of the epidemic that we need to examine? For the rest... @Scaff pretty much said it all.

 

[Imari]

That was to show how much of a concern "Islamophobia" is but in proportion to actual attacks and killings against Christians it receives far more undeserved attention.

Oh, I misunderstood then. You're saying that there's a huge fuss made about Islamophobia, but that the actual attacks against Christians are minor and get far more attention than they deserve?

I don't know about far more attention than they deserve, they get little attention as far as I can tell. But I agree with the general sentiment that they're at best a minor footnote, the far more important things are the Islam on Islam civil wars and the terrorist groups that kill indiscriminately.

You don't need a central leadership to have an overarching goal. Your point is moot and flies in the face of what I provided in the past few pages

Well, yeah, you do if you want to lump everyone together as united in that goal. It's one thing to say that Muslims want to take over the world, but if all the sects of Islam are competing with each other for that goal as well then that's a slightly different scenario to one where there's 1.6 billion people united to take over the world.

I dunno, how many in 2017?

The point was that if you don't know, then how do you determine what is an unacceptably high death rate for Christians in those areas? If Christians are getting popped at the same rate as every other religion, what's the problem? You know, other than people getting killed but you seem less interested in that if they're not of the correct religion.

I know, probably like ignoring this:

http://www.christianpost.com/news/a-slow-motion-christian-genocide-we-cant-ignore-it-anymore-137044/

Or this:

https://www.jihadwatch.org/2017/03/raymond-ibrahim-the-slow-motion-genocide-of-egypts-christians

So, a slow genocide from 2015. That two years later, still isn't a genocide.

And a slow genocide in Egypt. The article references ten individual murders. While sad, it's not a genocide if you're referencing the victims by name.

This is genocide, and this, and this.

Labeling what's going on in Egypt as genocide is either ignorant of what genocide really is, or you're knowingly exaggerating and hoping that no one will notice. The Copts are being persecuted in Egypt, no doubt, and they have been for decades. It's not a genocide.

But were the drone strikes aimed to kill because they were Muslims?

Yep. They're going after militants from groups that are explicitly Muslim.

Interesting, but I was making the point that we go on and on about Islamophobia and highlighting how many Christians had actually lost their life for their faith by Muslims.

So your point was hardly any, and that we should focus on more important things? I agree.

How much does the UN speak about "Islamophobia" when proportionally Muslims aren't the most persecuted religion.

I'm not sure what information would be available to back up a statement about which religion is the most persecuted, but it wouldn't surprise me at all if Muslims were currently the most persecuted religion in the world. Remember that there's a lot of division and persecution within Islam itself.

Huh? No they don't get a "free pass" and have you considered why they might be war-zones in the first place?

Have you? Look into the history of those war zones, and look at the events that came before they destabilised. I think you'll find some common themes.

 

[Dotini]

I'm toying with the idea that Muslims have unjustifiably been targeted as radical Islamist terrorists, and many of their nations including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and others been targeted for attack, invasion and Balkanization.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'm toying with the idea that Muslims have unjustifiably been targeted as radical Islamist terrorists, and many of their nations including Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria and others been targeted for attack, invasion and Balkanization.

Really? What on Earth gave you that idea*?

*Other than the events of the last 700 years, obviously...

 

[Dotini]

Really? What on Earth gave you that idea*?

*Other than the events of the last 700 years, obviously...

That idea was driven by the proposition that Muslims were in fact not mainly responsible for 9/11, but played only a minor part.

 

[TenEightyOne]

That idea was driven by the proposition that Muslims were in fact not mainly responsible for 9/11, but played only a minor part.

Absolutely. It's a demonstrable fact that Muslims as a whole played only a minor part. Some Muslims played a very major part, of course. That distinction is important I think.

 

[Dotini]

Absolutely. It's a demonstrable fact that Muslims as a whole played only a minor part. Some Muslims played a very major part, of course. That distinction is important I think.

That "distinction" is moot, unimportant in the extreme. It's nothing less than tragic for Muslims that their nations are almost all now shattered, millions of them are now dead, millions more orphaned, and yet more millions homeless and migrating to Europe. Even so, our mission to expunge radical Islamic terrorism from the planet is far from success, only just begun, and we have much, much more killing and destruction to do. Your "distinction" is defective and explains nothing, but does raise profound questions. Our war against Muslims in Africa, Central Asia and the Middle East is perpetual. The long-ago 9/11/01 was merely the "Pearl Harbor" event that justified the initial invasions. Muslim revenge is now being visited upon Europe, though few will be taking any pleasure in it.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Nike unveils pro Hijab:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/...formance-hijab-coming-female-muslim-athletes/

Good, bad, both?

I'm in the last camp - I can see how this empowers more women into sport it's just a shame that it legitimises such a garment in 2017

 

[TenEightyOne]

Nike unveils pro Hijab:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/...formance-hijab-coming-female-muslim-athletes/

Good, bad, both?

I'm in the last camp - I can see how this empowers more women into sport it's just a shame that it legitimises such a garment in 2017

If people choose to wear the hijab - and I mean choose - then that's none of my business. If Nike want to sell one, none of my business.

Some women and women like to completely cover their hair for traditional reasons (coming from a society that's a slave to Christian-style traditions I quite understand). Go them, it doesn't hurt anybody except the Cuz Muslimz Coming nutters.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

If people choose to wear the hijab - and I mean choose - then that's none of my business. If Nike want to sell one, none of my business.

Some women and women like to completely cover their hair for traditional reasons (coming from a society that's a slave to Christian-style traditions I quite understand). Go them, it doesn't hurt anybody except the Cuz Muslimz Coming nutters.

Not really, cos the key reason it could be an issue is what you alluded to - choice. Then you would imagine, say, a feminist having issue with that (not likely anymore).

 

[TenEightyOne]

Not really, cos the key reason it could be an issue is what you alluded to - choice. Then you would imagine, say, a feminist having issue with that (not likely anymore).

I'm not quite sure what you mean. Why would a "feminist" take issue with it? It's hardly a generalisable group.

 

[PeterJB]

We'll feminists seem to think Islam is fantastic so they'll probably be overwhelmingly supportive of this.

 

[TenEightyOne]

We'll feminists seem to think Islam is fantastic so they'll probably be overwhelmingly supportive of this.

Did you read the bit where I said:

It's hardly a generalisable group.

Some feminists certainly do think Islam is fantastic. But then some of them are Muslim too - although they're not mutually bound groups. Sheesh.

 

[Imari]

Nike unveils pro Hijab:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/fashion/...formance-hijab-coming-female-muslim-athletes/

Good, bad, both?

I'm in the last camp - I can see how this empowers more women into sport it's just a shame that it legitimises such a garment in 2017

Seems fine? People can put whatever they like on their heads. If some people are being forcibly made to wear certain headwear, then that's not Nike's problem. They just sell what people wear.

If we're getting rid of clothing that people are made to wear because of tradition or culture, then we can put the suit, bra, and school uniform manufacturers out of business first.

The dirty scoundrels.

 

[DLR_Mysterion]

Meanwhile, in a city called Birmingham....

Twerking in a hijab....

https://conatusnews.com/hijabi-girl-twirking-where-is-the-left/

Death threats and forced to apologise on youtube

 

[Scaff]

Meanwhile, in a city called Birmingham....

Twerking in a hijab....

https://conatusnews.com/hijabi-girl-twirking-where-is-the-left/

Death threats and forced to apologise on youtube

Meanwhile in Australia......

http://i.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/67576351/boy-spent-last-months-being-abused-court

.....Ends up dead.


Given that it seems the main use of this thread is to simply throw out negatives with little in the way of context or balance (which the source material in your case does actually attempt to provide and you once again omit), it's getting close to the point in which this thread and the God one get merged into a general religion thread.

 

[Johnnypenso]

We'll feminists seem to think Islam is fantastic so they'll probably be overwhelmingly supportive of this.

Meanwhile in Australia......

http://i.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/67576351/boy-spent-last-months-being-abused-court

.....Ends up dead.


Given that it seems the main use of this thread is to simply throw out negatives with little in the way of context or balance (which the source material in your case does actually attempt to provide and you once again omit), it's getting close to the point in which this thread and the God one get merged into a general religion thread.

Difference here is that the abuse, horrific as it may be, is the action of a single person. It's horrible and no one in their right mind would think it was okay. Twerking, on the other hand, is something I would guess a large percentage of teenage and beyond girls do in western society but in part of the Muslim community it generates a barrage of social media abuse from her own community that escalated all the way up to death threats. One can only imagine what the reaction would be if she were seen being cozy with or kissy face with a non-Muslim in public.

 

[Scaff]

Difference here is that the abuse, horrific as it may be, is the action of a single person. It's horrible and no one in their right mind would think it was okay.

No it was the actions of two people and if you believe that such abuse is limited to only those two people you are very much mistaken.

As the fall out from the Christian book "To Train up a child" is just one example of.

http://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/did-hanas-parents-train-her-to-death/

Twerking, on the other hand, is something I would guess a large percentage of teenage and beyond girls do in western society but in part of the Muslim community it generates a barrage of social media abuse from her own community that escalated all the way up to death threats. One can only imagine what the reaction would be if she were seen being cozy with or kissy face with a non-Muslim in public.

I would quite agree that the negative comments, threats and abuse are to be roundly condemned, however to infer that the entire community condemned her is missleading and untrue, as is to forget that conservative Christians and Orthodox Jews are not immune to such outrage over dress and behavior of others.

Lets not forget that good christian folk have issues death threats to people for offending Christianity, even statues can bring it out:

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progre...ives-death-threats-ten-commandments-decision/

or simply writing about it:

http://awkwardmomentsbible.com/death-threats-from-christians/

or being President:

http://www.rawstory.com/2013/11/chr...-leader-we-now-have-authority-to-shoot-obama/


My post was a partially sarcastic response to the double standard that exists in this regard.

 

[Carbonox]

This all comes across as a repeat of the prisonermonkeys strategy of derailing a conversation to try and take attention away from a subject in favor of something else that, while outrageous, has nothing to do with the original topic.

 

[Scaff]

This all comes across as a repeat of the prisonermonkeys strategy of derailing a conversation to try and take attention away from a subject in favor of something else that, while outrageous, has nothing to do with the original topic.

I am discussing the subject.

Is it that I am pointing out that the backlash is not from the entire Muslim community (as the original source also states, but the poster totally omitted, focusing only on one side) or that I'm pointing out that such outrage and threats by extreme elements of a religion are not unique to any one religion that has encouraged you to make baseless accusations?

 

[Carbonox]

It's more about the fact that you posted an article from 2015 in a thread where it's not on topic, only for the purposes of taking a cheap shot.

Meanwhile, in a city called Birmingham....

Twerking in a hijab....

https://conatusnews.com/hijabi-girl-twirking-where-is-the-left/

Death threats and forced to apologise on youtube

Meanwhile in Australia......

http://i.stuff.co.nz/world/australia/67576351/boy-spent-last-months-being-abused-court

.....Ends up dead.


Given that it seems the main use of this thread is to simply throw out negatives with little in the way of context or balance (which the source material in your case does actually attempt to provide and you once again omit), it's getting close to the point in which this thread and the God one get merged into a general religion thread.

 

[Scaff]

It's more about the fact that you posted an article from 2015 in a thread where it's not on topic, only for the purposes of taking a cheap shot.

No I posted the article (the age of which is not relevant) to illustrate how easy it is to do so for any faith and then commented about the bias presented by the poster in omitting the degree of balance the source article provides.

That you seem to object to the use of an example of another faith being used only highlights the fact that a dedicated thread for one religion alone, while every other one is in a single thread is also absurd. You infer an attempt to shut down a discussion while doing exactly that.

 

[PeterJB]

This is the Islam thread, so I don't really understand why every time someone voices a critique of it we need to change the subject towards Christians doing bad things.

 

[Scaff]

This is the Islam thread, so I don't really understand why every time someone voices a critique of it we need to change the subject towards Christians doing bad things.

It's not a change of subject, it's a comparison, and it was across all three Abrahamic faiths.

Hence the reason why it's getting less and less valid to have a thread for one religion, when all the others are in a combined thread.

 

[Outspacer]

Hence the reason why it's getting less and less valid to have a thread for one religion, when all the others are in a combined thread.

If you mean "Do you believe in God?", then I think that ought to be a different topic to "Religion(s) - what's your view on it/them?". In theory anyway.

Lots of overlap and similar if not identical tangents, of course, but addressing different notions.

 

[Scaff]

If you mean "Do you believe in God?", then I think that ought to be a different topic to "Religion(s) - what's your view on it/them?".

Lots of overlap and similar if not identical tangents, of course, but addressing different notions.

I would agree and it would be much better than the current 'split' that exists right now.

 

[Liquid]

As fair as that sounds I can't bear to imagine the mess of a thread with half the people arguing, myself included, about Christian!god and the other half having to shout over them to talk about how horrible or tolerable they find Islam.

It would be very hard to follow the threads of conversation within that thread (no pun intended).

 

[Scaff]

As fair as that sounds I can't bear to imagine the mess of a thread with half the people arguing, myself included, about Christian!god and the other half having to shout over them to talk about how horrible or tolerable they find Islam.

It would be very hard to follow the threads of conversation within that thread (no pun intended).

It certainly wouldn't be easy, but then again as the two largest faiths on the planet, which also have a shared origin, it's impossible not to compare and discuss.

What will not be happening however is shutting any mention of Christianity or Judaism out of this thread,. The shared origin alone make comparison valid, and I have to question the motives of those who want to do so.

Hence my suggestion that we may need a thread on the Abrahamic faiths as a whole.

 

[Spurgy 777]

It's not a change of subject, it's a comparison, and it was across all three Abrahamic faiths.

Hence the reason why it's getting less and less valid to have a thread for one religion, when all the others are in a combined thread.

But it's a pointless comparison that adds nothing to the topic in this case. It would only be relevant to make such a comparison if @DLR_Mysterion was suggesting that sending death threats etc was something that was unique to Muslims or Islam.

I have never seen you reply to someone criticising Christianity or the actions of Christians due to their religion in the God thread (which lets be honest is practically the Christianity thread) with something along the lines of "yes, but look how Islam sucks too". But feel free to prove me wrong.

So yes, comparisons between the two religions has it's place, but jumping on someone every time they don't add either #notjustIslam or #notallMuslims is usually completely unnecessary, and definitely is in this case. Most people here understand both of those concepts and unless someone says anything otherwise there really is no need to point them out.

 

[Scaff]

But it's a pointless comparison that adds nothing to the topic in this case. It would only be relevant to make such a comparison if @DLR_Mysterion was suggesting that sending death threats etc was something that was unique to Muslims or Islam.

Then you should take a better look at his posting history. Hence the reason i have repeatedly mentioned the double standard.

I have never seen you reply to someone criticising Christianity or the actions of Christians due to their religion in the God thread (which lets be honest is practically the Christianity thread) with something along the lines of "yes, but look how Islam sucks too". But feel free to prove me wrong.

I've on numerous occasions pointed out the issues with all religions and the need to hold a level playing field with regard to how they are treated.

Oh and no the God thread is not practically a Christian thread, but it is close to being an Abrahamic thread.

So yes, comparisons between the two religions has it's place, but jumping on someone every time they don't add either #notjustIslam or #notallMuslims is usually completely unnecessary, and definitely is in this case. Most people here understand both of those concepts and unless someone says anything otherwise there really is no need to point them out.

Given the past posting history in this case i totally disagree, and i would also disagree that a number of members are happy to accept that concept. Particularly given the sources used to attempt to back up some of the claims made.

Also given that @DLR_Mysterion is happy to explore such a concept when discussing his own faith, but repeatedly ignores it (and the context of it in this source) when it's another faith.