Orlando shooting + terrorism thread
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="593069" data-time="1467273174">
<div>
<p>I'm trying to get my head around what the argument is here.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>BSG, myself and a few others say Islam is a barbaric, hateful ideology that promotes sexism, homophobia and racism. That is categorically a fact. It is written in the Koran. There is just no debating that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Others argue against us by saying that not all Muslims practice those specific parts of Islam, so don't tar all Muslims with the same brush. They also claim the "majority" of Muslims are like this. I think that is a generalisation, which is why I provided the Saudi Arabia example. Nobody can tell me what each and every Muslim thinks, and I don't presume to know either. Some follow it to the letter, some don't. It's fair to say that most in Western countries don't actively practice the parts that are against the law. Great.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><strong><em>But none of that changes the fact that Islam is a barbaric, hateful ideology that promotes sexism, homophobia and racism.</em></strong></p>
<p> </p>
<p>So we're in this big debate but we are arguing points that are not mutually exclusive. Both are true. Islam is an awful ideology, AND not all Muslims practice the really bad parts of it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>That's not that difficult to understand is it?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Of course if you criticise Islam then plenty of Muslims will take offence. But that's their problem. I criticise people's ideas at work on a regular basis, I'm sure some of them take offense, but that's their problem, I'm not letting them do retarded shit that makes so sense because I don't want to offend them. You have the right to have your ideas, but your ideas themselves don't have rights and are open to criticism. Why does religion, and in particular Islam get such a free pass?</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I have no argument that Islam is a source of a huge amount of bad things. Its basically at the same life cycle Christianity was 200-300 years ago. I'm anti all religion really.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I'd also agree that the % of Muslims <em>willingly</em> practising the unpleasant sides is very small.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I very much agree with the bolded bit - but would also reiterate it's where Christianity was before most people stopped being Christians. So for me the question is "how do we get people in Muslim countries to where westerners got to when Religion became no big thing?" Not "we should ban them & magic Islam away by mocking it" (WTF?)</p>
<p> </p>
<p>I also agree free speech should allow us to criticise religion, my issue there is people want to use it to provoke & hurt, they don't want to use it just as comment, they want to actively hurt someone feelings or provoke a radical. That's the shit you did as a 5 year old in the playgound, like saying "your mum is fat!". What adult rants for their right to do that? It also utterly ignores the idea that if you want to encourage moderate Islam that's a terrible way to do it, but I suspect those pushing that agenda have zero desire to promote moderate Islam, they actively want that ISIS tube bomb because in their mind that'll lead to.. what.. a war on Islam they can fight in?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The bit I have an issue with in the wider political environment - and on here with one or two posters, is the idea that that no. 1 above, can make it OK to demonise whole swathes of people & be used as cover for flat out racist & bigoted ideas they would like to make mainstream but realise its a bit taboo. If I thought for a moment the more vocal opponents of Islam actually made any attempt to understand the driving forces or solutions I'd cut them some slack, but they come across more often than not as ignorant bigots who had an agenda WAY before 9/11 & this has now let them publically vent that. Like moving to South Africa in the 80's & going "wait, I'm allowed to say "no niggers allowed here!? Whooooo!". Or the huge wave of support Birtherism got in the US - ie you had a big group desperately wanting to outlaw a black guy being President, but knowing they couldn't say that, they couldn't even ban him because he's a Muslim (he so is!) but if he was born Kenya we can ban him without being racist bigots! YAY! So no matter how batshit crazy that was they went for it like a seagull on a chip.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>If the rabid anti Islam brigade wanted to have a bit more credibility they wouldn't attribute literally everything bad to Islam & have the solution to all the worlds ills as "what about no Islam!". That offends on a stupid level more than anything, If people want to be racist, fine, be racist, but put some thought into it, its like Trump wanting to ban Muslims from coming to the US. Which is unconstitutional & impossible. I mean come on... put some effort into your bigotry dude. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>So thats been my major issue on here, I'm totally cool with ISIS is bad, oragised religion is bad and Islam is WAY out in front as the worst. I'm not OK with the idea that all Muslims are bad & using the first 2 as cover for being able to go off on the dirty sand niggers / pakis just like I've always wanted to because they're not white like thay should be.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="593087" data-time="1467277860">
<div>
<p>I don't disagree with anything you've said there. But the part in red - that's not a generalisation - that's a literal take on Islam the ideology.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The guys (definitely not woman!) that wrote the Koran would have had the expectation that it would be followed literally. The fact that many people don't follow it literally today is great, but doesn't change what is written.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>How do we criticise Islam without "tarring all Muslims with the same brush"? They all follow the same book, some literally, some I guess metaphorically? (they must do some mental gymnastics to justify that, I mean the part that says being homosexual is punishable by death, what is the "non-literal" interpretation of that?!).</p>
<p> </p>
<p>To me, as long as it exists as a religion, there will always be people that follow it literally. Having it exist and then hope that people don't follow it literally is just not a viable option. The people that do not follow it literally, as you guys say, are the most likely to turn their back on it. Being in an environment where it is openly critiqued and questioned will hopefully speed up this process :)</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>The bible has many passages that are anti-homosexual, anti-non believer and yet the vast majority of christians don't practice or believe this. Moderation took centuries to occur and yet some posters expect this to happen much faster with Islam. I don't believe this to be realistic</p> -
<p>Some interesting remarks here: <a data-ipb='nomediaparse' href='http://www.torontosun.com/2016/06/28/radical-islam-was-brexits-elephant-in-the-room'>http://www.torontosun.com/2016/06/28/radical-islam-was-brexits-elephant-in-the-room</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>The beauty of an uprising like the Brexit vote is that it makes the political and media elites who govern our lives look like fools.</p>
<p>Brexit was no Haitian, Cuban or French Revolution, nor was it the Great Indian “Mutiny†of 1857. But it did demonstrate the power of the working class over elites, who showed they were cut off from reality.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The three main political parties of Britain endorsed the UK remaining in the European Union. They were backed by big business. Two hundred of Great Britain’s top business leaders called on the public to vote to stay in the EU.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Meanwhile, labour leaders representing 52 of the country's largest trade unions, threw their lot in with the elites.</p>
<p>Leading up to the June 23 vote, virtually every pollster and pundit predicted the UK would vote to “remain†within the EU. Thus the “leave†victory was a shock for the political and media elites.</p>
<p>Appeals by 23 British Nobel Prize winners and 300 academics fell on deaf ears as the UK’s previously side-lined working class voted to raise the “Gates of Vienna†and stop their country from being swamped by refugees, camped on the other side of the English Channel in France.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The so-called, riff-raff that the leftist Labour Party had taken for granted as it appeased ethnic voters, came out to exercise their rights and took the elites by surprise.</p>
<p>The veteran leftist, author and filmmaker Tariq Ali labelled the EU as “Cuckoo Landâ€, saying Britain was better off without it. The Latin American TV network TeleSur quoted Ali branding the recent EU refugee deal with Turkey as “squalidâ€.</p>
<p>In the once-thriving mining town of Barnsley, where 70% of the population voted to leave the European Union, one middle-aged man summed it up as he spoke to Britain’s ITV network: “It’s to stop the Muslims from coming into this country. Simple as that.â€</p>
<p>Few others dared to be so explicit. But neither before nor after the Brexit vote has the political and media elite dared to discuss the elephant in the room – radical Islam.</p>
<p>The fear of being labelled racist may silence many for now. But in the future there will be an ultra right-wing backlash in which innocent Muslims may well suffer.</p>
<p>I remember the fallout when former British foreign secretary Jack Straw in 2006 asked one of his constituents to remove her burka while speaking to him. He was accused of “thinly veiled racism†and his fate gave the elites one of many cues to tiptoe around such issues.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But trust ordinary Britons to be appalled at how their country was being reshaped to accommodate medieval values, not imported by Muslim immigrants, but entrenched in the values their British-born children were being taught at school.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>The UK is not alone. From India to Myanmar; France to the Central African Republic, ordinary people are angry at Islamism.</p>
<p>As as a result, innocent Muslims suffer while their radical leaders gloat at this “proof†of their predictions that the ‘“kuffarâ€, non-Muslims, are enemies of Islam.</p>
<p>If Muslim leaders do not acknowledge the flaunting of radical Islam on the streets and in the workplaces of Europe’s cities, then Brexit is just the beginning.</p>
<p>Is blocking off streets in Paris and Delhi for Friday prayers the best way for Muslims to display our faith? It’s time to take stock, but is anyone listening?</p> -
<p>SO we move into the phase of defending Islam by referring to Christianity. Tis ever the last resort of the Islam apologists.</p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="593234" data-time="1467351915">
<div>
<p>SO we move into the phase of defending Islam by referring to Christianity. Tis ever the last resort of the Islam apologists.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Just so I'm clear, which bit of</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Christianity used to be where Islam is now & 200-300 years ago it reformed internally & we are now in place where most Christians are Christian-lite, as educational standards, secure states, the rule of law & so on have removed the need for a strong church. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>makes you so angry & outraged? If anything I thought you'd be stoked by that, Christianity is a whole 300 years more evolved and superior to Islam. Do you think its factually incorrect? Maybe yoiu think that while Christians could move from burning heritics alive thats beyond the sort of people who practice Islam? </p> -
<p>Oh good you came up with a new pejorative term. </p>
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="gollum" data-cid="593313" data-time="1467362726">
<div>
<p>Just so I'm clear, which bit of</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Christianity used to be where Islam is now & 200-300 years ago it reformed internally & we are now in place where most Christians are Christian-lite, as educational standards, secure states, the rule of law & so on have removed the need for a strong church. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>makes you so angry & outraged? If anything I thought you'd be stoked by that, Christianity is a whole 300 years more evolved and superior to Islam. Do you think its factually incorrect? Maybe yoiu think that while Christians could move from burning heritics alive thats beyond the sort of people who practice Islam? </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>So you just making stuff again? Ok... this is the part where I just ignore you gnawing and ranting at the straw man.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="No Quarter" data-cid="593069" data-time="1467273174">
<div>
<p>I'm trying to get my head around what the argument is here.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>BSG, myself and a few others say Islam is a barbaric, hateful ideology that promotes sexism, homophobia and racism. That is categorically a fact. It is written in the Koran. There is just no debating that.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Others argue against us by saying that not all Muslims practice those specific parts of Islam, so don't tar all Muslims with the same brush. They also claim the "majority" of Muslims are like this. I think that is a generalisation, which is why I provided the Saudi Arabia example. Nobody can tell me what each and every Muslim thinks, and I don't presume to know either. Some follow it to the letter, some don't. It's fair to say that most in Western countries don't actively practice the parts that are against the law. Great.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>But none of that changes the fact that Islam is a barbaric, hateful ideology that promotes sexism, homophobia and racism.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>So we're in this big debate but we are arguing points that are not mutually exclusive. Both are true. Islam is an awful ideology, AND not all Muslims practice the really bad parts of it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>That's not that difficult to understand is it?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Of course if you criticise Islam then plenty of Muslims will take offence. But that's their problem. I criticise people's ideas at work on a regular basis, I'm sure some of them take offense, but that's their problem, I'm not letting them do retarded shit that makes so sense because I don't want to offend them. You have the right to have your ideas, but your ideas themselves don't have rights and are open to criticism. Why does religion, and in particular Islam get such a free pass?</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>This was such a good post, they had to move the goal posts and revert to plan B.. talk about Christianity and how bad that was.</p> -
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="593364" data-time="1467365879"><p>
This was such a good post, they had to move the goal posts and revert to plan B.. talk about Christianity and how bad that was.</p></blockquote>
You are delusional. Pretty much everybody complimented the post. -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="reprobate" data-cid="593379" data-time="1467368739">
<div>
<p>You are delusional. Pretty much everybody complimented the post.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Yes... and then you moved the goal post to all religion. So predictable.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="reprobate" data-cid="593378" data-time="1467368481">
<div>
<p>As opposed to you sticking with your constant refrain of apologist eh.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>Oh so now you get annoyed about pejorative terms? Maybe if you hadnt decided to make this thread about posters and not about the topic (post 78) . Maybe if you had not started throwing around the term bigot ... then I would have refrained from stating the apologist left wing regressive that you are?</p>
<p>That is the problem with regressives, they love to kick off the insults.. and then play the victim.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>And lets not forget you just completely made up a false narrative to argue against. What was that about delusional again?</p>
<p> </p>
<p>A reminder of your delusions</p>
<p> </p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">you cross the line between attacking the doctrine and the people more often than not, you frequently make blanket statements on muslims
<p> </p>
</blockquote> -
-
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="593423" data-time="1467415721">
<div>
<p>Yes... and then you moved the goal post to all religion. So predictable.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>moved what goal posts? with other people and other posts, NQ's for example, it is a discussion with multiple points of view. that was a good post, there were interesting and valid points in it, acknowledged by various people, who then also added their own points and discussed aspects of it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>as opposed to with you, where it is all name-calling and ranting and no actual points.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Baron Silas Greenback" data-cid="593424" data-time="1467415892">
<div>
<p>Oh so now you get annoyed about pejorative terms? Maybe if you hadnt decided to make this thread about posters and not about the topic (post 78) . Maybe if you had not started throwing around the term bigot ... then I would have refrained from stating the apologist left wing regressive that you are?</p>
<p>That is the problem with regressives, they love to kick off the insults.. and then play the victim.</p>
<p> </p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p>nope, i'm still not annoyed - not sure why you keep thinking i am. also sure as shit not a victim. just, once again, pointing out your hypocrisy. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>ranting and name-calling is how you approach everything, and trying to claim that you wouldn't have 'but he started it' it is pretty funny - if <em>maybe</em> a touch childish.</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="reprobate" data-cid="593431" data-time="1467418882">
<div>
<p>moved what goal posts? with other people and other posts, NQ's for example, it is a discussion with multiple points of view. that was a good post, there were interesting and valid points in it, acknowledged by various people, who then also added their own points and discussed aspects of it.</p>
<p> </p>
<p>as opposed to with you, where it is all name-calling and ranting and no actual points.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I will be happy to answer, once you admit your false narrative and made up bullshit. or at least actually answer my query for proof of your assertion.</p>
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote">
<p> </p>
<p><span style="color:rgb(40,40,40);font-family:helvetica, arial, sans-serif;font-size:12px;background-color:rgb(247,247,247);">you cross the line between attacking the doctrine and the people more often than not, you frequently make blanket statements on muslims</span></p>
<p> </p>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>I know it is the usual regressive left way to throw out false narratives and accusations and just hope they dont get called on them.. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I made a point, and unlike you it was actually about a topic and not a poster. You then decided to started yelling bigot!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>You don't have to agree with the point, but it was incredibly illustrative that in response, you didn't attack the point, you attacked me. And then you have the cheek to accuse me of name calling.. .. you think you should be allowed to use pejorative terms and nobody else?.. or just your regressive left mates? And then you call me a hypocrite.. lol</p> -
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="reprobate" data-cid="593432" data-time="1467419275">
<div>
<p>nope, i'm still not annoyed - not sure why you keep thinking i am. also sure as shit not a victim. just, once again, pointing out your hypocrisy. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>ranting and name-calling is how you approach everything, and trying to claim that you wouldn't have 'but he started it' it is pretty funny - if <em>maybe</em> a touch childish.</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p>I dont think I will take advice on who is childish children from the dishonest regressive left....</p> -
<p>How about this.. you dont post about me.. and I wont post about you. Surely that would be best.. in fact it would have been good about 70 posts ago...</p>