Islamophobia

[Strontium]

sorry, it must be a figment of our collective imagination.

 

 

As you're the only person saying it, it would appear to be a figment of your individual imagination.

 

but for the record, this sweeping generalisation of 2 billion people as either wrong uns or fools, could be mistaken for bigotry. Not saying you are a bigot, just highlighting a post which could lead to that conclusion, as requested.

 

 

Anyone who believes there's an invisible sky daddy looking out for them and judging their actions is, at the very least, misguided.

 

it's bad enough when people enslave each other, but to enslave yourself to a being that isn't there? That's the very definition of foolery.

 

If disbelieving this shit constitutes "bigotry", then guilty as charged. But I think we all know it's nothing of the sort.

[Guest ShoePiss]

I'm down on all religions because they are fundamentally false accounts of our origins that only serve to obstruct and hinder progress. And that isn't anything which is limited to "a few extremists", it is common to all believers.

 

 

 

 

 

It's a book that anyone can read. You don't need to subscribe to fuckwitted nonsense to be able to parse it.

 

 

 

 

Obviously. What a truly fucking dumb question.

 

 

 

 

Here are some of them; I suggest you spend some time reading them and familiarising yourself with my posting history, then you won't look like so clueless in future:

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/gf-general-forum/48350-flooding-caused-gays.html

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/gf-general-forum/80801-mother-teresa.html#post1783802

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/gf-general-forum/102669-terrorist-attack-oslo-man-shooting-childrens-camp-utoya-6.html#post2864368

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/gf-general-forum/102669-terrorist-attack-oslo-man-shooting-childrens-camp-utoya-13.html#post2867164

 

http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/gf-general-forum/87573-haiti-2.html#post2084988

 

What about Judaism? Do you apply equal criticism to that and acts in the name of it? I can't remember.

[Phoenix]

I think anyone who practices religion literally be it Muslim, Jewish, Christian and doesnt adapt it for the modern world deserves criticism.

 

I would suggest that 99% of people of such religions do not/or have any inkling to follow something so strictly especially in the western world.

 

It also about interpretations despite What the Doggy has to say.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

As you're the only person saying it, it would appear to be a figment of your individual imagination.

 

 

 

 

Anyone who believes there's an invisible sky daddy looking out for them and judging their actions is, at the very least, misguided.

 

it's bad enough when people enslave each other, but to enslave yourself to a being that isn't there? That's the very definition of foolery.

 

If disbelieving this shit constitutes "bigotry", then guilty as charged. But I think we all know it's nothing of the sort.

[YOUTUBE]xOrgLj9lOwk[/YOUTUBE]

[zigackly]

I'm down on all religions because they are fundamentally false accounts of our origins that only serve to obstruct and hinder progress. And that isn't anything which is limited to "a few extremists", it is common to all believers.

 

Very few religious people I know take those origin stories literally or wish to obstruct progress. For most, it's more about a spiritual message and personal development. As a rational atheist that isn't a crutch I find necessary myself, but if it's harmless and contributes to making someone a better person I can at least be tolerant of their beliefs. Speaking of false accounts, I think you're giving a false account of religion right there, in that in my experience what you say applies only to a baffled minority.

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Very few religious people I know take those origin stories literally or wish to obstruct progress. For most, it's more about the spiritual message and personal development. As a rational atheist that isn't a crutch I find necessary myself, but if it's harmless and contributes to making someone a better person I can at least be tolerant of their beliefs. Speaking of false accounts, I think you're giving a false account of religion right there.

Depends on what you mean about harmless though . All that spiritual belief still began with them religious books , Them books have caused the majority of wars and even now they still are .

From the crusades to Americas war on terror is all to do with them books.

[jonnybastard]

As you're the only person saying it, it would appear to be a figment of your individual imagination.

 

 

 

 

Anyone who believes there's an invisible sky daddy looking out for them and judging their actions is, at the very least, misguided.

 

it's bad enough when people enslave each other, but to enslave yourself to a being that isn't there? That's the very definition of foolery.

 

If disbelieving this shit constitutes "bigotry", then guilty as charged. But I think we all know it's nothing of the sort.

 

I most certainly did not, I merely pointed out how some, erroniously or otherwise, may have reached such a conclusion.

[zigackly]

Depends on what you mean about harmless though . All that spiritual belief still began with them religious books , Them books have caused the majority of wars and even now they still are .

From the crusades to Americas war on terror is all to do with them books.

 

It's about people, not books. The books are an excuse.

 

How many Christians throughout history have worshipped on the sabbath (Saturday, not Sunday), sacrificed animals as a burnt offering, sent their women away when they're on the blob, or any of the other myriad wacky instructions in there? There is no Christmas in the bible, no concept of hell, no instructions to burn heretics at the stake. The bible doesn't talk about crusades or a war on terror either.

 

I tend to judge people by their actions, which rarely have anything to do with their supposed beliefs.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

It's a book that anyone can read. You don't need to subscribe to fuckwitted nonsense to be able to parse it.

 

Obviously. What a truly fucking dumb question.

 

Here are some of them; I suggest you spend some time reading them and familiarising yourself with my posting history, then you won't look like so clueless in future:

 

The only person who looks clueless here is you.

 

So you've read the Qu'ran then? I find that astounding if true (its not true, though). For somebody who speaks with such arrogant and misplaced command over the subject, I'd have thought you would have realised that the Qu'ran is more or less the fucking Bible - which is more or less the Torah. The differences are so slight, nuanced, or irrelevant to your indignation that I don't understand why you're specifically denouncing the Qu'ran here and blaming it for so many of the world's ills. In reality it isn't the case - Christianity and Judaism can equally by cited as motivators for awful acts, just not in the UK because over here we don't give a fuck about some 3 year old orphan with half a body blown off.

 

So if you think all religion is the blame for the world's ills (which, in a wider sense, I wouldn't outright disagree with) what the fuck has Islam got to do with this? Nothing. What has Christianity got to do with it? Nothing. What has Judaism (even though I noticed you didn't link posts of yours decrying the horrific acts committed by Israel) got to do with it? Fuck and all.

 

Because whilst I agree that religion encourages segregation, dispute and war, there is only one common denominator for all of those listed - people. Religion is just another fucking tool used by mental cunts to justify mental shit. Correlation does not equate to causation and just because a large majority of horrific acts are caused by religious people (no shit: most of the fucking world is religious, what do you expect?) it doesn't mean they were caused by religion itself.

 

Was this guy religious, or this guy religious? Probably, but they weren't Islamic so why bother mentioning it? I can only imagine the state of terror we'd be gripped within if Jimmy Saville was actually Jamal Suleman and the BBC was ran out of a mosque. Islamaphobia refers to the disproportional, unfairly exclusive and largely misinformed fear and denouncement of Islam.

 

So when you start linking me news articles in which people are hysterically slandering the Bible because it treats women as a lower class and permits child prostitution, or where crimes committed by Christians, Jews or Sikhs are reported with a focus on the perpetrators religion, I'll agree that Islamaphobia is bullshit.

[Lario]

My 4 year old asked me the other day:

"Dad, how can Holy God see me from way up in the sky and I'm in the house?"

 

Even he can tell that all religion is bullshit.

[bizzle10]

The problem for muslims is the Wahhabi school of thought slowly taking over the religion due to saudi/gulf money bit like if the puritans took over church of england they believe any one not beiieving in their view is a non muslim this includes the other islamic school of thought and can and should be made to obey their view point by violence.Its a poisonous ideology and the biggest irony is the people with most to fear from Wahhabis is other muslims who they kill in huge amounts ranging from nigeria to afghanistan in their global jihad

[zigackly]

So how many of the 1.6 billion muslims in the world are Wahhabis? When you say taking over, I think you might be exaggerating somewhat. I agree in other respects.

[Strontium]

What about Judaism? Do you apply equal criticism to that and acts in the name of it? I can't remember.

 

 

Use your brain please. If and when they occur, then obviously I would. Islam and Christianity are just variations on Judaism anyway.

 

The only person who looks clueless here is you.

 

 

I'm afraid I can't compete with you there.

 

So you've read the Qu'ran then? I find that astounding if true (its not true, though). For somebody who speaks with such arrogant and misplaced command over the subject, I'd have thought you would have realised that the Qu'ran is more or less the fucking Bible - which is more or less the Torah. The differences are so slight, nuanced, or irrelevant to your indignation that I don't understand why you're specifically denouncing the Qu'ran here and blaming it for so many of the world's ills.

 

 

This is a thread about Islam. Please try to keep up, hey.

[Guest ShoePiss]

Use your brain please. If and when they occur, then obviously I would. Islam and Christianity are just variations on Judaism anyway.

 

Right, that clears that up, thanks.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

 

Use your brain please. If and when they occur' date=' then obviously I would. Islam and Christianity are just variations on Judaism anyway.

 

I'm afraid I can't compete with you there.

 

This is a thread about Islam. Please try to keep up, hey.[/quote']

 

No, this is a thread about Islamaphobia, you moron, making my points entirely relevant. You carry on.

[Lightforce]

No country in this world is perfect, we still have lots to learn, we don't have a monopoly on being right or knowing what's right and neither does anybody else. We can't be stubborn, we must allow our ways to be challenged.

 

What we can do is try to find more common ground and cooperate for the good of society, and in turn, our civilisation as a whole. We can't keep looking at entire massive groups of people and think they don't have anything to offer us regarding ideas, knowledge and culture. The more information you have, the better the decisions you can make, the more you listen, the more you build trust and understanding.

 

Ultimately the vast majority of people want happiness and to lead a good life, but suspicion and seperation will only lead to conflict.

 

We seem to have this habit of trying to keep intact an entire worldview when large parts of it are faltering and not entertaining the views of others that could help to fix them, because they're thought of as "outsiders" whose ideology or culture conflicts with what you are used to.

 

The fear that exists is the fear of confronting our demons, our vices and our need to change. Our selfish pursuits will no longer comfort us as the psychological dams we erect to protect our egos will not contain the crushing flood waters of reality that are about to break through and wash us away.

[melons]

It's about people, not books. The books are an excuse.

 

How many Christians throughout history have worshipped on the sabbath (Saturday, not Sunday), sacrificed animals as a burnt offering, sent their women away when they're on the blob, or any of the other myriad wacky instructions in there? There is no Christmas in the bible, no concept of hell, no instructions to burn heretics at the stake. The bible doesn't talk about crusades or a war on terror either.

 

I tend to judge people by their actions, which rarely have anything to do with their supposed beliefs.

 

Think about it, women are on the blob, they're in pain and moody with little to no pharmaceuticals to sort it out. I would send me away if I had the choice and I have drugs when on the blob, lots of them. I would send away my own daughters when on they're on the blob too given the chance. On this one religion is spot on.

 

I'll also burn next doors cat if it shits in my garden again. If i say it was a sacrifice so the RSPCA don't prosecute me, i'll say just that.

[janmolby]

Extremism is a natural extension from moderation, they are not mutually exclusive.

 

I repeatedly keep hearing the word 'interpretation', as though one is deserving of more respect if they draw different conclusions from the same source.

 

Essentially what the apologists are trying to say (I make the assumption most of them hold some religious belief, for this is their true vested interest) is this. I can tolerate your beliefs and you are free to hold them if you act in a passive manor towards me. But if you try to chop my head off with a meat cleaver that is where I draw the line, and that is when I am offended by what you believe in.

 

The 'moderates' & 'extremists' share the same fundamental core beliefs, how this manifests itself in an individuals actions is irrelevant. If the pink unicorn tells Mother Teresa to save a life, then the pink unicorn tells some else to take a life they are still drawing inspiration from something which any rational minded person would find ridiculous.

 

Most people would simply counter the above by saying they are happy for Mother Teresa to hold those views if she is doing such sterling work. Yet they fail (by design or conscious) to note that the hand played by the murderer is exponentially stronger simply given the fact that Mother Teresa exists in the first place.

[Son of L8]

So when you start linking me news articles in which people are hysterically slandering the Bible because it treats women as a lower class and permits child prostitution, or where crimes committed by Christians, Jews or Sikhs are reported with a focus on the perpetrators religion, I'll agree that Islamaphobia is bullshit.

 

In between the fucks, this is a cogent argument re: the West's problem with anti-Muslim prejudice, but it's also a straw man. SD didn't say Islamophobia (in the form of anti-muslim prejudice) is bullshit, or that it doesn't exist, he made a perfectly reasonable criticism of conflating individuals or groups of individuals who subscribe to a social construct (muslims) with the construct itself (islam), which has the outcome of deflecting reasonable criticism of the construct under the guise of protecting the individuals from prejudice.

 

Accusing people who make reasonable rational criticisms of Islam with being Islamophobic, which lumping Islam and Muslims together under the same "phobia" allows, is similar (albeit not structurally identical from the perspective of logic) to the way the charge of anti-semitism is used to deflect criticism of Israel's government and military. In both cases, conflating individuals or groups with a characteristic they share is dangerous to public discourse. People need to be protected from hatred and bigotry, but reasonable progressive discourse also needs to be protected from reactive attempts to stifle it.

[Paulie Dangerously]

I tend to egg them on to expose their ignorance now. I did delete them but now I put comments like "THOSE FUCKING ISLAMUSLIMISTS NEED TO GO BACK TO AFRICA AND STOP HURTING OUR PEOPLE" you'd be surprised how many people think that it's a proper comment.

 

I've often said that I think the best way to neutralise these people is to give them a platform. People kicked off when the BNP went on question time but the fact that Nick Griffin got his arse handed to him for an hour, sweating, squirming and getting the stun from Jack Straw was brilliant. He has hardly had any press time since because people see him as a joke ergo his party as a joke.

 

I say give the EDL a rope to hang themselves, they'll send up the best of them with his 3 GCSEs and will be so embarrassing that they'll be laughed at up and down the country.

[KopOut]

All religion is superstition. We're supposed to be mature, so lets be honest about conflict - its about "share it fairly, but don't take a slice of MY pie".

[zigackly]

Essentially what the apologists are trying to say (I make the assumption most of them hold some religious belief, for this is their true vested interest) is this. I can tolerate your beliefs and you are free to hold them if you act in a passive manor towards me. But if you try to chop my head off with a meat cleaver that is where I draw the line, and that is when I am offended by what you believe in.

 

I expect you would have me down as an apologist, but I don't fit your pattern in that I am an atheist. Could you tell me what is wrong with tolerance towards those who exhibit harmless behaviours though? Isn't this the position we as a liberal society hold towards any members of society? Think and do whatever you like within reason, but if you start acting in a manner which is dangerous to others then we won't tolerate that. To go further and say that because some people who think a certain way act inappropriately then everyone who thinks that way might be dangerous is simple prejudice, not to mention committing a logical fallacy. At that point, you can no longer claim rationality. At least be honest about it and stop insulting people's intelligence.

 

The 'moderates' & 'extremists' share the same fundamental core beliefs, how this manifests itself in an individuals actions is irrelevant. If the pink unicorn tells Mother Teresa to save a life, then the pink unicorn tells some else to take a life they are still drawing inspiration from something which any rational minded person would find ridiculous.

 

There are many ridiculous things people do which aren't harmful to society. Watching Eastenders for instance. I find it completely ridiculous that anyone would waste their time in that fashion, yet many who do so exhibit perfectly reasonable behaviour in every other respect. If someone chooses to like Eastenders or believes in pink unicorns but in other respects are acting in a manner which is not hurting others then I'm fine with that.

[The Special One]

*enters thread*

 

*skims*

 

*takes down names*

 

*strokes imaginary muslamic beard*

 

*prepares ray gun*

 

*leaves thread*

[janmolby]

Yes but my general point is that the moderates in their existence allow the extremists to fester and flourish, yet they feel vindicated and aptly able to marginalise these extremists as and when they see fit.

 

The moderates need the extremists as much as the extremists need the moderates. And that transcends religions.

 

Until people have the courage to break away from these centuries year old taboos nothing will change. Those teaching their children that the earth is 6500 years old despite flying in the face of over whelming scientific evidence might seem harmless and passive to you but as fast as I'm concerned they are, at least in part, responsible for what happened to Lee Rigby.

[zigackly]

I think your idea of causation may be quite extremist in that case! A better argument could be made that secular violence stems from violent television, yet we accept that most people can watch it without becoming psychotic.

 

Very few religious people consider the earth to be 6500 years old in my experience by the way.