Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 01:49 PM Oct 2014

Islamophoia is not a liberal value

My Ignore list is getting a real workout tonight.

You want to argue about the various backward things that various MidEast governments do, feel free. But claiming that Islam is uniquely awful and that fundie Christians wouldn't be every iota as bad, if not worse, if the law didn't prevent them, is willful self-delusion that attempts to "otherise" Muslims. Fundie Christians, when they have had control of the law, have been exactly as bad. See Roeder (and the violent anti-abortion movement generally), the Lord's Resistance Army, the Hutaree, parts of Naziism and part of the Irish Troubles. I have personally been physically attacked over my religion. And that was on a British street, in about 2002.

Insisting Islam is different because, well, it's just different, is delusional "it can't happen here" wishful thinking. It seeks to alleviate fear by otherising the danger to people not like me (no, I'm not meaning brown although some certainly include that). The problem isn't Christianity or Islam. The problem is fundamentalism in general and the fact that the Muslim version of the KKK have power in particular.

And my Ignore list can be of infinite length, btw. So feel free to tell me how uniquely horrible Islam is.

170 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Islamophoia is not a liberal value (Original Post) Prophet 451 Oct 2014 OP
This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Oct 2014 #1
*bitter cynical chuckle* Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #2
I largely agree with you- not about the ignore list. I don't do ignore lists cali Oct 2014 #3
No, you seem able to have a constructive dialogue Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #5
well, I've always referred to that concept as "confirmation bias" cali Oct 2014 #22
I'm aware of confirmation bias Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #29
As I said, I think it's far more complex that simply "the law stops them" cali Oct 2014 #58
I think we're just going to have to disagree on the law part Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #67
That's a well-reasoned post. Blue_In_AK Oct 2014 #78
Thank you, sir n/t Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #92
Ma'am. :) Blue_In_AK Oct 2014 #97
Sorry. Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #99
Such a joke GummyBearz Oct 2014 #91
I listed modern Christian terrorists in my OP Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #101
So? GummyBearz Oct 2014 #119
"Christian terrorists seem to be a little nicer than islamic state terrorists" Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #122
I think you're missing how both fundamentalisms are intertwined. CJCRANE Oct 2014 #6
How could I be missing it when cali Oct 2014 #19
Where have we seen an increase in Islamic fundamentalism? CJCRANE Oct 2014 #27
Really ? Rhinodawg Oct 2014 #59
really? Link it. cali Oct 2014 #61
On brief look .... Rhinodawg Oct 2014 #64
Tell us did you watch Face the Nation on Sunday? azurnoir Oct 2014 #103
that isn't remotely like anything I've ever said, dear. cali Oct 2014 #137
it's the same logic as "we're not against Black people, just their massive criminal element" MisterP Oct 2014 #4
Pretty much n/t Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #7
"I don't hate gay people, I hate homosexuality." Another fun one from this mindset Scootaloo Oct 2014 #8
And we’re even getting a lot of that in this thread. “I’m not saying [certain group] is bad, I’m Chathamization Oct 2014 #112
No, it isn't. RedCappedBandit Oct 2014 #114
Do you think there is a difference between ZombieHorde Oct 2014 #154
Problem is they actually follow their holy book snooper2 Oct 2014 #9
I listed modern Christian terrorists in my OP Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #12
percentages matter snooper2 Oct 2014 #16
Only when you're trying to justify a prejudice Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #18
So would you, then. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #28
this is such a tired and simplistic line. cali Oct 2014 #25
I would call equating a heavily armed ruthless group that has actually Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #34
not really, people that really follow their holy books would be assholes snooper2 Oct 2014 #37
Equal opportunity disdain is fine Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #43
I know, cut and paste adds some comedic value :) snooper2 Oct 2014 #49
You say "they" like you mean all. Maybe you mean some follow their holy book. Percentages are import rhett o rick Oct 2014 #33
See post 37 for clarification snooper2 Oct 2014 #39
Post 37 provides zip. You said that the "Problem is they actually follow their holy book" rhett o rick Oct 2014 #53
The phelps actually follow their holy book snooper2 Oct 2014 #57
Your ignore list contains much more than people...it includes entire concepts. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #10
In the West, muslims are a MINORITY, and liberals traditionally protect closeupready Oct 2014 #11
Nnnnnno. Don't agree with you there, I'm afraid. sibelian Oct 2014 #21
No, it's not mainly because "prejudice is illogical". Liberals have traditionally relied on cali Oct 2014 #30
That moral basis RELIES on the fact that prejudice is illogical. sibelian Oct 2014 #56
Know your history. The idea of civil rights is itself a liberal idea. closeupready Oct 2014 #41
Certainly there is always propensity for the mainstream to dominate sibelian Oct 2014 #62
That'd be cool if liberals controlled the govment. We are currently ignoring major portions of the rhett o rick Oct 2014 #38
As a liberal, one should do what one can. Change starts with YOU. closeupready Oct 2014 #45
I like your avatar but I'll never look at meatballs the same. rhett o rick Oct 2014 #69
Then think of them as Rocky Mountain Oysters! closeupready Oct 2014 #79
You're not helping. nm rhett o rick Oct 2014 #130
I don't think the point is that they are different. sibelian Oct 2014 #13
Not to some Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #14
Are you allowed to link links? sibelian Oct 2014 #70
I'm honestly not sure Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #75
Give or take a hundred massacred women and children Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #15
Oh, never mind all that. sibelian Oct 2014 #24
Blowing folks to bits is so much more civilized. GeorgeGist Oct 2014 #106
Ooooga booga Rhinodawg Oct 2014 #132
Bad guys trying to bomb bad guys and missing. sibelian Oct 2014 #156
Adding "phobia" to the end of the word Islam does not make it immune from analysis or criticism. Throd Oct 2014 #17
Homophobes say exactly the same n/t Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #20
Nice try. Throd Oct 2014 #23
Ah, you're on the "Islam is different because it just is" train Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #26
No I'm not. Throd Oct 2014 #32
Probably because he/she accidentally watched 3 seconds of the 700 Club Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #48
Islam *is* different from homosexuality muriel_volestrangler Oct 2014 #150
Islam is a set of beliefs. Race and sexual orientation are a matter of nature. PeaceNikki Oct 2014 #151
I reserve the right to cali Oct 2014 #36
Like this poster did... Rhinodawg Oct 2014 #74
I understand that Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #120
yeah, but when I criticize aspects of a given religion, I do not feel compelled cali Oct 2014 #135
There, we disagree Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #141
That sounds tedious. Throd Oct 2014 #145
Religion is a choice, sexual orientation not. nt alp227 Oct 2014 #63
. sibelian Oct 2014 #73
Two things Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #123
Religion is a choice Marrah_G Oct 2014 #104
Fundy Christians don't think so Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #121
The Problem Hari Seldon Oct 2014 #31
Greatest quote ever, thank you. get the red out Oct 2014 #46
I couldn't agree more that getting off fossil fuels would solve a ton of our problems. Marr Oct 2014 #51
Well said. nm rhett o rick Oct 2014 #68
That's a bit simplistic muriel_volestrangler Oct 2014 #152
Message auto-removed Name removed Oct 2014 #35
We don't demean Christians on the basis of being Christian Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #40
What a guy. Happy to "take a shot" at deniers of rights. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #44
I guess you weren't on DU earlier in the year. Lobo27 Oct 2014 #89
If I was around, I missed it Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #95
Neither is defending oppressive authoritarians. Marr Oct 2014 #42
I wish a few psychologists would study why it's so hard for the Left to say what you said. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #47
Definitely. I think I understand where they're coming from, but still. Marr Oct 2014 #66
It always befuddles me how the Left, which prides itself on nuanced thought Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #71
George Bush get the red out Oct 2014 #84
There was radical Islam before Bush. nt Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #86
Most definitely! get the red out Oct 2014 #87
I can see that. nt Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #88
I'm definitely one of his ignorees leftynyc Oct 2014 #76
Welcome to the club. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #81
I'll wear it as a badge of honor leftynyc Oct 2014 #83
I think what ends up happening is this. Lobo27 Oct 2014 #90
The easier access to power is an accident of history Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #50
Yes, our entire government and our election process is an accident of history. Dreamer Tatum Oct 2014 #55
I don't disagree with you-- but here we are. Marr Oct 2014 #60
What to do? Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #72
Certainly. Marr Oct 2014 #138
Yes, forgot about that Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #140
I think they are all equally disgusting Skittles Oct 2014 #52
Equal opportunity disdain is fair n/t Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #54
K&R liberal_at_heart Oct 2014 #65
Man is the only animal to have found the One True God....several of them. Mark Twain Tierra_y_Libertad Oct 2014 #77
K&R. YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #80
Post removed Post removed Oct 2014 #82
Glad you would be in favor of disenfranchising most of America's population... YoungDemCA Oct 2014 #94
Well, you know....Prop 8 ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2014 #117
Exactly The Green Manalishi Oct 2014 #127
Two things Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #96
I am glad you have something that works for you, be it meds or faith. The Green Manalishi Oct 2014 #125
One could say the same of all gun owners Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #129
that is a different argument, and a good point. The Green Manalishi Oct 2014 #136
" insane, vile, hateful and hurtful paradigm" Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #139
Atheism isn't taken seriously because people with invisible sky friends need cognitive dissonance The Green Manalishi Oct 2014 #142
Glad to know I have company n/t Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #146
Nah, just take away the tax exempt status. ProudToBeBlueInRhody Oct 2014 #107
Yes, I'd go for that Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #109
The word fundamentalism does not sadoldgirl Oct 2014 #85
Hmm, yes. That's a good distinction Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #98
Pardon me, but I went to Quaker schools and Quaker meeting when I was younger Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #155
If I'm wrong, I welcome correction Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #157
Not any Quakers that I've ever met, and I've met LOTS. Crunchy Frog Oct 2014 #161
How quickly things like Sabra and Shatila, the Bosnia Genocide, the LRA, the IRA, etc. get forgotten Chathamization Oct 2014 #93
Eloquently put Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #113
Most Americans never even HEARD the word "Muslim" prior to 9/11... Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #100
"Otherising" Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #116
Religion has done that from the beginning.... Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #144
Not all religions Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #158
No kidding. Presbyterian was good at helping the poor and Quaker is still anti-war. Spitfire of ATJ Oct 2014 #164
Let's cut the crap. MicaelS Oct 2014 #102
so what conclusion should we be drawing from your post? azurnoir Oct 2014 #105
That I think the ME / Islamic World is one really fucked up place. MicaelS Oct 2014 #111
You say "cut the crap" but your post is full of it Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #108
Equality for women and gays is a liberal value OKNancy Oct 2014 #110
Something of a generalisation Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #115
I think it's problematic saying that Western culture is better than African culture or Asian culture Chathamization Oct 2014 #149
Islam, Judaism and Christianity ... All peas in the same pod Trajan Oct 2014 #118
~No, equal disdain is fine Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #126
Islamaphobia is a Christian Dominionist trapping. Watch your step. The Dominionists are Nazis. blkmusclmachine Oct 2014 #124
We have 2000 years of Christian history to back up the fact that Christians can be just as violent. hrmjustin Oct 2014 #128
That's something I agree with entirely Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #131
People say many things, but it is only their actions others can use to define them. Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #133
That's not what I said Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #134
No, it is what I said. I speak for myself. No one is tilting at you. Bluenorthwest Oct 2014 #143
I missed Feral Child Oct 2014 #147
No, equal disdain is fair Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #159
Your point is accurate. Feral Child Oct 2014 #167
I am firmly against any religion LostOne4Ever Oct 2014 #148
Define "persecute" Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #160
I would define it as LostOne4Ever Oct 2014 #168
What Ben Affleck missed in the Islamophobia debate PeaceNikki Oct 2014 #153
This is so interesting you should post it separately. Rhinodawg Oct 2014 #165
I view Muslims in the same way I view Christians. Neoma Oct 2014 #162
That's fair Prophet 451 Oct 2014 #163
The prevelance of repulsively right-wing opinions in Islam is currently unique. Donald Ian Rankin Oct 2014 #166
Any religion like Islam or similar is NOT compatible with liberalism Lee-Lee Oct 2014 #169
Authoritarianism is ALWAYS bad, whether it is religious or otherwise. alarimer Oct 2014 #170

Response to Prophet 451 (Original post)

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
3. I largely agree with you- not about the ignore list. I don't do ignore lists
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:00 PM
Oct 2014

but I do think it's more complex than your summation. First of all, it's not simply about law restraining xian fundamentalists; it's that and a confluence of other elements such as the stages religions and cultures seem to go through. And the influence of Christianity (at least in the U.S.)seems to have- not quite sure how to put this- transmuted into something that isn't overtly Christian but still has destructive power (think bushco's "crusading" imagery.

But it's pointless, really, to speculate. The fact remains that fundamentalism within Islam, at this point in history, is a more powerful force than it is within any of the other major religions re the manifestation of violence. But even saying that doesn't touch on why that is. Personally, I think at least part of that is the long history of colonialism and the subjugation of peoples.

but honestly, I don't give a fig if you put me on ignore. feel free.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
5. No, you seem able to have a constructive dialogue
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:07 PM
Oct 2014

Firstly, I honestly and truly believe that it is purely and solely the law restraining people like Robertson. I fully believe that. If the law didn't prevent, he'd burn an atheist quicker than look at him. And one can point to a violent anti-abortion movement that cloaks itself in Christian imagery and really isn't shy about it's violence. That's just one example, there are plenty of others.

There are a lot of reasons why fundamentalism is more powerful than it is in the other two Abrahamic faiths and, because I'm lazy, I'm just going to c/p what I said on the topic in another thread:

I would suggest the reason so many Muslims in the MidEast poll as having such regressive attitudes is mostly because of their environment. Saudi (for example) Muslims are living under an absolute monarchy where there are literal secret police enforcing the fundie version of Islam. I would not be at all surprised if at least some of the respondants were afraid that the survey taker was secret police out to catch them in being insufficiently fundie. On top of that, there is very little media freedom in those countries. What gets broadcast is only what the fundies approve. Finally, your country and mine have been periodically bombing the crap out of them for twenty years in your case and about eighty in ours. So you take an average Muslim. Let's call him Aziz. Aziz might not be especially well-educated, he's probably not acquainted with more modernist religions. Now you feed him a continual diet of of stories that the west and, by extension, modernity, is a terrible, awful, no good thing.

Are you familiar with the concept of "incestuous amplification"? It's a psychological term that describes what happens when someone gets all or most of their information from sources that agree with them. Gradually, their opinions get more and more extreme. Take a bunch of guys who think Bush was an OK president. Lock them in a room together for a while and eventually, they'll come out claiming that W was the best president ever, he should be on Mt. Rushmore and the one dollar bill (and yes, this has already happened with Reagan). That's why those who get all their news from the conservative bubble get so extreme. So take our Muslim. He's fed these stories and he believes them because, at this point, he has no reason not to. And these stories are everywhere and the secret police seem to be everywhere. The only thing that really compares to it is Soviet Russia, that level of paranoia and distrust.

Now, drop a bomb on the next village over. Or maybe his son. Suddenly, modernity isn't just bad, it's trying to kill him! And his sense of what it means to be a proper Saudi is also heavily tied up in this fundie version of his religion because the rise of Wahabbiism was also the rise of Arabic nationalism. Consider also, the psychological bias that means that if we hold a view, not only will we resist correction when that view is wrong, the correction will make us hold that belief even more strongly. And remember that humans will instinctively obey a perceived authority (Milgram proved that) and are instinctively conformist (Asche proved that). And everyone around Aziz is faithfully parroting the government (fundie) line (for all those reasons). And remember also that the Arabic culture places a lot of store in history and the history of the west's primary religion (Christianity) is, shall we say, not very good in that area (And when we haven't been bombing, we've been propping up tyrants). He's scared, he's angry and the fundies are telling him the same thing fundies always do: It's not your fault. It's their fault. If they'd just do this or that or adhere to this religion more strongly, everything would be fine. And that's how a normal Muslim in those countries, our little Aziz, ends up believing such extreme stuff.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
22. well, I've always referred to that concept as "confirmation bias"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:21 PM
Oct 2014

It something I have a particular thing about: I check myself on it multiple times on virtually every issue.

Your final paragraph, in the post I'm responding to, is one I agree with completely.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
29. I'm aware of confirmation bias
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:25 PM
Oct 2014

It's also something I check myself for daily because I just finished a tediously repetitive module on it. All of the Christian terrorists I listed in my OP are within living memory. The violent anti-abortion front is still with us and barely even tries to hide. There is no difference between them and ISIS except that the law here stops them acting out their fap-fantasies.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
58. As I said, I think it's far more complex that simply "the law stops them"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:50 PM
Oct 2014

It's about culture as well. It's about backlash and the loss of power. I think a much better comparison to ISIS would be the Inquisition. Oh, and the Nazis weren't really about Christianity. That was not a major theme. It was tertiary. As far as a violent anti-abortion front, that dissipated with the successes the anti-abortion movement made legally. I'm not saying Christianity is "better" than Islam. I'm not saying that Islam is bad. I am saying that at this moment in time, violence is roiling the Islamic world. Undoubtedly, that violence is linked to actions by the western nations, particularly actions taken over the last 100+ years.

You keep saying the law prevents xian fundamentalists from acting out violently, but there are also laws against terrorism in Islamic countries. And the schism between Sunni and Shia plays into this, just as schisms within Christianity did once.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
67. I think we're just going to have to disagree on the law part
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:06 PM
Oct 2014

I didn't include the Inquisitions because I wanted to keep it to modern acts of terror.

History is undecided about the Nazis. Hitler proclaimed his Christianity loudly and often, especially in Mein Kampf. But given that was for public consumption and how much you trust anything the bastard said is up to you. That said, I was specific that it was only "part" of Naziism. I'm not claiming that it was one of the major animators but Christianity was one of the excuses used to justify it to the public and at least some Nazis absolutely believed that they were good Christians rounding up the Christ-killers.

The violent anti-abortion movement hasn't dissipated sadly. Maddow had segments on this about a year ago.

Yes, there are laws against terrorism in (some) Islamic nations. But are there laws preventing Saudi terrorists from executing terrorism in, say, London? Or are there just laws against enacting terror within those nations? Additionally, how far is there respect and/or fear of the law in such nations?

The division between Sunni and Shia, I can't speak to. I've never been able to get the difference straight.

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
91. Such a joke
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:41 PM
Oct 2014

"If the law didn't prevent, he'd burn an atheist quicker than look at him."

Let me know as soon as he does, and I will become a christianphobic. In the mean time, I'm more inclined to be a afraid of the islamic state who ACTUALLY beheads aid workers as a hobby.

The difference is subtle, I'm sure it will take time for you to wrap your head around the concept of actual murder vs. "imaginary murder".

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
101. I listed modern Christian terrorists in my OP
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:54 PM
Oct 2014

This is not ancient history, I lived through several of them.

 

GummyBearz

(2,931 posts)
119. So?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:16 PM
Oct 2014

You lived through them. Christian terrorists seem to be a little nicer than islamic state terrorists. Let me know the next time IS lets an atheist live through its path.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
122. "Christian terrorists seem to be a little nicer than islamic state terrorists"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:21 PM
Oct 2014

That's another one for the Ignore list.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
6. I think you're missing how both fundamentalisms are intertwined.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:07 PM
Oct 2014

The Pentagon under Rumsfeld was rife with religious messages and undertones. Both Bush and Blair were well known for referencing religion in both public and private when talking about the Iraq War.

Islamic fundamentalism has increased dramatically since that war, just as Christian fundamentalism in America has increased.

They both react against each other and feed off each other. When people feel that their culture is under attack they just embrace it even more.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
19. How could I be missing it when
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:18 PM
Oct 2014

I wrote this:

First of all, it's not simply about law restraining xian fundamentalists; it's that and a confluence of other elements such as the stages religions and cultures seem to go through. And the influence of Christianity (at least in the U.S.)seems to have- not quite sure how to put this- transmuted into something that isn't overtly Christian but still has destructive power (think bushco's "crusading" imagery.

I want to add to the above that Rumsfeld et al are no longer in power. I stick with my assertion above.

and actually, I believe you're incorrect about the increase in Islamic fundamentalism and xian fundamentalism, but at the moment I'm too lazy to research it.

CJCRANE

(18,184 posts)
27. Where have we seen an increase in Islamic fundamentalism?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:23 PM
Oct 2014

In Iraq, Libya and Syria.

All places where we intervened or supported intervention.

The other countries where islamic fundamentalism is on the increase are our allies.

We are either incredibly incompetent or something else is at work.

We now also have members of the GOP including politicians openly promoting Biblical Law as a mainstream position.

This is a massive leap even from the Bush years.

I believe there is a deliberate attempt to increase fundamentalism on both sides. It's an easy way to have a more pliant populaiton (and keep people divided).

 

Rhinodawg

(2,219 posts)
59. Really ?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:54 PM
Oct 2014

"But it's pointless, really, to speculate. The fact remains that fundamentalism within Islam, at this point in history, is a more powerful force than it is within any of the other major religions re the manifestation of violence."

I said almost the same thing and you called it...what was the word ?...oh yeah, CRAP!



azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
103. Tell us did you watch Face the Nation on Sunday?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:55 PM
Oct 2014

seems Netanyahu announced to the entire US that Hamas and ISIS are the same gee just like your quiz

Chathamization

(1,638 posts)
112. And we’re even getting a lot of that in this thread. “I’m not saying [certain group] is bad, I’m
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:07 PM
Oct 2014

just saying they’re statistically more likely to [bad stuff]. Those are just the facts, I would be ignoring reality if I didn’t [certain bigoted action].”

Conservatives are so fond of that particular bigoted garbage (you’ll see it all over Freeperville). It’s disturbing to see it so prevalent on a supposedly progressive site.

RedCappedBandit

(5,514 posts)
114. No, it isn't.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:10 PM
Oct 2014

Criticizing or questioning an ideology that may be flawed is not the same as criticizing an entire people.

ZombieHorde

(29,047 posts)
154. Do you think there is a difference between
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 09:17 PM
Oct 2014

a set of beliefs, such as a religion, and physical qualities, such as skin color?

I think there is a big difference.

 

snooper2

(30,151 posts)
9. Problem is they actually follow their holy book
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:10 PM
Oct 2014

when is the last time somebody in Kansas went out and killed their neighbor for working on Sunday?

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
12. I listed modern Christian terrorists in my OP
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:13 PM
Oct 2014

This is not ancient times, this is within living memory. The fundy Christians would be every bit as bad, and have been, whenever they could get away with it.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
18. Only when you're trying to justify a prejudice
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:18 PM
Oct 2014

Fundy Christians would be every bit as bad. I know that for a fact. That they are a small (although not that small, about 20%) of the populace makes them no different. Miniscule fractions of Muslims commit acts of terror, so do miniscule fractions of Christians. Claiming they are different comes down to saying "Islam is different because it just is".

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
28. So would you, then.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:23 PM
Oct 2014

I know it for a fact. Were it not illegal, you would be beheading people.

I know it. For a fact.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
34. I would call equating a heavily armed ruthless group that has actually
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:26 PM
Oct 2014

murdered thousands and threatened millions to Christians lazy thinking.

 

snooper2

(30,151 posts)
37. not really, people that really follow their holy books would be assholes
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:30 PM
Oct 2014

Both books are full of evil shit and if one REALLY FOLLOWED THEIR FUCKING HOLY BOOK they would be, like I said, an asshole-


Cruelty in the New Testament
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/nt_list.html

And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcases of the men that have transgressed against me: for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorring unto all flesh.--Is.66:24

Whenever we read ... the cruel and tortuous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize humankind. And, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel. -- Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason

Matthew


Those who bear bad fruit will be cut down and burned "with unquenchable fire." 3:10, 12

Jesus strongly approves of the law and the prophets. He hasn't the slightest objection to the cruelties of the Old Testament. 5:17

Jesus recommends that to avoid sin we cut off our hands and pluck out our eyes. This advice is given immediately after he says that anyone who looks with lust at any women commits adultery. 5:29-30

Jesus says that most people will go to hell. 7:13-14

Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire." 7:19

"The children of the kingdom [the Jews] shall be cast out into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 8:12

Jesus tells a man who had just lost his father: "Let the dead bury the dead." 8:21

Jesus sends some devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the waters below. 8:32

Cities that neither "receive" the disciples nor "hear" their words will be destroyed by God. It will be worse for them than for Sodom and Gomorrah. And you know what God supposedly did to those poor folks (see Gen 19:24). 10:14-15

Families will be torn apart because of Jesus (this is one of the few "prophecies" in the Bible that has actually come true). "Brother shall deliver up the brother to death, and the father the child: and the children shall rise up against their parents, and cause them to be put to death." 10:21

Jesus says that we should fear God who is willing and "able to destroy both soul and body in hell." 10:28

Jesus says that he has come to destroy families by making family members hate each other. He has "come not to send peace, but a sword." 10:34-36

Jesus condemns entire cities to dreadful deaths and to the eternal torment of hell because they didn't care for his preaching. 11:20-24

Jesus will send his angels to gather up "all that offend" and they "shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." 13:41-42, 50

Jesus is criticized by the Pharisees for not washing his hands before eating. He defends himself by attacking them for not killing disobedient children according to the commandment: "He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death." (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20 , Dt 21:18-21) So, does Jesus think that children who curse their parents should be killed? It sure sounds like it. 15:4-7

"Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." 15:13

Jesus advises his followers to mutilate themselves by cutting off their hands and plucking out their eyes. He says it's better to be "maimed" than to suffer "everlasting fire." 18:8-9

In the parable of the unforgiving servant, the king threatens to enslave a man and his entire family to pay for a debt. This practice, which was common at the time, seems not to have bothered Jesus very much. The parable ends with this: "So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you." If you are cruel to others, God will be cruel to you. 18:23-35

"And his lord was wroth, and delivered him to the tormentors." 18:34

God is like a rich man who owns a vineyard and rents it to poor farmers. When he sends servants to collect the rent, the tenants beat or kill them. So he sent his son to collect the rent, and they kill him too. Then the owner comes and kills the farmers and rents the vineyard to others. 21:33-41

"Whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder." Whoever falls on "this stone" (Jesus) will be broken, and whomever the stone falls on will be ground into powder. 21:44

In the parable of the marriage feast, the king sends his servants to gather everyone they can find, both bad and good, to come to the wedding feast. One guest didn't have on his wedding garment, so the king tied him up and "cast him into the outer darkness" where "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 22:1-14

The end of the world will be signaled by wars, famines, disease, and earthquakes (6-7). And that's just "the beginning of sorrows" (8). Next believers will be hated and killed by unbelievers (9), believers will hate and betray each other (10), false prophets will fool people (11), iniquity will abound and love wax cold (12). But hey, if you make through all that, you'll be saved (13).
Only one more thing will happen before the end comes: the gospel will be preached throughout the world (14). Well, that and the abomination of desolations will stand in the holy place (15), many false Christs and false prophets will show great signs and wonders (24), the sun and moon will be darkened and the stars will fall (29), the sign of the son of Man will appear in the sky, everyone on earth will mourn, and then, finally, the great and powerful son of Man will come in all his glory (30).

Oh, and all these things will happen within the lifespan of Jesus' contemporaries (34).

Or maybe not. Jesus was talking about things he knew nothing about (36). (See Mark 13:32.) 24:3-51


Jesus had no problem with the idea of drowning everyone on earth in the flood. It'll be just like that when he returns. 24:37

God will come when people least expect him and then he'll "cut them asunder." And "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 24:50-51

The parable of the cruel and unjust master
The kingdom of heaven is like a rich man who distributed his wealth to his servants while he traveled. He gave five talents (a talent was a unit of money, worth about 20 years of a worker's wages) to one servant, two to another, and one to a third. When he returned, the servant with five talents had made five more, the servant with two made two more, but the servant with one talent only had the talent his master entrusted to him. The master rewarded the servants that invested his money (without his permission -- what would have happened if the stock market went down during their master's travels?) and took the talent from the single-talent servant and gave it to the one with ten talents. "For unto every one that hath shall be given .. but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath." Then the cruel and unjust master cast the servant who carefully protected his master's talent into the "outer darkness: [where] there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 25:14-30

The servant who kept and returned his master's talent was cast into the "outer darkness" where there will be "weeping and gnashing of teeth." 25:30

Jesus judges the nations. 25:31-46

Jesus tells us what he has planned for those that he dislikes. They will be cast into an "everlasting fire." 25:41

Jesus says the damned will be tormented forever. 25:46
Mark


Jesus explains why he speaks in parables: to confuse people so they will go to hell. 4:11-12

Jesus sends devils into 2000 pigs, causing them to jump off a cliff and be drowned in the sea. When the people hear about it, they beg Jesus to leave. 5:12-13

Any city that doesn't "receive" the followers of Jesus will be destroyed in a manner even more savage than that of Sodom and Gomorrah. 6:11

Jesus criticizes the Jews for not killing their disobedient children as required by Old Testament law. (See Ex 21:15, Lev 20 , Dt 21:18-21) 7 -10

Jesus tells us to cut off our hands and feet, and pluck out our eyes to avoid going to hell. 9:43-49

God is like a rich man who owns a vineyard and rents it to poor farmers. When he sends servants to collect the rent, the tenants beat or kill them. So he sent his son to collect the rent, and they kill him too. Then the owner comes and kills the farmers and gives the vineyard to others. 12:1-9

Jesus tells his disciples to eat his body and drink his blood. 14:22-24

Jesus says that those that believe and are baptized will be saved, while those who don't will be damned. 16:16 Luke


Zechariah asks the angel Gabriel how his wife Elizabeth could become pregnant, since she is "stricken with years." Gabriel makes him "dumb" just for asking. 1:20

Those who fail to bear "good fruit" will be "hewn down, and cast into the fire." 3

John the Baptist says that Christ will burn the damned "with fire unquenchable." 3:17

Jesus heals a naked man who was possessed by many devils by sending the devils into a herd of pigs, causing them to run off a cliff and drown in the sea. This messy, cruel, and expensive (for the owners of the pigs) treatment did not favorably impress the local residents, and Jesus was asked to leave. 8:27-37

Jesus says that entire cities will be violently destroyed and the inhabitants "thrust down to hell" for not "receiving" his disciples. 10:10-15

Jesus says that we should fear God since he has the power to kill us and then torture us forever in hell. 12:5

Jesus says that God is like a slave-owner who beats his slaves "with many stripes." 12:46-47

"Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." 13:3, 5

According to Jesus, only a few will be saved; the vast majority will suffer eternally in hell where "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." 13:23-30

In the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, the rich man goes to hell, because as Abraham explains, he had a good life on earth and so now he will be tormented. Whereas Lazarus, who was miserable on earth, is now in heaven. This seems fair to Jesus. 16:19-31

Jesus believed the story of Noah's ark. He thought it really happened and had no problem with the idea of God drowning everything and everybody. 17:26-27

Jesus also believes the story about Sodom's destruction. He says, "even thus shall it be in the day the son of man is revealed ... Remember Lot's wife." This tells us about Jesus' knowledge of science and history, and his sense of justice. 17:29-32

In the parable of the talents, Jesus says that God takes what is not rightly his, and reaps what he didn't sow. The parable ends with the words: "bring them [those who preferred not to be ruled by him] hither, and slay them before me." 19:22-27

Jesus tells his disciples to eat his body and drink his blood. 22:19-20
John


Jesus believed the stupid and vicious story from Numbers 21. (God sent snakes to bite the people for complaining about the lack of food and water. Then God told Moses to make a brass snake to cure them from the bites.) 3:14

"God so loved the world, that he gave his His only begotten Son."
As an example to parents everywhere and to save the world (from himself), God had his own son tortured and killed. 3:16

People are damned or saved depending only on what they believe. 3:18, 36

The "wrath of God" is on all unbelievers. 3:36

Jesus believes people are crippled by God as a punishment for sin. He tells a crippled man, after healing him, to "sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee." 5:14

Those who do not believe in Jesus will be cast into a fire to be burned. 15:6

Jesus says we must eat his flesh and drink his blood if we want to have eternal life. This idea was just too gross for "many of his disciples" and "walked no more with him." (They are called Protestants nowadays.) 6:53-66
Acts


Peter claims that Dt 18:18-19 refers to Jesus, saying that those who refuse to follow him (all non-Christians) must be killed. 3:23

Peter and God scare Ananias and his wife to death for not forking over all of the money that they made when selling their land. 5:1-10

Peter has a dream in which God show him "wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls." The voice (God's?) says, "Rise, Peter: kill and eat." 10:10-13

Peter describes the vision that he had in the last chapter (10:10-13). All kinds of beasts, creeping things, and fowls drop down from the sky in a big sheet, and a voice (God's, Satan's?) tells him to "Arise, Peter; slay and eat." 11:5-10

The "angel of the Lord" killed Herod by having him "eaten of worms" because "he gave not God the glory." 12:23

David was "a man after [God's] own heart." 13:22

The author of Acts talks about the "sure mercies of David." But David was anything but merciful. For an example of his behavior see 2 Sam 12:31 and 1 Chr 20:3, where he saws, hacks, and burns to death the inhabitants of several cities. 13:34

Paul and the Holy Ghost conspire together to make Elymas (the sorcerer) blind. 13:8-11
Romans


Homosexuals (those "without natural affection&quot and their supporters (those "that have pleasure in them&quot are "worthy of death" - - along with gossips, boasters, and disobedient children. 1:31-32

The guilty are "justified" and "saved from wrath" by the blood of an innocent victim. 5

God punishes everyone for someone else's sin; then he saves them by killing an innocent victim. 5:12

"If ... we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son", then God is truly a monster. 5:10 1 Corinthians


If you defile the temple of God, God will destroy you. 3:17

Paul claims that God killed 23,000 in a plague for "committing whoredom with the daughters of Moab 10:8

If you tempt Christ (How could you tempt Christ?), you'll will die from snake bites. 10

If you murmur, you'll be destroyed by the destroyer (God). 10:10
2 Corinthians


The terror of the Lord 5:11
Galatians


If anyone dares to disagree with Paul on religious matters, "let him be accursed." 1:8-9
Ephesians


We are predestined by God to go to either heaven or hell. None of our thoughts, words, or actions can affect the final outcome. 1:4-5, 11

God had his son murdered to keep himself from hurting others for things they didn't do. 1

The bloody death of Jesus smelled good to God. 5:2

Those who refuse to obey will face the wrath of God. 5:6
Philippians

Colossians


God bought us with someone else's blood. 1:14

God makes peace through blood. 1:19-20
1 Thessalonians


God is planning a messy, mass murder in "the wrath to come" and only Jesus can save you from it. 1:10

Christians shouldn't mourn the death of their fellow believers. They'll be OK and you'll see them later in heaven. The people you should mourn are dead nonbelievers. They have no hope (because they're going to hell). 4:13
2 Thessalonians


Jesus will take "vengeance on them that know not God" by burning them forever "in flaming fire." 1 -9

Jesus will "consume" the wicked "with the spirit of his mouth." 2:8

God will cause us to believe lies so that he can damn our souls to hell. 2:11-12
1 Timothy

2 Timothy

Titus

Philemon

Hebrews


"That which beareth thorns and briers is rejected, and is nigh unto cursing; whose end is to be burned."
Apostates will burn in hell with the other non-believers. 6:8

"Melchisedec ... met Abraham returning from the slaughter of the kings, and blessed him."
God showed his approval of "the slaughter of the kings" with Melchisedec's blessing of Abraham. (Genesis 14:17-18) 7:1

God will not forgive anyone unless something is killed for him in a bloody manner. 9:13-22

"A certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries."
God will soon destroy non-believers in a fiery hell. 10:27

Those who disobeyed the Old Testament law were killed without mercy. It will be much worse for those who displease Jesus. 10:28-29

"Vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord." 10:30

"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." 10:31

"Abraham ... offered up Isaac ... his only begotten son." (And this was a good thing? How fucked up is that?) 11:17

The Israelites kept the passover and sprinkled blood on doorposts so that God wouldn't kill their firstborn children (like he did the Egyptians in Exodus 12:29). 11:28

God saved Rahab because she believed. (He killed all the non-believers in Jericho.) 11:31

"Time would fail me to tell of Gideon, and of Barak, and of Samson, and of Jephthah; of David also, and Samuel, and of the prophets."
The heroes of faith: Gideon, Samson, Jephthah, David, and Samuel. It would be hard to find a more monstrous group than these guys. 11:32

"Others were tortured ... that they might obtain a better resurrection." 11:35

God ordered animals to be "stoned, or thrust through with a dart" if they "so much as ... touch the mountain." 12:20

"Ye are come ... to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things that that of Abel." 12:22-24 James


James says Abraham was justified by works (for being willing to kill his son for God); Paul (Romans 4:2-3) says he was justified by faith (for believing that God would order him to do such an evil act). 2:21
1 Peter


We are all, according to Peter, predestined to be saved or damned. We have no say in the matter. It was all determined by "the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ."1:2

"The precious blood of Christ ... was foreordained before the foundation of the world."
God planned to kill Jesus from the get-go. 1:19-20

God drowned everyone on earth except for Noah and his family. 3:20
2 Peter


God drowned everyone else on earth except for Noah and his family. 2:5, 3:6

"Turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into ashes" 2:6

God will set the entire earth on fire so that he can burn non-believers to death. 3

When Jesus returns, he'll burn up the whole earth and everything on it. 3:10
1 John


Christians are washed in the blood of Jesus. 1
2 John
3 John






Now lets take a look at the lovely Quran
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/023-violence.htm

The Quran:

Quran (2:191-193) - "And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah [disbelief] is worse than killing...

but if they desist, then lo! Allah is forgiving and merciful. And fight them until there is no more Fitnah [disbelief and worshipping of others along with Allah] and worship is for Allah alone. But if they cease, let there be no transgression except against Az-Zalimun (the polytheists, and wrong-doers, etc.)" (Translation is from the Noble Quran) The historical context of this passage is not defensive warfare, since Muhammad and his Muslims had just relocated to Medina and were not under attack by their Meccan adversaries. In fact, the verses urge offensive warfare, in that Muslims are to drive Meccans out of their own city (which they later did). The use of the word "persecution" by some Muslim translators is thus disingenuous (the actual Muslim words for persecution - "idtihad" - and oppression - a variation of "z-l-m" - do not appear in the verse). The actual Arabic comes from "fitna" which can mean disbelief, or the disorder that results from unbelief or temptation. Taken as a whole, the context makes clear that violence is being authorized until "religion is for Allah" - ie. unbelievers desist in their unbelief.



Quran (2:244) - "Then fight in the cause of Allah, and know that Allah Heareth and knoweth all things."



Quran (2:216) - "Fighting is prescribed for you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing which is bad for you. But Allah knoweth, and ye know not." Not only does this verse establish that violence can be virtuous, but it also contradicts the myth that fighting is intended only in self-defense, since the audience was obviously not under attack at the time. From the Hadith, we know that this verse was narrated at a time that Muhammad was actually trying to motivate his people into raiding merchant caravans for loot.



Quran (3:56) - "As to those who reject faith, I will punish them with terrible agony in this world and in the Hereafter, nor will they have anyone to help."



Quran (3:151) - "Soon shall We cast terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers, for that they joined companions with Allah, for which He had sent no authority". This speaks directly of polytheists, yet it also includes Christians, since they believe in the Trinity (ie. what Muhammad incorrectly believed to be 'joining companions to Allah').



Quran (4 4) - "Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward." The martyrs of Islam are unlike the early Christians, who were led meekly to the slaughter. These Muslims are killed in battle as they attempt to inflict death and destruction for the cause of Allah. This is the theological basis for today's suicide bombers.



Quran (4 6) - "Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah…"



Quran (4:89) - "They but wish that ye should reject Faith, as they do, and thus be on the same footing (as they): But take not friends from their ranks until they flee in the way of Allah (From what is forbidden). But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever ye find them; and (in any case) take no friends or helpers from their ranks."



Quran (4 5) - "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of Allah with their goods and their persons. Allah hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath Allah promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,-" This passage criticizes "peaceful" Muslims who do not join in the violence, letting them know that they are less worthy in Allah's eyes. It also demolishes the modern myth that "Jihad" doesn't mean holy war in the Quran, but rather a spiritual struggle. Not only is the Arabic word used in this passage, but it is clearly not referring to anything spiritual, since the physically disabled are given exemption. (The Hadith reveals the context of the passage to be in response to a blind man's protest that he is unable to engage in Jihad and this is reflected in other translations of the verse).



Quran (4:104) - "And be not weak hearted in pursuit of the enemy; if you suffer pain, then surely they (too) suffer pain as you suffer pain..." Is pursuing an injured and retreating enemy really an act of self-defense?



Quran (5:33) - "The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement"



Quran (8:12) - "I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them" No reasonable person would interpret this to mean a spiritual struggle.



Quran (8:15) - "O ye who believe! When ye meet those who disbelieve in battle, turn not your backs to them. (16)Whoso on that day turneth his back to them, unless maneuvering for battle or intent to join a company, he truly hath incurred wrath from Allah, and his habitation will be hell, a hapless journey's end."



Quran (8:39) - "And fight with them until there is no more fitna (disorder, unbelief) and religion should be only for Allah" Some translations interpret "fitna" as "persecution", but the traditional understanding of this word is not supported by the historical context (See notes for 2:193). The Meccans were simply refusing Muhammad access to their city during Haj. Other Muslims were allowed to travel there - just not as an armed group, since Muhammad had declared war on Mecca prior to his eviction. The Meccans were also acting in defense of their religion, since it was Muhammad's intention to destroy their idols and establish Islam by force (which he later did). Hence the critical part of this verse is to fight until "religion is only for Allah", meaning that the true justification of violence was the unbelief of the opposition. According to the Sira (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 324) Muhammad further explains that "Allah must have no rivals."



Quran (8:57) - "If thou comest on them in the war, deal with them so as to strike fear in those who are behind them, that haply they may remember."



Quran (8:67) - "It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war until he had made a great slaughter in the land..."



Quran (8:59-60) - "And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy."



Quran (8:65) - "O Prophet, exhort the believers to fight..."



Quran (9:5) - "So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captive and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them." According to this verse, the best way of staying safe from Muslim violence is to convert to Islam (prayer (salat) and the poor tax (zakat) are among the religion's Five Pillars). This popular claim that the Quran only inspires violence within the context of self-defense is seriously challenged by this passage as well, since the Muslims to whom it was written were obviously not under attack. Had they been, then there would have been no waiting period (earlier verses make it a duty for Muslims to fight in self-defense, even during the sacred months). The historical context is Mecca after the idolaters were subjugated by Muhammad and posed no threat. Once the Muslims had the power, they violently evicted those unbelievers who would not convert.



Quran (9:14) - "Fight against them so that Allah will punish them by your hands and disgrace them and give you victory over them and heal the breasts of a believing people." Humiliating and hurting non-believers not only has the blessing of Allah, but it is ordered as a means of carrying out his punishment and even "healing" the hearts of Muslims.



Quran (9:20) - "Those who believe, and have left their homes and striven with their wealth and their lives in Allah's way are of much greater worth in Allah's sight. These are they who are triumphant." The Arabic word interpreted as "striving" in this verse is the same root as "Jihad". The context is obviously holy war.



Quran (9:29) - "Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued." "People of the Book" refers to Christians and Jews. According to this verse, they are to be violently subjugated, with the sole justification being their religious status. This was one of the final "revelations" from Allah and it set in motion the tenacious military expansion, in which Muhammad's companions managed to conquer two-thirds of the Christian world in the next 100 years. Islam is intended to dominate all other people and faiths.




Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"



Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place." This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.



Quran (9:41) - "Go forth, light-armed and heavy-armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah! That is best for you if ye but knew." See also the verse that follows (9:42) - "If there had been immediate gain (in sight), and the journey easy, they would (all) without doubt have followed thee, but the distance was long, (and weighed) on them" This contradicts the myth that Muslims are to fight only in self-defense, since the wording implies that battle will be waged a long distance from home (in another country and on Christian soil, in this case, according to the historians).




Quran (9 3) - "O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination." Dehumanizing those who reject Islam, by reminding Muslims that unbelievers are merely firewood for Hell, makes it easier to justify slaughter. It also explains why today's devout Muslims have little regard for those outside the faith.



Quran (9:88) - "But the Messenger, and those who believe with him, strive and fight with their wealth and their persons: for them are (all) good things: and it is they who will prosper."




Quran (9:111) - "Allah hath purchased of the believers their persons and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain: a promise binding on Him in truth, through the Law, the Gospel, and the Quran: and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? then rejoice in the bargain which ye have concluded: that is the achievement supreme." How does the Quran define a true believer?



Quran (9:123) - "O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness."



Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction." Note that the crime is moral transgression, and the punishment is "utter destruction." (Before ordering the 9/11 attacks, Osama bin Laden first issued Americans an invitation to Islam).



Quran (18:65-81) - This parable lays the theological groundwork for honor killings, in which a family member is murdered because they brought shame to the family, either through apostasy or perceived moral indiscretion. The story (which is not found in any Jewish or Christian source) tells of Moses encountering a man with "special knowledge" who does things which don't seem to make sense on the surface, but are then justified according to later explanation. One such action is to murder a youth for no apparent reason (74). However, the wise man later explains that it was feared that the boy would "grieve" his parents by "disobedience and ingratitude." He was killed so that Allah could provide them a 'better' son. (Note: This is one reason why honor killing is sanctioned by Sharia. Reliance of the Traveler (Umdat al-Saliq) says that punishment for murder is not applicable when a parent or grandparent kills their offspring (o.1.1-2).)



Quran (21:44) - "We gave the good things of this life to these men and their fathers until the period grew long for them; See they not that We gradually reduce the land (in their control) from its outlying borders? Is it then they who will win?"



Quran (25:52) - "Therefore listen not to the Unbelievers, but strive against them with the utmost strenuousness..." "Strive against" is Jihad - obviously not in the personal context. It's also significant to point out that this is a Meccan verse.



Quran (33:60-62) - "If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbors in it but a little while. Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter." This passage sanctions the slaughter (rendered "merciless" and "horrible murder" in other translations) against three groups: Hypocrites (Muslims who refuse to "fight in the way of Allah" (3:167) and hence don't act as Muslims should), those with "diseased hearts" (which include Jews and Christians 5:51-52), and "alarmists" or "agitators who include those who merely speak out against Islam, according to Muhammad's biographers. It is worth noting that the victims are to be sought out by Muslims, which is what today's terrorists do. If this passage is meant merely to apply to the city of Medina, then it is unclear why it is included in Allah's eternal word to Muslim generations.



Quran (47:3-4) - "Those who reject Allah follow vanities, while those who believe follow the truth from their lord. Thus does Allah set forth form men their lessons by similitude. Therefore when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners," Those who reject Allah are to be subdued in battle. The verse goes on to say the only reason Allah doesn't do the dirty work himself is in order to to test the faithfulness of Muslims. Those who kill pass the test. "But if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost."



Quran (47:35) - "Be not weary and faint-hearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost (Shakir: "have the upper hand&quot for Allah is with you,"



Quran (48:17) - "There is no blame for the blind, nor is there blame for the lame, nor is there blame for the sick (that they go not forth to war). And whoso obeyeth Allah and His messenger, He will make him enter Gardens underneath which rivers flow; and whoso turneth back, him will He punish with a painful doom." Contemporary apologists sometimes claim that Jihad means 'spiritual struggle.' Is so, then why are the blind, lame and sick exempted? This verse also says that those who do not fight will suffer torment in hell.



Quran (48:29) - "Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves" Islam is not about treating everyone equally. There are two very distinct standards that are applied based on religious status. Also the word used for 'hard' or 'ruthless' in this verse shares the same root as the word translated as 'painful' or severe' in verse 16.



Quran (61:4) - "Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way" Religion of Peace, indeed! The verse explicitly refers to "battle array" meaning that it is speaking of physical conflict. This is followed by (61 ): "He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist." (See next verse, below). Infidels who resist Islamic rule are to be fought.



Quran (61:10-12) - "O You who believe! Shall I guide you to a commerce that will save you from a painful torment. That you believe in Allah and His Messenger (Muhammad ), and that you strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with your wealth and your lives, that will be better for you, if you but know! (If you do so) He will forgive you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow, and pleasant dwelling in Gardens of 'Adn - Eternity ['Adn (Edn) Paradise], that is indeed the great success." This verse refers to physical battle in order to make Islam victorious over other religions (see above). It uses the Arabic word, Jihad.



Quran (66 ) - "O Prophet! Strive against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern with them. Hell will be their home, a hapless journey's end." The root word of "Jihad" is used again here. The context is clearly holy war, and the scope of violence is broadened to include "hypocrites" - those who call themselves Muslims but do not act as such.




From the Hadith:



Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."



Bukhari (52:256) - The Prophet... was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." In this command, Muhammad establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Islamic terror bombings.



Bukhari (52:65) - The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause. Muhammad's words are the basis for offensive Jihad - spreading Islam by force. This is how it was understood by his companions, and by the terrorists of today.



Bukhari (52:220) - Allah's Apostle said... 'I have been made victorious with terror'



Abu Dawud (14:2526) - The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: Three things are the roots of faith: to refrain from (killing) a person who utters, "There is no god but Allah" and not to declare him unbeliever whatever sin he commits, and not to excommunicate him from Islam for his any action; and jihad will be performed continuously since the day Allah sent me as a prophet until the day the last member of my community will fight with the Dajjal (Antichrist)



Abu Dawud (14:2527) - The Prophet said: Striving in the path of Allah (jihad) is incumbent on you along with every ruler, whether he is pious or impious



Muslim (1:33) - the Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah



Bukhari (8:387) - Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally."



Muslim (1:30) - "The Messenger of Allah said: I have been commanded to fight against people so long as they do not declare that there is no god but Allah."



Bukhari (52 3) - "Allah's Apostle said, 'Know that Paradise is under the shades of swords'."



Bukhari (11:626) - [Muhammad said:] "I decided to order a man to lead the prayer and then take a flame to burn all those, who had not left their houses for the prayer, burning them alive inside their homes."



Muslim (1:149) - "Abu Dharr reported: I said: Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best? He (the Holy Prophet) replied: Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause..."



Muslim (20:4645) - "...He (the Messenger of Allah) did that and said: There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth. He (Abu Sa'id) said: What is that act? He replied: Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!"



Muslim (20:4696) - "the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: 'One who died but did not fight in the way of Allah nor did he express any desire (or determination) for Jihad died the death of a hypocrite.'"



Muslim (19:4321-4323) - Three separate hadith in which Muhammad shrugs over the news that innocent children were killed in a raid by his men against unbelievers. His response: "They are of them (meaning the enemy)."



Muslim (19:4294) - "When the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) appointed anyone as leader of an army or detachment he would especially exhort him... He would say: Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who disbelieve in Allah. Make a holy war... When you meet your enemies who are polytheists, invite them to three courses of action. If they respond to any one of these, you also accept it and withhold yourself from doing them any harm. Invite them to (accept) Islam; if they respond to you, accept it from them and desist from fighting against them... If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the Jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them."



Bukhari 1:35 "The person who participates in (Holy Battles) in Allah’s cause and nothing compels him do so except belief in Allah and His Apostle, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty ( if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise ( if he is killed)."



Tabari 7 7 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, "Kill any Jew who falls under your power." Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad's men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.



Tabari 9:69 "Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us" The words of Muhammad, prophet of Islam.



Tabari 17:187 "'By God, our religion (din) from which we have departed is better and more correct than that which these people follow. Their religion does not stop them from shedding blood, terrifying the roads, and seizing properties.' And they returned to their former religion." The words of a group of Christians who had converted to Islam, but realized their error after being shocked by the violence and looting committed in the name of Allah. The price of their decision to return to a religion of peace was that the men were beheaded and the woman and children enslaved by the caliph Ali.



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 990: - Lest anyone think that cutting off someone's head while screaming 'Allah Akbar!' is a modern creation, here is an account of that very practice under Muhammad, who seems to approve.



Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992: - "Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah." Muhammad's instructions to his men prior to a military raid.



Saifur Rahman, The Sealed Nectar p.227-228 - "Embrace Islam... If you two accept Islam, you will remain in command of your country; but if your refuse my Call, you’ve got to remember that all of your possessions are perishable. My horsemen will appropriate your land, and my Prophethood will assume preponderance over your kingship." One of several letters from Muhammad to rulers of other countries. The significance is that the recipients were not making war or threatening Muslims. Their subsequent defeat and subjugation by Muhammad's armies was justified merely on the basis of their unbelief.


Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
43. Equal opportunity disdain is fine
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:36 PM
Oct 2014

Consistency, that's all I ask for.

BTW, you appear to have got a few accidental smilies in your list.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
33. You say "they" like you mean all. Maybe you mean some follow their holy book. Percentages are import
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:26 PM
Oct 2014

important.

So your point is Christians are better because they don't follow their holy book? Sorry if I missed your point.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
53. Post 37 provides zip. You said that the "Problem is they actually follow their holy book"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:42 PM
Oct 2014

I am interested in knowing what the problem is you are addressing and who "they" are.

 

snooper2

(30,151 posts)
57. The phelps actually follow their holy book
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:48 PM
Oct 2014

Pat Robertson actually follows his holy book



This dude actually follows his holy book

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
10. Your ignore list contains much more than people...it includes entire concepts.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:10 PM
Oct 2014


So you're saying that Radical Islam = Fundamentalist Christians. Under the conditions of complete and utter anarchy, though. I will take Self-Defeating Arguments for $1000, please Alex.

I was not aware that ISIS reign of terror was written into law somewhere. I mean, it HAS to be. Because they're the same as Christians, but the LAW prevents Christians from running amok!!

Phil Robertson: "I command that my army of duck-kazoo makers go forthwith, murder all non-Christians, and elevate me to my rightful throne of Grand Imperial Whiteguy Wizard of Christofascistland America! I WILL NOT BE DENIED! PRAISE BE THE LORD ALMIGHTY!"

Some other Robertson: "We can't. It's illegal."

Phil: "Oh."



 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
11. In the West, muslims are a MINORITY, and liberals traditionally protect
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:11 PM
Oct 2014

the rights of minorities from the persecution of the majority. See "Bill of Rights", US Constitution.

K&R

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
21. Nnnnnno. Don't agree with you there, I'm afraid.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:20 PM
Oct 2014

I've never seen liberals as being in the business of protecting "minorities" - liberals protect victims of prejudice, primarily because prejudice is illogical. If the attribution of a characteristic to a demographic is factual rather than prejudiced, the population percentage doesn't count. I don't extend my "protection" from "prejudice" to those who actually exhibit the characteristics that that the allegedly prejudicial assert. One might quibble over the extent to which such characteristics are exhibited, but it;s no more Islamophobic to assert that Islam has a misogynistic streak that to say that Christianity has a misogynistic streak. We have no real right to dismantle Christianity to the bone and then put Islam on a pedestal. They are roughly the same kind of thing. Just because one movement currently has greater access to financial or militaristic power than the other doesn't make the ideology of either more or less legitimately open to analysis.

e.g. the Quiverfull movement is a minority. Are we protecting them?
 

cali

(114,904 posts)
30. No, it's not mainly because "prejudice is illogical". Liberals have traditionally relied on
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:25 PM
Oct 2014

the moral basis for minority rights. That's how the argument has been cast for a very long time. And I think your example of "Quiverfull" is a poor one, but yes, we protect their rights.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
56. That moral basis RELIES on the fact that prejudice is illogical.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:46 PM
Oct 2014


There would be no reason for that moral basis if this was not the case. The argument may have been cast in terms of nebulous symbols, but the way an argument is cast is not what gives it it's meaning. It's the structure of an argument that gives it it's meaning and the reason prejudice is wrong is because it doesn't make any sense. It is in fact that very absence of logical structure that prejudice perpetuates that makes it wrong and unfair!

"And I think your example of "Quiverfull" is a poor one, but yes, we protect their rights."

How? Where the Democrats campaigning on the back of protecting Quiverfull? Who are the ideologues on DU claiming that criticism of Quiverfull is prejudiced?
 

closeupready

(29,503 posts)
41. Know your history. The idea of civil rights is itself a liberal idea.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:34 PM
Oct 2014

I support the idea that Islamic fundamentalism is wrong. There are good reasons to think that. Most liberals would agree.

I do not support people with a bullhorn like Maher who essentially exhort his viewers to hate and bash Islam.

So I don't know, maybe we are talking apples and oranges. We likely don't disgree, when all is said and done. I'm just appalled at the thinly veiled bigotry I read here, or see on news programs.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
62. Certainly there is always propensity for the mainstream to dominate
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:00 PM
Oct 2014

and for voices less powerful than the mainstream to be marginalised - that I would never dispute. My main problem in arguing with others on the left about Islam is what I perceive to be a terrible double standard in the way in which we analyse right wing ideology in Christianity and Islam, the left is absolutely terrible at discussing Bad guys vs Bad guys. Victims can also be bad guys.

I suspect you are wary of real world consequences for Muslims that would not fall on Christians if we subjected Islam to the same level of vitriol the left is happy to dish out to Christianity, and if you are I certainly agree that the lack of Islamic influence in the West could leave them vulnerable, but that's still a kind of power-mongering, to me. In protecting those we see as weak we can sometimes let their faults go unchallenged. If we allow or sense of fair play to occlude abuse we become enablers. We would be using our power to perpetuate more power imbalance, not correct it.
 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
38. That'd be cool if liberals controlled the govment. We are currently ignoring major portions of the
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:31 PM
Oct 2014

Constitution.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
13. I don't think the point is that they are different.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:13 PM
Oct 2014

I think the point in fact IS that they are roughly the same.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
14. Not to some
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:14 PM
Oct 2014

I have had at least one poster tonight tell me that fundy Christians weren't half as bad and Islam was uniquely evil. Not going to name names because that would qualify as a call-out and get me banned from my own thread.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
75. I'm honestly not sure
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:14 PM
Oct 2014

I think I can get away with linking to the thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5646988

At least, I think it was that thread. I've put teh poster on Ignore and my meds play hell with my memory so if it's teh wrong one, I apologise.

sibelian

(7,804 posts)
24. Oh, never mind all that.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:21 PM
Oct 2014

They're all hyped up because of what the nasty Christians are doing to them. It isn't their fault! I think. Not sure.

Anyway, a history buff is about to show up, I'm sure.

Throd

(7,208 posts)
32. No I'm not.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:26 PM
Oct 2014

Why are you so vested in ignoring/denying the fact that currently the greatest amount of head-chopping whack-jobs are adherents to a particular religion?

muriel_volestrangler

(101,082 posts)
150. Islam *is* different from homosexuality
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 08:02 PM
Oct 2014

You, in #20, are trying to say they belong in the same category. They don't, and you should abandon your attempt to pretend they do. Your response to#17 was a failure, and you're digging yourself a hole by trying to keep it up.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
36. I reserve the right to
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:30 PM
Oct 2014

criticize Islam just as I reserve the right to criticize any other religion. I think we do have to be careful not to place Islam above criticism- and I get the impulse to shy away from criticism because Islamophobia is so pernicious and widespread. One doesn't want to add fuel to the fire.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
120. I understand that
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:17 PM
Oct 2014

I think there are things about Islam which can be rightfully criticised but that those things also figure in criticisms of the other Abrahamic faiths. What I'm arguing against is the idea that Islam is worse simply because Christians fanatics don't have the power to burn us anymore.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
135. yeah, but when I criticize aspects of a given religion, I do not feel compelled
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:15 PM
Oct 2014

to criticize another religion. And I shouldn't.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
141. There, we disagree
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:26 PM
Oct 2014

Simply pretending that other religions are more innocent, even by omission, is still intellectually dishonest.

Throd

(7,208 posts)
145. That sounds tedious.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:52 PM
Oct 2014

Every time something is criticized, there must be equal criticisms, qualifiers, and condemnations of other things?

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
123. Two things
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:26 PM
Oct 2014

A) I was pointing out the weasely legalistic parsing of the word "Islamophobia", not actually comparing the two.

B) Is it really a choice? I'm a Luciferian Satanist. My upbringing was entirely British (that is, nominally Christian) and my major caregiver (my grandmother) was devoutly, if quietly, Christian and exemplified the very best ideals of the faith (she spent her entire life caring for disabled and disturbed kids). Everything about my upbringing said I should be Christian. And yet, I worship the other guy. And there was no single point when I decided "yes, I'll worship Lucifer". It just kind of happened because he answered my prayers and, like any religious believer, I feel his presence.

No, I'm not claiming that religion is as involuntary as orientation. But I am saying there's something more complex than simple choice going on here.

Marrah_G

(28,581 posts)
104. Religion is a choice
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:55 PM
Oct 2014

Sexuality is not. I can criticize a religion without hating the members of that religion. I despise the Catholic church, but I still love my parents

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
121. Fundy Christians don't think so
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:20 PM
Oct 2014

They are certain that homosexuality is a choice people make because they hate god and want to rape babies (or something, I stopped listening). Yes, they're wrong and the science proves it and if you want to shout down fundie Islam, I'm right there with you. What I'm arguing against is the idea that Islam is especially evil when teh only thing that stops Christian fanatics burning us all is that the law, made in saner times, prevents it.

 

Hari Seldon

(154 posts)
31. The Problem
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:26 PM
Oct 2014

The problem is that Western Imperialism has been plundering Middle Eastern countries for more than a century.

The violence has more to do with local push-back than it does Islam Teaching.

I don't condone violence, but I appreciate the frustration that gives birth to it.

The Answer was clear to President Carter: it is (past) time to end our dependence on fossil fuels, and leave the Middle East to its inhabitants.

get the red out

(13,456 posts)
46. Greatest quote ever, thank you.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:38 PM
Oct 2014
The Answer was clear to President Carter: it is (past) time to end our dependence on fossil fuels, and leave the Middle East to its inhabitants.


I completely agree!
 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
51. I couldn't agree more that getting off fossil fuels would solve a ton of our problems.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:42 PM
Oct 2014

It'd pull our nose out of the Middle East, counter climate change, and I expect, do a hell of a lot to un-rig our economy, which is all built around controlling oil and gas resources.

muriel_volestrangler

(101,082 posts)
152. That's a bit simplistic
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 08:13 PM
Oct 2014

ISIL, for instance, has plenty of hatred for Shia Muslims, Yazidis, and other non-western groups, because of religious disagreements.

Response to Prophet 451 (Original post)

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
40. We don't demean Christians on the basis of being Christian
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:33 PM
Oct 2014

Well, some do. But most of us insult them for having nonsensical, provably wrong ideas.

If someone wants to hold up some nonsensical, provably wrong ideas of fundie Muslims, I'll happily take a shot at them. But there are at least some people here claiming that fundie Christians *aren't* as bad and Islam is uniquely evil.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
44. What a guy. Happy to "take a shot" at deniers of rights.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:37 PM
Oct 2014

Who have MURDERED to deny those rights. You're really full of it.

Lobo27

(753 posts)
89. I guess you weren't on DU earlier in the year.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:33 PM
Oct 2014

When Catholics were the daily whipping dogs. It was mess on DU. So much hate for Catholics. Pedo this, Pedo that. Anti gay people. Anti women's right. Many didn't listen that not all Catholics shared said beliefs.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
95. If I was around, I missed it
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:46 PM
Oct 2014

I think I remember some of the kind of stuff you're talking about and I'm going to feel slightly smug about trying to argue against the worst of it back then. That said, bashing the RCC is a little like bashing AOL back in the Nineties: It gets shot at a lot because it's the biggest target (which is not to excuse the potshots).

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
42. Neither is defending oppressive authoritarians.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:35 PM
Oct 2014

I totally understand the reticence of many to acknowledge these arguments, believe me. It seems like it's potentially handing ammunition to the worst elements of our own society, who seem to like nothing more than war, theft, and bullying minorities of any sort.

However, strictly speaking, I have to acknowledge that authoritarian theocrats and other violent religious extremists in the Islamic world seem to enjoy easier access to power than they do in the West. I think it's the duty of liberal minded people to speak up for the vast numbers of women, gays, religious minorities, atheists, and every other group in such places-- not their establishment.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
47. I wish a few psychologists would study why it's so hard for the Left to say what you said.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:40 PM
Oct 2014

It seems like it's physically painful for some to form those words.

So painful that the OP is nonsensically lashing out against them and ignoring people who disagree with his/her way of thinking.

Which by the way, who else completely dehumanizes disbelievers...hmmmmmm...

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
66. Definitely. I think I understand where they're coming from, but still.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:04 PM
Oct 2014

Whenever this topic comes, I'm reminded of this report I saw on television on 9-11. They were showing the rubble and all, and some "expert" said something to the effect of, 'this is going to make the west reexamine it's entire foreign policy'.

Naive schmuck that I was, I actually took that to mean that the guy thought the governments of the west would be less intrusive, perhaps look at getting off oil, etc., etc. Nope. It just meant more bombs.

So on the one hand, I can see having this gut reaction against any sort of blanket judgement of other regions-- especially the Middle East. It seems like our establishment can always be counted on to do exactly the worst thing with it. But still, I mean, it doesn't change reality.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
71. It always befuddles me how the Left, which prides itself on nuanced thought
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:12 PM
Oct 2014

cannot bear, I mean absolutely cannot STAND, to say without qualification that radical Islam is bad.

get the red out

(13,456 posts)
87. Most definitely!
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:28 PM
Oct 2014

But his wars, IMO, pushed some liberals into not looking as negatively at any part of Islam as they do Christianity.

 

leftynyc

(26,060 posts)
76. I'm definitely one of his ignorees
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:15 PM
Oct 2014

for pointing out that comparing what's going on with Islam today with what Christians did hundreds of years ago was ridiculous. Poster seems perfectly happy treating Islam like a holy relic and treating Muslims like children who simply cannot help themselves. THAT's the reason for this entire thread.

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
81. Welcome to the club.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:19 PM
Oct 2014

The difference between now and the past, if the past is even relevant, is that those things were done IN THE NAME of Christianity, whereas now it's basically for oil.

But then again, how can you expect to deal with the mentality of a person who equates an entire army that is actively killing thousands to one lunatic who killed Dr. Tiller? Makes no sense.

Lobo27

(753 posts)
90. I think what ends up happening is this.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:40 PM
Oct 2014

I notice it a lot here on DU, and on liberal media I enjoy, like TyT. Whenever Islam or Muslims are criticized, one of the first things that is done is to point out how bad Christians are or once were.

Example, last night Cenk Uygur in his defense of Islam told me how bad Christians and Buhddists can be. Which is fine, I understand his point. But at the same time by doing that I think he loses the people that are in the middle that may be sympathetic to the Muslim plight.

Yes, I know of the Crusades and the Oklahoma City bombing, but that is also the past. We have to live in the here in now, and that means stopping radical Islam and giving the Muslim people a chance to live good lives. Imo.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
50. The easier access to power is an accident of history
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:42 PM
Oct 2014

Simply put: In the MidEast the Klan won. Wahabbiism (the extremist, fanatical fundie version of Islam) is not that old. Maybe seventy years (Islam was actually the religion of learning in the Middle Ages). And it developed in conjunction with Arabic nationalism. And it is that conjunction of teh two that has allowed the fundies to seize power. An they defend power via all teh tricks that totalitarian governments use (which I explained upthread).

Dreamer Tatum

(10,926 posts)
55. Yes, our entire government and our election process is an accident of history.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:45 PM
Oct 2014

This is alternately infuriating and hilarious, bending toward hilarious.
 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
60. I don't disagree with you-- but here we are.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 02:57 PM
Oct 2014

How we arrived at this moment matters if we're talking about how to extricate ourselves from it, or improve the current mess. But it doesn't make that mess any less messy. That is to say, I agree with your diagnosis, but what do you actually do with it? I don't think we do ourselves any favors by denying that violent, religious extremists and oppressive regimes have easier access to power in the Islamic world.

For the record, I don't think it has much to do with the actual religion, either. Religions (at least, the ones I can claim any degree of familiarity with) can be twisted into meaning just about anything you want them to mean. That's one of the big problems with them.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
72. What to do?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:12 PM
Oct 2014

Well, trying to impose modernity by force hasn't worked. I think we can all agree on that.

I think the only thing that could work is sponsoring, promoting and spotlighting the moderate voices within Islam (i.e. Malala Yousefazi). That's the same moderate voices that Maher's mean-spirited rant was alienating.

I also think that the internet is slowly breaking the fundy's power to control the message.

 

Marr

(20,317 posts)
138. Certainly.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:21 PM
Oct 2014

I'd also say that getting off of oil as quickly and completely as possible would alleviate a lot of these problems in the long term.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
140. Yes, forgot about that
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:24 PM
Oct 2014

I think that, as fellow passengers on this blue orb, we will always have some opinion on ME affairs and perhaps even some influence in them (preferably to promote progressive values). But getting off oil would certainly, shall we say, "un-complicate" things wonderfully.

Response to Prophet 451 (Original post)

 

YoungDemCA

(5,714 posts)
94. Glad you would be in favor of disenfranchising most of America's population...
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:46 PM
Oct 2014

Including most minorities. Because all those black and Latino Christians are just too stupid to know what's in their best interest, amirite?

The Green Manalishi

(1,054 posts)
127. Exactly
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:38 PM
Oct 2014

the Catholics and Baptists joined the Mormons in supporting that vile law. I'd have not the slightest problem disenfranchising and deporting anyone who voted for it. Regardless of color or how otherwise progressive they may be. Homophobia should result in being dropped off in an institution and forgotten about.

We've tried to reason with sky fairy worshippers, it doesn't work. The only thing left is to do unto others what others have been trying to do unto you for a few thousand years. turnabout is fair play and it's a couple of millennia past time for some payback.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
96. Two things
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:50 PM
Oct 2014

1) You've gone too far the other way and become that which you hate.

2) I am a man of faith. I am also legitimately mentally ill. I am receiving treatment for the latter in the form of three very powerful anti-depressants and a very powerful anti-psychotic every day which keep me, somewhat and sometimes, functional. Take it from someone who has experienced both, they are not the same thing.

The Green Manalishi

(1,054 posts)
125. I am glad you have something that works for you, be it meds or faith.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:36 PM
Oct 2014

But, unless and until they can provide proof of their deity at least as consistent and verifiable as I can for gravity or quantum physics there is not reason I should not consider them (all god botherers)as quite capable of atrocities.

If becoming what I hate is even a small step towards completely, someday, destroying every vestige of the curse upon humanity that ALL religion is, then I shall; there is no way I could be worse than the assholes who blow up abortion clinics, vote for things like Prop 8 or throw acid in girls' faces.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
129. One could say the same of all gun owners
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:43 PM
Oct 2014

All quite capable of atrocities. And anti-theism has committed some too (see much of communist history).

The Green Manalishi

(1,054 posts)
136. that is a different argument, and a good point.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:15 PM
Oct 2014

although I own guns I am nonetheless aware that there is something kind of wrong with the sorts who would use them for anything other than target shooting.

My point is that the original poster is claiming that "islamophobia" is not a "progressive value". I disagree. Hatred (or at least deep suspicion) of an insane, vile, hateful and hurtful paradigm and those who would promulgate or defend it in any way is one hell of a lot more "progressive" than saying that it should given any respect at all. Just because it is currently a little more overtly apeshit than xtianity in this country is no reason to hate it any less, or more, than that same form of oppressiveness that is our dominant religion here.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
139. " insane, vile, hateful and hurtful paradigm"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:22 PM
Oct 2014

Conservatives say the same thing of Liberalism. These are all points of view and the sneering self-superiority of many atheists is a very large part of why atheism isn't taken more seriously.

The Green Manalishi

(1,054 posts)
142. Atheism isn't taken seriously because people with invisible sky friends need cognitive dissonance
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:31 PM
Oct 2014

to justify their silly beliefs.

anyway, there are other forums for such discussions; my point is that not everyone who would be happy to see Islam wiped from the face of the earth is a hypocrite or a conservative. Asshole, maybe, you would not be alone in considering me so

ProudToBeBlueInRhody

(16,399 posts)
107. Nah, just take away the tax exempt status.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:03 PM
Oct 2014

That would clear up a lot of the racket that is organized religion in this country.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
109. Yes, I'd go for that
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:06 PM
Oct 2014

I'm British. Part of my tax money goes to the Church of England. I'm a Luciferian Satanist.

sadoldgirl

(3,431 posts)
85. The word fundamentalism does not
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:26 PM
Oct 2014

strike me as the right one. A lot of "isms" carry equally far. I would call the problem fanaticism (yes, another "ism&quot . One can believe in fundamental truths without being a fanatic.

What the US and the ME need is a new enlightenment, which they never experienced.

On the other hand even after the enlightenment in Europe there were other fanatical "isms", including the Nazi ideology. Still, a new enlightenment might help.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
98. Hmm, yes. That's a good distinction
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:52 PM
Oct 2014

That allows us to segregate the Amish and Quakers (who are fundamentalist but entirely peaceful and don't bother anyone) from the lunatics (and I include Robertson in that).

And I entirely agree that another Enlightenment would be a great help.

Crunchy Frog

(26,539 posts)
155. Pardon me, but I went to Quaker schools and Quaker meeting when I was younger
Sat Oct 11, 2014, 12:59 AM
Oct 2014

and they are not in the slightest bit fundamentalist. There may be some in isolated pockets who are, but I never encountered them. You might just as well label Unitarian Universalists as fundamentalist.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
157. If I'm wrong, I welcome correction
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:03 PM
Oct 2014

I was under the impression that Quakers view the Bible as literally and inerrantly true, which was the definition of fundamentalism I was using. If that's incorrect, I withdraw that statement with apologies.

Crunchy Frog

(26,539 posts)
161. Not any Quakers that I've ever met, and I've met LOTS.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:33 PM
Oct 2014

Quakers have traditionally been pacifists, and were thus allowed to be concientious objectors to military service. For this reason, there was a massive influx during the Vietnam war, and American Quakerism took on somewhat of a hippy flavoring.

My Quaker boarding school somewhat resembled a hippy commune, and the main creed was "sex, drugs and rock'n roll".

Prior to the 1960's it was more staid, but Quakers have always been at the forefront of progressive social movements such as the abolition of slavery, and women's rights.

I accept your apology.

Chathamization

(1,638 posts)
93. How quickly things like Sabra and Shatila, the Bosnia Genocide, the LRA, the IRA, etc. get forgotten
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:45 PM
Oct 2014

(or perhaps, more accurately, “forgotten”) when people talk about how Christian violence is in the distant past. The difference is that when these things occurred, people didn’t start talking about the looming threat of Christian extremism. Sri Lank and Myanmar didn’t cause people to talk about the threat of Buddhist violence, nor did riots in India pave way to talk of Hindu extremism. There was a post on DU about a Yazidi mob that stoned a 17 year old girl to death for the sin of dating a Muslim. Naturally it was hidden, since the Yazidis are our friends now and only bigotry against Muslims is allowed.

Atheists will tell you they hate all religion. Conservatives will tell you that the ideology with the highest body count is militantly atheist Communism.

The bigots wave their ignorance as a source of pride and shout, “This group is uniquely awful, what other group could ever do such things?!” Being reminded of harsh reality doesn’t change their minds, for theirs is an ignorance of choice.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
113. Eloquently put
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:08 PM
Oct 2014

No faith of any kind of age has clean hands. And the only reason mine does is because we're very young and not organized enough to hold a piss-up in a brewery.

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
100. Most Americans never even HEARD the word "Muslim" prior to 9/11...
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:53 PM
Oct 2014

You are dead on in that America's introduction to Islam on 9/11 WAS like introducing Christianity to someone by having the KKK show up with their hoods, burning crosses and lynchings.

Prior to 9/11 many parts of the country were busy bickering about the differences between Catholics vs Baptists vs Protestants vs Jews. Then, all of the sudden it was like there was the classic "Common Enemy" thing going on and all hate had a focus. Add to that the usual war propaganda of projecting evil upon the "enemy" and the breathess nuts believing in prophesy and it was the perfect blend of the uninformed, the agenda driven and blind rage that leads nominally sane people to claim anything less than the use of nukes is "weak".

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
116. "Otherising"
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:13 PM
Oct 2014

In my real life, I study criminals (I'm 5/6 through a degree in Forensic Psychology). The concept of "otherising" is something which has come up repeatedly. It's a combination of factors that allow us to think of another human as lesser, other, not really human.

 

Spitfire of ATJ

(32,723 posts)
144. Religion has done that from the beginning....
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:48 PM
Oct 2014

So has the invention of political borders.

It all seems petty when seen from above.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
158. Not all religions
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:05 PM
Oct 2014

There are some variants of Christianity which preach universal brotherhood and acceptance. Granted, they're not the majority.

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
102. Let's cut the crap.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:54 PM
Oct 2014

I think a some liberals view Muslims, if not the entire Islamic world as "victims" of Western Imperialism / Oppression / Racism. And there is nothing these liberals likes better than a victim, whether real or imagined. Since that give said liberals a chance to wrap themselves in the flag of their own self-righteousness, which IMO is just a form of secular fundamentalism.

So...since Muslims are victims, they can do anything they want, no matter how horrible. And the liberals won't condemn them, since victim-blaming is inherently immoral.

You can equate Islamic vs. Christian vs. Hindu vs. Judaic Fundamentalism all you want, but the chance of someone cutting YOUR head off, or stoning you to death for whatever immorality your are perceived in engaging in a YouTube video is a great deal higher in the Islamic World than all the others. Probably combined.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
105. so what conclusion should we be drawing from your post?
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 03:57 PM
Oct 2014

what do you think of the US actions in the ME?

MicaelS

(8,747 posts)
111. That I think the ME / Islamic World is one really fucked up place.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:07 PM
Oct 2014

And we should get the fuck out. Completely out. Let them settle their own affairs. Quit depending on their oil. Because THAT, and our "support" of Israel are the only real reasons we are there. They seem to want to butcher one another, and blame the West for it. So at least if we GTFO, we won't be blamed for it. I figure if there's ever a real nuclear exchange it'll happen in the ME between the people living there. Frankly I'm surprised as hell that Israel hasn't hit Iran.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
108. You say "cut the crap" but your post is full of it
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:04 PM
Oct 2014

The Christian terrorists listed in the OP are not ancient history, I lived through several of them. And if you'd like me to list terrorist acts from other faiths, I can easily find them.

The difference is A) the law and B) that Christian fanatics don't have teh political/legal power to get away with it. That is it and that is all.

OKNancy

(41,832 posts)
110. Equality for women and gays is a liberal value
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:06 PM
Oct 2014

I look at it more as a difference between Western culture and other cultures.
For a long time, I held typical thoughts that all have equal value, they were just different.
I don't anymore.
Western culture is better. I knew it was better for women, but the more involved I get in gay rights activism I had to realize that no, it's better in the west. It's better to be gay in Utah or Oklahoma than the most liberal Muslim country.

It's not a "phobia" ( fear), it's just a personal opinion.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
115. Something of a generalisation
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:11 PM
Oct 2014

but I think you're onto something. Now, there are parts of Arabic culture I like and admire but it's fair to say that minority rights is not one of them. Again though, we're talking about teh fact that the Muslim version of the KKK have power in those regions, control information zealously and literally shoot dissenters.

Chathamization

(1,638 posts)
149. I think it's problematic saying that Western culture is better than African culture or Asian culture
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 08:00 PM
Oct 2014

just because Western countries happen to be ahead of the curve on LGBT rights at the moment.

 

Trajan

(19,089 posts)
118. Islam, Judaism and Christianity ... All peas in the same pod
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:14 PM
Oct 2014

I disdain them all, and disdain them even MORE when their adherents commit vicious acts of violence ...

I am Liberal, and I despise ANYONE who would commit heinous acts of violence against their fellow human beings ....

So, to wrap this up in a tiny bow ... ANTI Theist, with a healthy dash of DISLIKE for the violent ones ...

I still consider myself to be VERY Liberal ...

So there! ... please place me on your ignore list ...

I consider it an honor ...

 

hrmjustin

(71,265 posts)
128. We have 2000 years of Christian history to back up the fact that Christians can be just as violent.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:41 PM
Oct 2014

I live around and have Muslim friends and know that they are just as peaceful and normal as any other group.

All religions have issues and i have said before that Islam would benefit from a reformation.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
131. That's something I agree with entirely
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 04:47 PM
Oct 2014

My beef is with those who complain that Islam is especially bad for (*lots of legalistic self-justification*) reasons that amount to "it's different because it just is". All the Abrahamic faiths have violent teachings. Islam is no worse and no better than any other.

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
133. People say many things, but it is only their actions others can use to define them.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:01 PM
Oct 2014

That is to say, I really don't care to hear the back story or list of excuses for why you do what you do, because there is no way for me to know if that is authentic, or agenda driven. It's their inner life. What matters is what they do.
So if you treat others badly, I think you are a shitty person. If you rush behind the skirts of some faith and say 'my god says to treat others that way' I do not really care. What matters is what you do. Not your note from Mommy excusing you from civilization.
In Uganda, they say it's for Christianity. In many places they say it's for Islam. I do not give a shit what they clam it is for. It is what they, actual people, did to other actual people.
I have zero reason to abstain from criticism of those who treat others in shitty ways just because they have worked up some elaborate rationale for being so shitty. It's not the religion. It's the people treating others poorly. And I oppose the shitty treatment of others.
This idea that religions should be free to hate minority groups is a Republican, right wing, fucked up thing.
So you need to come up with something better than 'don't criticize anything done by people of faith'. Fuck that. No free pass. You are that. You own your actions, welcome to Earth, you have free will, what will you make of it?

 

Bluenorthwest

(45,319 posts)
143. No, it is what I said. I speak for myself. No one is tilting at you.
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 05:40 PM
Oct 2014

I said what I had to say for me.

Feral Child

(2,086 posts)
147. I missed
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 06:39 PM
Oct 2014

the Arbiter of All Things Liberal election.

Congratulations!


Seriously, though. I'm not an Islamaphobe, I hold all religions in equal disdain, so I guess you might as well put me on that ignore list.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
159. No, equal disdain is fair
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:07 PM
Oct 2014

The point I was trying to make is that Islam cannot be held to be uniquely awful. If you dislike all religions, that's treating them equally, which is fair.

LostOne4Ever

(9,262 posts)
148. I am firmly against any religion
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 07:19 PM
Oct 2014

that in any way calls for it adherents to harm, kill, discriminate, or persecute any person who has not hurt them or others.

Prophet 451

(9,796 posts)
160. Define "persecute"
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:08 PM
Oct 2014

There are factions of most religions who hold that any disagreement with them, or preventing them from discriminating against others, is itself persecution.

Assuming a more rational definition, I actually agree with you.

LostOne4Ever

(9,262 posts)
168. I would define it as
Sat Oct 18, 2014, 03:51 PM
Oct 2014

The systematic mistreatment of an individual or group by another individual or group. Specifically, mistreatment along the lines of unsolicited harassment, isolation, imprisonment, torture, legalized theft, and violence.

Simply not agreeing with a group, or not allowing them to harm others does not count as persecution.

PeaceNikki

(27,985 posts)
153. What Ben Affleck missed in the Islamophobia debate
Fri Oct 10, 2014, 08:13 PM
Oct 2014
The missing piece of this puzzle is a basic assumption about religion Ben et. al. are mistakenly making. Their analogy of religion to race fails. Religion is not like race. Religion is an idea—a faith-based idea lacking any evidence—or a set of ideas to which one willingly adheres. Race can't be changed; religion can. All you have to do is change your mind. Think for yourself and you can be free from religion.

...

Religion does tell us something about a person's mindset; race does not. And our mindset often dictates our action. In short, religion is a far better predictor of belief, and therefore behavior, than race.
.....

Ideas dictate behavior, skin color does not. And religion is a set of common ideas to which one willingly subscribes. The caveat to this, and perhaps the hang up for Affleck, was noted by Maher and has been noted by Harris many times in the past. Religion is often an accident of birth and, in the case of Islam, leaving that religion can be lethal. Maher correctly observed that some Muslims are afraid to leave their religion and are even "afraid to speak out because [Islam]'s the only religion that acts like the mafia, that will fucking kill you if you say the wrong thing, draw the wrong picture or write the wrong book." This spiritual blackmail is disgusting, but it belies the simplicity of treating religion only as a set of ideas. In other words, leaving Islam and saying that you are no longer a Muslim—that you no longer adhere to that set of ideas—is not easy for that religion. However, this caveat is not enough to substantiate Affleck, Kristal, and Steele's claims of bigotry against Maher and Harris.

Affleck himself admitted that we must criticize bad ideas, "of course we do!" Harris and Maher see Islam, as Harris put it, as "the mother lode of bad ideas" and criticize those ideas. But Affleck sees Harris and Maher as attacking Muslims. Harris and Maher are attacking Islam, the set of ideas which Muslims self-identify as subscribing to. Without doubt, there are internecine conflicts within Islam—arguments about which is the true Islam. But both sides recognized this. Harris laid out concentric circles of people who consider themselves Muslims with the ISIS–like extremists at the middle. And Kristal and Steele noted people and friends they know who are in Harris's outer circles. But again, Kristal and Steele's anecdotal evidence does not invalidate Maher and Harris's criticism of ideas: such as the idea that apostasy should be a capital crime. An idea that more than 3/4 of Egyptian Muslims agree with (that statistic actually embodies the differences among Muslims and the anecdotes raised).

Of course Islamophobia exists. A self-appointed vigilante killing a Sikh after mistaking him for a Muslim—he wanted to go out and "shoot some towelheads"—is an example of that fear running wild after 9/11. But criticizing the religion itself, pointing out its barbaric tenets, and explaining the penalties for apostasy are not examples of Islamophobia. What Maher and Harris were saying was not Islamophobic, they were simply speaking critical truths about a set of cruel, misogynistic ideas.


- See more at: http://ffrf.org/news/blog/item/21513-what-ben-affleck-missed-in-the-islamophobia-debate-with-bill-maher-and-sam-harris#sthash.53QeJT85.KylQ0Dvb.dpuf

I agree with Andrew.

Neoma

(10,039 posts)
162. I view Muslims in the same way I view Christians.
Wed Oct 15, 2014, 10:35 PM
Oct 2014

Some are nice, mostly when they keep it to themselves, some are simply misinformed, and some are worthy of being wary of.

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)
166. The prevelance of repulsively right-wing opinions in Islam is currently unique.
Thu Oct 16, 2014, 03:30 AM
Oct 2014

There is a *far* stronger correlation between being a Muslim and holding extremely right-wing and repressive opinions than is true for any other religion.

It is by no means true that all muslims interpret their religion as teaching that women should have a subservient role in society, that homosexuality and apostasty should be criminalised, etc. But it *is* true that those are majority, not minority, opinions in most of the
Islamic world, and significantly more prevalent among Muslims than among followers of any other religion.

It *is* illiberal to hold that fact against the minority of Muslims who are genuinely liberals. But it's just factually wrong to deny that strong correlation, and pretend that the extent to which other religions cause illiberalism and repression is not significantly less.




 

Lee-Lee

(6,324 posts)
169. Any religion like Islam or similar is NOT compatible with liberalism
Sat Oct 18, 2014, 04:53 PM
Oct 2014

The teachings of Islam about women, as followed to different degrees in differing areas, are simply not compatable with progressivism.

In all but a tiny, extremely progressive segment women are treated as second class citizens, forced to wear restricive covering clothing- this practive alone makes Islam oppressive to women, an inherently patriarchal system, and as such incomparable with liberalism and progressivism.

Believing that doesn't make me Isamophobic, it just means I won't turn a blind eye to a system that treats women poorly and won't be quiet about it.

True, there are exceptions. But as a percentage they are small enough and limited to western nations almost exclusively, so they are the outlier and not the majority.

I won't even go into the far worse treatment of women in many areas for a large segment of the followers of the religion.

I don't hate followers of Islam. I do hate how the majority of women in the religion are treated, most with no choice to be able to leave. And anyone considering themselves a liberal or progressive should too.

alarimer

(16,245 posts)
170. Authoritarianism is ALWAYS bad, whether it is religious or otherwise.
Sat Oct 18, 2014, 06:52 PM
Oct 2014

Liberals have always been wishy-washy on cultural relativism.

To me, human rights are human rights the world over, whatever the government, whatever the religion. It is categorically WRONG to subjugate women, whether it occurs in Jerusalem, Kabul, or Brooklyn. It is wrong to issue death threats against an author for the seeming insult he made to your religion. Rushdie was in hiding for years. Not allowing girls to be educated is wrong, or not giving them the option of a fully realized life (Quiverfull idiots). Etc.

Wrong is wrong, wherever it occurs and independent of our own failure to be perfect on this score.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Islamophoia is not a libe...