Sun Jul 17, 2016, 09:50 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
Islam, as it is practiced by a majority of muslims in the world, is a regressive force.Last edited Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:54 AM - Edit history (11)
Majority Muslim countries stand out for their lack of social progress on issues like gay rights and women rights. Generally, progress on such issues is more related to levels of development. The more advanced a nation, the more these nations adopt progressive social policies. The massive exception is places where Islamic political movements hold sway. Despite high levels of economic development, these places remain socially backwards or massively regress when these movements come to power (Turkey, Qatar, UAE etc...).
There are of course very tolerant and accepting strains of Islam, but the undeniable fact is these find very little popularity with the Muslim world as a whole. Denying this does nothing to solve this problem or aid minorities affected by it. ![]() ![]() ![]() "Although Sikhs and Hindus do sometimes commit such murders, honor killings, both worldwide and in the West, are mainly Muslim-on-Muslim crimes. In this study, worldwide, 91 percent of perpetrators were Muslims. In North America, most killers (84 percent) were Muslims, with only a few Sikhs and even fewer Hindus perpetrating honor killings; in Europe, Muslims comprised an even larger majority at 96 percent while Sikhs were a tiny percentage. In Muslim countries, obviously almost all the perpetrators were Muslims. With only two exceptions, the victims were all members of the same religious group as their murderers." What can be done about it? I'm not entirely sure myself, I do know that trying to dismiss this problem as unimportant does nothing to help address it. At minimum, it is intolerable that we consider allies and sell weapons to nations with human rights records like Saudi Arabia. "But Kurska, it is all about Human development and the impact of colonialism" ![]() Alright, lets test that theory. Lets compare areas of the world that have broadly similar HDI's to the middle east; South America, east Asia (excluding Japan/Korea) and South East Asia. https://www.yahoo.com/sy/ny/api/res/1.2/daVWANQcHZI4WAQPYIQvdw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjtzbT0xO3c9ODAwO2lsPXBsYW5l/ ![]() Notice something? Despite having similar levels of human development, the middle east is still massively behind the rest of the world on this issue and I assure you, other issues like this. You can clearly see the HDI plays a role, EXCEPT in areas where political Islam is powerful, where it doesn't seem to matter. The charts speak for themselves. Again, HDI plays a role yes, except in areas where political Islam is powerful, where it doesn't seem to make a difference. The Middle East is even worse than Sub-Shara Africa, which has the world's lowest levels of HDI and was heavily impacted by colonialism. On edit. I'm seeing this argument in particular. "But Kurska, you can't expect a nation that built higher HDI on an export economy to not be a socially regressive hell hole" Okay, lets compare the economic export map of Brazil ![]() To Egypt ![]() One of these nations has gay marriage, the other has homosexuality outlawed. The difference is not an export driven economy largely based on raw materials, the difference is the influence of political Islam. Funnily enough, Brazil and Egypt both have a similar percent of their economy tied to exports (13%). Once more, the difference is the power of political Islam.
|
245 replies, 22127 views
![]() |
Author | Time | Post |
![]() |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | OP |
Scurrilous | Jul 2016 | #1 | |
bravenak | Jul 2016 | #2 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #3 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #4 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #5 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #6 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #11 | |
Gothmog | Jul 2016 | #179 | |
giftedgirl77 | Jul 2016 | #7 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #9 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #12 | |
cprise | Jul 2016 | #77 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #78 | |
cprise | Jul 2016 | #92 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #99 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #226 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #105 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #109 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #113 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #141 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #186 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #143 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #177 | |
Chathamization | Jul 2016 | #195 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #199 | |
840high | Jul 2016 | #54 | |
Chakab | Jul 2016 | #64 | |
cprise | Jul 2016 | #81 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #133 | |
grossproffit | Jul 2016 | #123 | |
Feeling the Bern | Jul 2016 | #71 | |
grossproffit | Jul 2016 | #124 | |
Post removed | Jul 2016 | #73 | |
TipTok | Jul 2016 | #98 | |
JI7 | Jul 2016 | #8 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #10 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #13 | |
ck4829 | Jul 2016 | #15 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #16 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #20 | |
cheapdate | Jul 2016 | #84 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #184 | |
Gothmog | Jul 2016 | #180 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #14 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #17 | |
ck4829 | Jul 2016 | #19 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #24 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #23 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #25 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #28 | |
AntiBank | Jul 2016 | #60 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #154 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #75 | |
1939 | Jul 2016 | #104 | |
Nuclear Unicorn | Jul 2016 | #130 | |
get the red out | Jul 2016 | #131 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #161 | |
enough | Jul 2016 | #18 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #21 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #36 | |
840high | Jul 2016 | #52 | |
AntiBank | Jul 2016 | #62 | |
delete_bush | Jul 2016 | #76 | |
awoke_in_2003 | Jul 2016 | #82 | |
Marr | Jul 2016 | #89 | |
romanic | Jul 2016 | #108 | |
NutmegYankee | Jul 2016 | #110 | |
treestar | Jul 2016 | #134 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #222 | |
leftynyc | Jul 2016 | #135 | |
riderinthestorm | Jul 2016 | #146 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #151 | |
Chathamization | Jul 2016 | #157 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #159 | |
Chathamization | Jul 2016 | #160 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #164 | |
Chathamization | Jul 2016 | #169 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #162 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #163 | |
Chathamization | Jul 2016 | #170 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #191 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #32 | |
JNelson6563 | Jul 2016 | #63 | |
grossproffit | Jul 2016 | #126 | |
NightWatcher | Jul 2016 | #22 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #26 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #30 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #35 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #33 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #38 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #144 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #27 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #102 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #153 | |
bdwker | Jul 2016 | #183 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #29 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #37 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #39 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #43 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #142 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #148 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #40 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #47 | |
MariaThinks | Jul 2016 | #31 | |
MariaThinks | Jul 2016 | #34 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #42 | |
MariaThinks | Jul 2016 | #50 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #51 | |
hrmjustin | Jul 2016 | #83 | |
riderinthestorm | Jul 2016 | #145 | |
840high | Jul 2016 | #53 | |
demosincebirth | Jul 2016 | #95 | |
ck4829 | Jul 2016 | #41 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #44 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #45 | |
kcjohn1 | Jul 2016 | #48 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #49 | |
Gothmog | Jul 2016 | #181 | |
sibelian | Jul 2016 | #150 | |
The Straight Story | Jul 2016 | #46 | |
True Dough | Jul 2016 | #96 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #97 | |
Squinch | Jul 2016 | #129 | |
PlanetaryOrbit | Jul 2016 | #55 | |
jpak | Jul 2016 | #56 | |
muriel_volestrangler | Jul 2016 | #147 | |
AgingAmerican | Jul 2016 | #57 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #65 | |
EX500rider | Jul 2016 | #193 | |
AgingAmerican | Jul 2016 | #206 | |
EX500rider | Jul 2016 | #211 | |
AgingAmerican | Jul 2016 | #220 | |
EX500rider | Jul 2016 | #232 | |
AgingAmerican | Jul 2016 | #235 | |
EX500rider | Jul 2016 | #237 | |
AgingAmerican | Jul 2016 | #240 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #238 | |
alain2112 | Jul 2016 | #58 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #66 | |
mr_liberal | Jul 2016 | #59 | |
closeupready | Jul 2016 | #61 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #72 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #74 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #67 | |
bluestateguy | Jul 2016 | #68 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #70 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #69 | |
ram2008 | Jul 2016 | #79 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #80 | |
Doodley | Jul 2016 | #87 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #90 | |
Doodley | Jul 2016 | #85 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #88 | |
Doodley | Jul 2016 | #91 | |
JI7 | Jul 2016 | #93 | |
Albertoo | Jul 2016 | #100 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #116 | |
hrmjustin | Jul 2016 | #86 | |
cprise | Jul 2016 | #94 | |
hrmjustin | Jul 2016 | #101 | |
DetlefK | Jul 2016 | #106 | |
Seeking Serenity | Jul 2016 | #173 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #107 | |
BlueMTexpat | Jul 2016 | #103 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #111 | |
mwrguy | Jul 2016 | #112 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #122 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #114 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #115 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #119 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #176 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #132 | |
Democat | Jul 2016 | #117 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #118 | |
Angel Martin | Jul 2016 | #152 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #158 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #175 | |
ck4829 | Jul 2016 | #120 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #128 | |
ileus | Jul 2016 | #121 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #127 | |
leftynyc | Jul 2016 | #136 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #140 | |
modem77 | Jul 2016 | #125 | |
Uponthegears | Jul 2016 | #137 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #138 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #139 | |
Uponthegears | Jul 2016 | #149 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #224 | |
Uponthegears | Jul 2016 | #233 | |
no_hypocrisy | Jul 2016 | #155 | |
rjsquirrel | Jul 2016 | #156 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #165 | |
rjsquirrel | Jul 2016 | #167 | |
leftynyc | Jul 2016 | #172 | |
romanic | Jul 2016 | #166 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #168 | |
YoungDemCA | Jul 2016 | #171 | |
backscatter712 | Jul 2016 | #174 | |
Gothmog | Jul 2016 | #178 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #182 | |
Gothmog | Jul 2016 | #185 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #187 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #190 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #197 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #188 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #208 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #219 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #229 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #239 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #241 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #242 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #243 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #244 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #189 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #218 | |
KamaAina | Jul 2016 | #192 | |
TubbersUK | Jul 2016 | #194 | |
Bluenorthwest | Jul 2016 | #196 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #201 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #216 | |
KamaAina | Jul 2016 | #234 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #236 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #198 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #200 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #202 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #207 | |
cpwm17 | Jul 2016 | #203 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #205 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #204 | |
ericson00 | Jul 2016 | #209 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #212 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #210 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #215 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #217 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #221 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #227 | |
guillaumeb | Jul 2016 | #228 | |
randome | Jul 2016 | #230 | |
On the Road | Jul 2016 | #213 | |
MohRokTah | Jul 2016 | #214 | |
Ken Burch | Jul 2016 | #231 | |
struggle4progress | Jul 2016 | #223 | |
Kurska | Jul 2016 | #225 | |
Democat | Jul 2016 | #245 |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 09:52 PM
Scurrilous (38,676 posts)
1. This should go well....
![]() |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 09:56 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
3. its practiced by close to a plurality of the world, not anywhere close to a majority
K/R for your bravery posting this.
Some things to help your case: ![]() (all dark red countries are Muslim majority, and most red countries (dark and light) are Muslim majority. ![]() all countries except Nigera in this map are Muslim majority (Nigeria is plurality Muslim or Christian, bc the ratio is nearly 1:1) ![]() the heavily Muslim MENA region is the most anti-Semitic |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #3)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 09:58 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
4. I meant as it is practiced by a majority of Muslims, not as a majority of the world.
Sorry if that wasn't clear.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #4)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 09:58 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
5. probably should fix the title of the thread
nt/
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #4)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:44 PM
Gothmog (130,700 posts)
179. That claim is simply false and sad
Your claim is so sad and wrong that it is sad.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:03 PM
giftedgirl77 (4,713 posts)
7. Yeah, yeah we get it.... Muslims are bad.
Such tolerant "liberals" around here.
|
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:04 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
9. are Evangelicals bad people or Mormons bad people? No, but progressives criticize their religion
and its political/societal influence a lot, and should absolutely do so. As we can do about Islam.
|
Response to ericson00 (Reply #9)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:05 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
12. +1
I'm no more friendly to Christian majority nations that have backwards social policies, but those are rarely defended on DU. That is the point.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #12)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:50 AM
cprise (8,445 posts)
77. Putting our economic/military strength behind wahabists
and other extremists was very convenient for our "national interests abroad" and cold war policy. Demonizing secular ME states has made the situation much worse. And that's not even getting into the effects of directly invading countries in the region.
I suggest you read up on the history of Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia since the start of the cold war. You should also look at the estimates of dislocation, refugees and premature death since US invasion and sanctions began in the early 90s. Then I would invite you to imagine that the tables were turned. If you're not willing to grant that, then I'd have to question your motives. Anyone who wants to use maps and identity politics to state their case, but averts their eyes from more telling data like body counts and shattered infrastructure is spreading ignorance. You apparently want people to respect gay rights as an accomplished fact, not from any sort of empathy and understanding. Or is your identity politics above the others? |
Response to cprise (Reply #77)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:56 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
78. If the tables were turned, I still wouldn't be stoning women and killing gays.
Look a the history of South America, just as many dictators supported and incredible amounts of foreign intervention. Blaming native sentiments approving of oppression completely on western intervention is asinine.
No, we didn't make things any better. We were supporting outright fascists in South America and yet still they made social progress after those dictators fell. Treating political Islam as something inflicted on Middle East via western intervention is asinine. Political Islam has been the dominant cultural force in the region since Al-Ghazali destroyed the Islamic golden age. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #78)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:01 AM
cprise (8,445 posts)
92. Most of the 20th century would beg to disagree with your tautology.
Muslim countries have had major movements toward democracy and modernization, and imperialists stamped them out. They were considered too much of a threat if they followed their own interests and possibly bolster the situation of our major rivals.
This is like trying to have a discussion with someone who refuses to consider the conditions and atrocities in pre-1917 Russia. Or the west's policy of pitting Chinese warlords against each other, and spreading opium addiction there. In the ME, we have rapidly switched sides back and forth in regional conflicts there. That is considered a form of genocide. In Asia, there are still examples of extreme nationalism that clearly wouldn't have arisen without western imperialism (which is a big word that I realize I'm not supposed to use here, lest I sprout another head--its not used on TV after all) that treated the local populations like pawns or in good times, like children. More recently, our government precipitated a hard-right turn in Iran when our president threatened them with nuclear attack. Blaming native sentiments approving of oppression completely on western intervention is asinine.
Its hard to know what is more asinine: Blaming the west, or trivializing the effects of repeated invasion and blockades and starvation. Or of mindsets like "full-spectrum dominance", "shock and awe" and "the New American Century". Democrats like phrases such as "making America the Indispensable Country", a euphemism for "No non-aligned countries allowed on planet Earth". Some scholars call America a cargo cult; I think there is some truth to that, as its members have very little critical faculty left. At the end of the day, its the same "Native Americans were savages who killed each other" argument. There is no reckoning about technological superiority or any associated sense of responsibility. And no mention of smallpox blankets, either. This time the frontier is the oilfield. |
Response to cprise (Reply #92)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:09 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
99. Pretending that the current social policies are anything but continous from ones thousands of years
is the asinine part. Maybe you should educate yourself about the longer history of that region. The rejection of natural causality by madmen like Al-Ghazali is where this mess started. Their backwardness did not begin with colonialism. Their treatment of women is rooted millennium old tribalism and a focus on a scripture that, while progressive for the time, is woefully out of place with the modern world (like most scripture is).
Again, you want to make this about the west, but it is a thousand years older than either of us. You ignore the fact that western power games have affected every part of the world and yet, this one stands uniquely against the tides of modernization and progress. As if it was the only place to ever have a government overthrown for western corporate and political interests. You're rather speak a thousand words against the west, than utter one phrase in protection of gay people in Saudi Arabia, such drivel is what I really find tiring. Political Islam thrives, because it has resources that we need, but also because it has a legion of well meaning westerners always willing to virtue signal about how terrible imperialism was while Yazidi die on mountains and gays rain from the roof tops. Eliminate our economic need for them by developing our own energy resources and then we can quit coddling their backward ideologies. The sooner we start treating places like Saudi Arabia as the international pariahs they deserve to be the better. |
Response to cprise (Reply #92)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:26 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
226. A truly excellent reply that is obviously not in tune
with the post. Your first sentence in the body of the reply says it all. From the initial division of the Middle East, (Sykes-Picot), through the CIA sponsored intervention in Iran, through the constant interference from 1967 on, the US and Europe have interfered continuously.
|
Response to ericson00 (Reply #9)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:36 AM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
105. Basic difference: No one in the U.S. foreign policy establishment...
Last edited Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:07 AM - Edit history (1) ...is pushing for an all-out war between the U.S. and evangelicals or Mormons.
We don't have large religious denominations claiming that prophecy requires a global confrontation with Mormons or evangelicals. People aren't being beaten or killed in this country because they are Mormon or evangelical or because someone else thinks they are. And we don't have a presidential candidate seeking to ban Mormon or evangelical immigration. It's not about pretending Muslims are infallible saints or that the countries you list are utopias...it's about not wanting to give aid and comfort to hate campaigns. And those countries would likely be much the same no matter which religion ruled them. The repressive features of those societies all predated Islam. Essentially, the issue is a long-standing inclination towards patriarchal sexual paranoia. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #105)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:46 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
109. the US FP establishment is NOT pushing some kind of
"war against Islam;" thats what the Islam-defenders on the left always do; try to shut down debate by implying all critics of Islam are like the most extreme crazies from the annals of Free Republic.
One can criticize Islam and simultaneously abhor hate crimes against innocent people who might happen to be Muslim. On immigration, we also don't have potentially large waves of immigration of Evangelicals and Mormons. |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #109)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:59 AM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
113. I'm not an "Islam-defender"...It's just that I'm not an anti-Islam obsessive.
The countries you list are bad places among other bad places in this world. They aren't uniquely evil, and since the form of Islam practiced in those places wasn't always repressive, the possibility of change from within(the only possible way of changing things in such places)still exists.
And I see parallels in what you are pushing for here with the kind of rhetoric deployed during the decades of western "criticism" of "communism" ![]() The intent is to imply that most or all of the world's problems are the result of the actions of some designated enemy. Nothing good ever comes of trying to break the world up into "good" and "evil" nations. It's fine to criticize any country in which regressive policies occur, but there are also limits A)To the degree we in "the West" are entitled to claim moral superiority over anyone else B)To what we as outsiders can do to change things in other regions. "Communism" didn't end because of outside condemnation. Nothing anyone said about the Soviet model from outside had anything to do with it. It ended because people in those countries rose up to resist it, and because Mikhail Gorbachev made it clear that he would do nothing to preserve the old repression. Something like that is what is needed to change things in Muslim countries. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #113)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:41 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
141. "Nothing anyone said about the Soviet model from outside had anything to do with it. '
I think that is a massively flawed recollection of history. Communism fell, in large part, because of the appeal of the culture and way of life of the first world.
In response to your first point, I find moral relativism very tiring. If you're not willing to admit a country that forbids women to drive or executes gay is a backwards terrifying place, then I don't think you should be comfortable calling yourself a progressive. Either you don't find those issues particularly appealing or you're saying your beliefs are based on something other than a moral foundation. Either answer is troubling. As a gay man, maybe I'm biased because I have skin in the game. But I view a nation that won't murder me for my love infinitely morally superior to one that would. Then again, equivocating about it is certainly easier when you don't have said neck on the line. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #141)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:27 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
186. I agree that those countries are backwards places. Repression anywhere should be denounced.
But that's not what you care about. You just want the west to keep militarily intervening in the Arab/Muslim world, despite the fact that the last thirteen years have proved that western military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world can NEVER lead to liberalism there. You can't introduce tolerance and inclusion as badges of conquest.
|
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #113)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:21 AM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
143. So Ken, please dictate the limits LGBT must respect when objecting to the lash and
to executions. It's cute to declare you have such limits for our freedoms in mind, but you need to specify and state your 'limits'.
Do such limits apply to other minority groups when they object to abuse? Or is it just LGBT? What of South Africa, I personally boycotted them and they returned the favor. Do you claim that was wrong because we were 'outsiders' condemning them? Didn't global pressures help bring about the end of Apartheid? Or is it ok to boycott South Africa but wrong to boycott The Kingdom? |
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #143)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:40 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
177. Wasn't talking about LGBTQ people here, and would never limit your right to speak out.
It's not gays who want a war against the Muslim world, so go ahead and I am in solidarity with you.
What is crucial is to separate principled opposition to repression from calls for military intervention. History has proven that outside military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world can never have anything but reactionary effects. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #113)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:45 PM
Chathamization (1,638 posts)
195. It's just about the same as the rhetoric of colonialism
They're backward, they're less developed, they do barbaric things, therefore their culture is bad and inferior to ours.
|
Response to Chathamization (Reply #195)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:33 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
199. Therefore, we should send in the Marines. n/t.
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:19 PM
840high (17,196 posts)
54. Such tolerant liberals don't mind
crapping on Christians. Double standard.
|
Response to 840high (Reply #54)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:13 AM
Chakab (1,727 posts)
64. I agree that secular liberals, such as myself, should be able to criticize
Islam just as much as we criticize Christianity; however, this "new atheist" bullshit led by people like Sam Harris, who claim that Islam is especially and uniquely bad compared to every other extant religion is problematic.
|
Response to Chakab (Reply #64)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:08 AM
cprise (8,445 posts)
81. Except Muslims aren't making the laws here
They aren't setting the news agenda, or moralizing to me on TV.
Atheists are also barred from holding high public office in a number of US states. So I don't think atheists are legislating my life, either. If I lived in a different country, the focus of my criticism might be different. OTOH, I guess its easy to direct hate and distaste at populations who have almost no power our everyday lives. |
Response to 840high (Reply #54)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:33 AM
grossproffit (5,591 posts)
123. Thank you! ++++++++++
![]() |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:34 AM
Feeling the Bern (3,839 posts)
71. Well, I live in Malaysia for a while. Women are required to dress like muslim women need to
Men can wear anything they want.
Women are forced into marriages here. Men are not. Women can be beaten in public for cheating on their husbands. Men can cheat on their wives. Unmarried Muslims can be arrested and imprisoned for going to a hotel room under prostitution laws if they cannot prove they are married, even if they are boyfriend/girlfriend or engaged. And let's no go into how the Muslim majority here treats its Chinese, Indian and non-Muslim Malay minorities. Oh, I'm Jewish too. If I go to Israel and have an Israeli stamp in my passport, I lose my right to re-enter the country due to their allegiance to the Arab League. Yeah, Malaysia is considered a moderate Islamic country too. |
Response to Feeling the Bern (Reply #71)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:34 AM
grossproffit (5,591 posts)
124. Your post NEEDS to be READ and REREAD
![]() |
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Post removed
Response to giftedgirl77 (Reply #7)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:04 AM
TipTok (2,474 posts)
98. Not all of the people...
Just the ideology they live their live by to varying degrees...
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:04 PM
JI7 (87,946 posts)
8. the concept of separation of church and state is lacking
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:04 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
10. You might as well say "Brown/Black" people are regressive force in world
You do realize majority of muslims live in 3rd world countries, with colonialism history?
Why do you think western world is so progressive? Do you think it has anything to do wealth and education? Why do you think the 3rd world doesn't enjoy the same progressiveness? Diagnosing the problem as you have reminds me so much of the white burden. Next you will be telling us we need to take over those countries for their own benefit. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:08 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
13. I gave a list of many Muslim countries that are far from third world.
Many Gulf nations are incredibly rich. Turkey, Egypt, Lebanon and Jordan are far closer to first in terms of human development than poor regions of Africa.
Nor does it have anything to do with white vs. people of color. Asian Nations like Japan, Korea and China are worlds better on social policies (though far from perfect) than the majority of the Muslim world. Same story from Latin America, even the most economically and developmental backward nations with long histories of colonialism are miles ahead of the Muslim world on human and minority rights. Are you really going to claim that Bolivia is more economically advanced than Egypt? Or that Latin America has seen less influence via colonialism in the past 300 years than the Muslim World? Trying to tie it purely to these issues doesn't mesh with fact. The point is that Muslim majority nations are well behind where their human and economic development says they should be. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #13)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:11 PM
ck4829 (34,496 posts)
15. Those countries certainly are incredibly rich... for some people
Response to ck4829 (Reply #15)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:13 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
16. Mostly for the Native Citizens in areas like UAE.
The natives who still hold the reigns of power and shape the regressive policies than guide their nation. Not the impoverished masses of workers they import, who still probably hold more socially modern views than the rich people they build for.
Meanwhile, the most prolific and violent Islamic radical leaders have generally come from Middle class or very well off families. Bin Laden didn't grow up poor. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #13)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:15 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
20. Wealth in Gulf is not because of advanced soceity
They lucked out in Oil. There is little development in those countries. No democratic institutions or anything like that. If anything oil wealth has become burden.
Majority of countries in sub-saharan countries are non-muslim majority countries, and they seem to have the same lack of progress as those muslim countries. You seem to be seeing what you want to see. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #20)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:16 AM
cheapdate (3,811 posts)
84. +1
I was thinking the same. Gulf countries didn't modernize over time -- it happened virtually overnight not too long ago. They were thrust into modernity from an isolated, non-technological, traditional, pastoral, society in the space one or two generations.
The upheaval of centuries of lifestyle and tradition was tremendous. I'm not religious or conservative. Nor am I naive. Religious fundamentalism is antithetical to my values no matter what its flavor. America and Britain survived waves of fundamentalism during the "Great Awakenings" in the 17th and 18th centuries. In some ways, rebellion against the stifling fundamentalism of the Great Awakening informed the revolution of ideas that led to American Revolution. Maybe the "Islamic World" will get it's shit together. We shall see. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #20)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:20 PM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
184. +1
The contortions re the inconvenient sub-Sahara data are pretty telling IMO.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #13)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:48 PM
Gothmog (130,700 posts)
180. Have you met an ulta-orthodox Jew?
That branch of Judaism does represent may faith any more than the idiots you cite represent Islam. Do you even know any Muslims? I do and work with them both at the party and professional level. Your claims are simply false and based on bigotry and ignorance
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:10 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
14. the colonialism the Muslim world experienced pales in comparison to that of sub-Saharan Africa,
and SSA is mostly non-Muslim:
![]() and we don't see non-Muslim militant groups from Sub-Saharan Africa going around the globe acting violently in the name and/or cause of their religion. Also, if its about wealth, why are so many Islamist terrorists and sympathizers of Islamist views and militancy, on board with evil jihad? |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #14)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:14 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
17. South America is another very good example of this EOM
Response to ericson00 (Reply #14)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:14 PM
ck4829 (34,496 posts)
19. Those countries just imprison gays for years at a time or up to life
![]() |
Response to ck4829 (Reply #19)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:19 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
24. Now imagine there was a HDI and victimization of colonialism map overlaid ontop of that
On HDI SSA would be much darker than the Middle east. South America would be a Similar shade to the middle east.
On colonialism South America and SSA would be much darker. Yet, where is the place you see the vast majority of the red and light red? It isn't the areas with the least amount of human development and it isn't the areas that were impacted most by colonialism, it is the areas where political Islam is powerful. |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #14)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:19 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
23. Your agenda is so obvious, I shouldn't bother
But I will for one post for the benefit of other people to counter your propaganda.
OP topic is social development and progress. Not about terrorism. All the social progress that has happened in the western world has been gradual over the past 100+ years. Most of the muslim and 3rd world countries are just gaining their independence in the last 50-60 years. There is little development. Just 5 years ago gay marriage was being faught in the most rich country in the world. 50 years ago black people couldn't even drink of water faucets. Progress takes time. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #23)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:21 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
25. The Middle East is far behind every single area of the world on these issues
Including areas that have lower GDPs and were more viciously impacted by colonialism.
How long are victims of repression in those countries supposed to wait, before we admit something is seriously wrong here? |
Response to Kurska (Reply #25)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:27 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
28. Why do you think gays have similar rights (no rights) in places like
Jamaica, Singapore, Uganda, ?
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #28)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:11 AM
AntiBank (1,339 posts)
60. the West Indies are very anti gay in cultrure, but many of the smaller islands don't do
much with the laws, and have large gay tourism. Barbados is a perfect example.
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #23)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:45 AM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
154. How have you managed to separate terrorism from social development and progress?
Do you believe the propensity for terrorism is somehow divorced from social progress? Why have you chosen the words: "Agenda" and "Propaganda"? |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:46 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
75. Most Muslims live in lands forcibly converted by Arab/Muslim colonizers. Was it racism?
The Eurasian East of Iran was mostly converted in colonial bloodbaths.
Iran and Afghanistan were Zoroastrian and Buddhist and wre forcibly converted. But the worst conversion massacres occurred on the Indian subcontinent. Pakistan and Bangladesh are now Muslim because Muslim conquerors committed mass genocide. Now, do tell me why criticizing the ideology of Islam is racist. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:35 AM
1939 (1,683 posts)
104. Colonialism
When you blame colonialism for all of the ills in the world.
1. Spain and Portugal were colonized by Islam. 2. southeastern Europe was colonized by Islam. 3. Most of northern Africa was colonized by Islam. 4. India was colonized by Islam. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:59 AM
Nuclear Unicorn (19,497 posts)
130. Why would the colonized have a more regressive view of women, homosexuals and ethnic
minorities than the powers that colonized them?
I suppose it could be called rejection of the colonizer's values but it only hurts their own populations. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:13 AM
get the red out (13,439 posts)
131. Islam pre-dates colonialism
We should NOT take over these countries, I am personally opposed to having anything to do with regressive countries at all.
My hatred of countries that persecute women and gay people probably keeps me from being a real liberal. It is disgusting to call someone a racist for pointing out human rights abuses, and boy do we have them here too! We have some very white Christian sects that treat women and gays like dirt and our so-called civil rights don't apply in these cases, where girls are raised up to be owned as nothing but brood mares and kept out of regular society. Oh, and I never said I liked Christianity, I despise any pre-text for denying people human rights, the fact that this happens in this country doesn't negate the problems pointed out in the OP. And whatever else is thrown at people who dare give a damn about oppression even if it happens in countries with majority "liberal-preferred" religion. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #10)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:22 PM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
161. The western world's progressive values *resulted* in its wealth and education...
You have cause and effect the wrong way round. It is ironic that you hint at the phrase "white man's burden", the protectiveness towards Islam exhibited by some seems to me to be a rather self-absorbed form of white guilt, which I find to be little more than "the white man's burden" turned inside out. It seems that some believe it is impossible for these areas to have unwholesome characteristics that have emerged independently from the West's influence. Naturally this idea is idiotic. Human beings all over the place have a very repetitive tendency to come up with extremely bad ideas all by themselves. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:14 PM
enough (12,998 posts)
18. "Christianity, as it is practiced by a majority of Christians in the world, is a regressive force."
Response to enough (Reply #18)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:15 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
21. DU has no problem admitting that, so I don't understand why the inverse is offensive to people EOM
Response to Kurska (Reply #21)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:34 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
36. Don't you love the double standard?
Criticize Christianity for being misogynistic, homophobic, sometimes violent, and anti-democratic? "YEAH, YOU TELL 'EM!"
Criticize Islam for being misogynistic, homophobic, sometimes violent, and anti-democratic? "OMG, YOU ARE SUCH A BIGOTED SHITLORD!" ![]() |
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:12 AM
AntiBank (1,339 posts)
62. this ^^^^^^^^^^
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:46 AM
delete_bush (1,712 posts)
76. this ^^^^ that^^^^
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:08 AM
awoke_in_2003 (34,582 posts)
82. Bigoted shitlord
You are a wordsmith
|
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:42 AM
romanic (2,841 posts)
108. Yep
Islam really is a sacred cow amongst some liberals.
|
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:48 AM
NutmegYankee (15,812 posts)
110. +1.
It gets old to keep seeing the willful denial of this double standard.
|
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:51 AM
treestar (81,545 posts)
134. That's not what they are critical of
They are using that to attempt to paint one religion as worse than all others and encourage bigotry against that group. They don't really care about the issues they claim to care about. They want to convince others that terrorism is inherent in Islam.
They never do say what we should do about it either. One wonders if it would be a right wing solution. |
Response to treestar (Reply #134)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:19 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
222. The most benign interpretation of what they moght want
is for "The West" to lecture the Arab/Muslim world as if we are entitled to see our region as "their betters".
The least benign would be that their is a desire to restart The Crusades and crush the Muslim world into submission. As if it were even possible to win a conflict like that. |
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:00 AM
leftynyc (26,060 posts)
135. Some on DU feel compelled
to prove Bill Maher right every single day.
|
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:46 AM
riderinthestorm (23,272 posts)
146. + another 1 nt
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:35 AM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
151. It has become pathological.
I don't even see how it effectively contradicts any of the comments made about Islam.
"Christianity is bad, too..." Therefore....? Stop talking about Islam? Because it's as bad as Christianity? By that standard shouldn't we be not be talking about Christianity? |
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #36)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:03 PM
Chathamization (1,638 posts)
157. "How come I can criticize white people but people call me a bigot when I criticize black people?"
For all the words that get spent discussing privilege, it's surprising that so many people still can't grasp the difference between minority groups and majority groups.
|
Response to Chathamization (Reply #157)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:11 PM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
159. "the difference between minority groups and majority groups."
Which is what? When majority groups murder people it's bad, but when minority groups do it it's....? What? What is the difference? There isn't one. There IS no difference. |
Response to sibelian (Reply #159)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:20 PM
Chathamization (1,638 posts)
160. You honestly see no difference between someone saying "stupid white people" and someone saying
"stupid black people"? The former might get you a hide here (or might not), the latter would probably get you tombstoned - and for good reason. Neither bigotry is good, but bigotry against a minority that faces discrimination is a lot worse and a lot more dangerous than bigotry against a dominant majority. If a friend said to you that they really hate Christians you might roll their eyes; if they told you that they really hate Jews you'd probably cut off the friendship. Do you really see no difference?
|
Response to Chathamization (Reply #160)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:42 PM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
164. ...
The topic under discussion is the attitude of Islam towards social policy. Do you think the statement "Islamic states routinely call for the execution of gay people" is equivalent to the statement "stupid black people"? You are aware that the first is a prosaic description of reality and the second is meaningless? The former might get you a hide here (or might not), the latter would probably get you tombstoned - and for good reason. Neither bigotry is good, but bigotry against a minority that faces discrimination is a lot worse and a lot more dangerous than bigotry against a dominant majority. 1 - no, the former wouldn't get a hide of any kind. 2 - what makes you think the last part of your statement is true? You think the danger posed by bigotry depends on the size of the population against which the bigotry is aimed? I'm sorry, but that is not true. The idea has a certain compelling "schoolyard" pseudologic to it but that's not how bigotry works in reality. The danger that a particular form of bigotry poses depends on what the content of the twisted templates that bigots use for misrepresenting the "other" to themselves and what those templates subsequently allow them to do to the object of their bigotry, not the population size of their victims, nor the prevailing social attitude to their victims. From your assertion we can easily dismiss all necessity for feminism in all populations in which there are more women than men. (Incidentally, I am regularly engaged in discussions online with fundamentalist Christians who are happy to tell me they despise gay people. I'm gay. I don't roll my eyes or "tombstone" them (by whatever mechanism may be available...). I inform them of my sexual orientation and ask them to explain what they mean. Invariably they are conflating me with an imaginary version of me that does things they would be quite justified in hating and more often than not leave the discussion on polite terms with me, uttering reassurances that they already understand that it's foolish to make generalisations about people. This is an experience I have yet to see repeated on DU on any subject. You may imagine my surprise, and my increasing cynicism regarding certain other movements.) |
Response to sibelian (Reply #164)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:59 PM
Chathamization (1,638 posts)
169. So if someone said "I hate Christians" you'd treat them the same as somone who said "I hate Jews"?
Do you think the statement "Islamic states routinely call for the execution of gay people" is equivalent to the statement "stupid black people"?
I think my post made it pretty clear that I think "stupid black people" is similar to the statement "stupid white people", other than the fact that one group is a dominant majority and the other a minority that faces general discrimination. Hence why those two statements are treated differently. Your post, and the post I originally responded to, where claiming that, all else being the same, bigotry against both groups is equally problematic. Which is, frankly, nuts. From your assertion we can easily dismiss all necessity for feminism in all populations in which there are more women than men.
I said: "bigotry against a minority that faces discrimination is a lot worse and a lot more dangerous than bigotry against a dominant majority". You seriously think men are generally discriminated against and that women dominate our society? |
Response to Chathamization (Reply #157)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:38 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
162. In Saudi Arabia, they're the majority. See how they act?
It's literally illegal in Saudi Arabia for a woman to drive a car, or even walk to the corner store for a jug of milk without male family escort.
If you're gay, you could be executed. If you dare to say anything critical about Islam, you'll get beheaded in Chop Chop Square. Over there, they're the ones doing the oppressing. |
Response to Chathamization (Reply #157)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:41 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
163. Also, I criticize the religion, and the repressive culture that has formed around the religion.
That's distinctly different from being discriminatory against human beings.
|
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #163)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:05 PM
Chathamization (1,638 posts)
170. If you're not criticizing the people, perhaps don't write "See how they act?" to show us how
terrible the people are.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #21)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:37 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
191. Because those who want to label Islam as "regressive" only want that label put in place
because they want a global war against the Islamic world...a war that(as the last thirteen years of western intervention proves)could never be won and could never make any lives better if it somehow WERE won.
You sound as if you want Islam abolished. That is neither a realistic nor a sane objective. It is, however, an imperialist goal. |
Response to enough (Reply #18)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:30 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
32. You're right about that...
Christianity, OTOH, tends to be sneakier about that. Instead of chopping the heads off of LGBT people, they simply push families to ostracize them and drive them to suicide. Out of love, of course.
Religion in general has a way of being amazingly toxic. |
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #32)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:13 AM
JNelson6563 (28,151 posts)
63. Well said!
Response to enough (Reply #18)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:36 AM
grossproffit (5,591 posts)
126. Seriously? This is posted here almost daily.
![]() |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:18 PM
NightWatcher (39,343 posts)
22. Replace with Religion is a regressive force.
No need today which is worse or better. They all suck.
|
Response to NightWatcher (Reply #22)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:24 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
26. I personally agree religion practiced as public policy is horrible idea
I personally don't see much benefit it from it, but could care less if people choose to go that route.
However identifying Islam as the cause of social problems and terrorism is misidentifying the route cause. Just look at this country. Do you think Christianity was the route cause of slavery? Ignorance and lack of social progress was the cause. You could argue Christianity slowed down progress, but progress was made because there was economic improvement, which allowed the masses to be less ignorant through education, and that is all from democratization of institutions. These things take long time, and unfortunately majority of the world is not even on the 1st base because of lack of development. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #26)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:29 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
30. No sorry, there are other factors in play.
![]() Based on your theory, South America and most of East Asia should have the same level of regressive social policies as the Middle east, this just isn't the case and you know it. HDI plays a role, but denying the influence of political Islam just doesn't mesh with the facts. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #30)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:32 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
35. You don't make one bit of sense
What exactly is your point? What are you defining as regressive social policies?
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #26)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:30 PM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
33. African slave trade was originally and finally a Muslim practice, they started it and
kept it up until the last. Since we're talking and all.
|
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #33)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:34 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
38. What is your point?
BTW how could muslims "start" slavery when islam has only being around 1,500 years? You know they had slavery way way before that including Roman, Greek, Egyptian times...?
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #38)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:37 AM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
144. The post I responded to, you asked if Christianity was the root cause of slavery, I pointed
out that the African slave trade which Europe and the Americans took part in had begun centuries prior to their involvement and that it was started by Arabic Muslims. The African slave trade is obviously a subset of slavery which has of course existed prior to the establishment of either of those faiths and prior to the establishment of the Jewish faith which has a foundation story of liberation from slavery.
The Arabic African slave trade was the first and most enduring African slave trade. That's not 'my point' it's just historical fact. Both religions have texts that support slavery, all three actually. Christians and Muslims exploited those texts ruthlessly and did so for centuries. Muslims were first in the game, Christians excelled in the game. Facts are just facts, kid. If you have to rewrite the facts to sell some narrative you are not talking history but fiction. |
Response to NightWatcher (Reply #22)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:26 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
27. Saying "all religions are just as bad" is nothing but a trope
When religions becomes political forces, they open themselves up to political criticism. The fact is, political Islam has been the most successful political force at preventing social progress in the world for years now.
Political Christianity is dying, because we successfully confronted it. Yet there is zero will on the left to do so with political Islam. |
Response to NightWatcher (Reply #22)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:40 AM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
102. I tend to agree
In sub-Saharan Africa for instance virulent homophobia has been fomented by fundamentalists of all stripes.
Why Africa is the most homophobic continent The share of the sub-Saharan Africa population that is Christian climbed from 9% in 1910 to 63% in 2010, says the Pew Research Centre. Kaoma said: "Religious fundamentalism is strong in these countries. That provides the militant reaction to LGBT rights. One of the fears for fundamentalists is losing grip of the country; they are told they have lost grip because of the gays. They say, 'We don't want to lose Nigeria or Uganda just as our brothers lost America to the gays. If it means killing, we will kill.'" He said homosexuality is a rare point of convergence for Christian and Islamic hardliners.
US evangelicals have been accused of turning their attention to Africa and whipping up homophobia with lurid stories about child molestation, bestiality, rape and deadly diseases. Kaoma reflected: "In America the conservatives are losing. In Africa they are winning and the progressives are on the retreat. People are not paying attention to how world religions are taking advantage of globalisation. Those opposed to gay rights can connect very easily with African groups opposed to gay rights. In the past they had to travel; now they send an email and share tactics. Conservatives argue that gays are out to destroy 'traditional family values'; as Africans encounter fast-changing values, this language sounds very attractive." https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/23/africa-homophobia-uganda-anti-gay-law Where Homosexuality Is Rejected Publics in Africa and in predominantly Muslim countries remain among the least accepting of homosexuality. In sub-Saharan Africa, at least nine-in-ten in Nigeria (98%), Senegal (96%), Ghana (96%), Uganda (96%) and Kenya (90%) believe homosexuality should not be accepted by society. Even in South Africa where, unlike in many other African countries, homosexual acts are legal and discrimination based on sexual orientation is unconstitutional, 61% say homosexuality should not be accepted by society, while just 32% say it should be accepted. http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/ |
Response to NightWatcher (Reply #22)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:38 AM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
153. Buddhism, Taoism and Hinduism
do not habitually call for the persecution of demographics. There are religions that do, and there is ONE, currently, world-wide, which openly practices bigotry against women and gay people as a matter of religious faith with fatal consequences for the persecuted. |
Response to sibelian (Reply #153)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:20 PM
bdwker (435 posts)
183. Oh...just say it.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:29 PM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
29. Here's world opinion on conducting war and murdering civilians in the process:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/157067/views-violence.aspx
While the majority of world citizens agree that military attacks targeting civilians are never justified, a decade after 9/11, there is a wide range in the level of support for this view. A clear majority in Asia and MENA (Middle East and North Africa) find military attacks against civilians unacceptable. This is not surprising considering the acute conflicts raging in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and other parts of the Middle East.
In contrast, regionally, residents of the U.S. and Canada are most likely to say that military attacks against civilians are sometimes justified. Americans are the most likely population in the world (49%) to believe military attacks targeting civilians is sometimes justified, followed by residents of Haiti and Israel (43%). [URL= ![]() ![]() [URL= ![]() ![]() [URL= ![]() ![]() The highly popular 'Muslims are bad' position promoted by many in the US works in favor of those that want to promote more war. Expect much more war in our future with many more Muslims as the victims. |
Response to cpwm17 (Reply #29)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:34 PM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
37. The OP is about Islam which is a school of thought that includes execution of LGBT.
Why do you support such a school of thought? The choices are not war or support horrific atavism and bigotry. There are other choices.
|
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #37)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:38 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
39. In 1950s only 4% Americans approved interracial marriage
What system should we blame for that bigotry?
|
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #37)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:40 PM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
43. The OP was about comparing the character Muslims to other groups.
I provided more evidence. War is a major issue these days, you know.
I can play your game: why do you support war and the murdering of civilians? |
Response to cpwm17 (Reply #43)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:06 AM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
142. The OP is about Islam which is a school of thought that includes execution of LGBT.
Your assertion is that the choices are war or pretending that genocidal and bigoted cultures are super progressive. Those are not the only choices. You present them as such because your objective is to evade discussion of the philosophy being discussed. One has to assume that you put the philosophy above the persons.
The humans most often abused and murdered by humans claiming to follow Islam are also Muslims. I personally support the man being subjected to the lash for being gay and I do not support the man who holds the whip. Both are Muslims. Which do you support? It really can't be both. What you do here is reductive. In the face of very real and important human rights issues you resort to characterization and hyperbole. You seek to obscure the facts that you don't want to admit to. Several Islamic countries execute LGBT and they say they do it for Islam. I do not support that. Do you? |
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #142)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:48 AM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
148. War is the ultimate evil.
Nothing is worse. War is the worst manifestation of bigotry.
The US deliberately seeks out and arms the worst elements in the Middle East. Much of the Middle East had been much more secular and peaceful. Look at the history of the 20th century and who were the most violent then. The US very much helped spread the ideology. The US armed the fundies to fight the commies. The US overthrew Saddam and helped overthrow Qaddafi. The US is currently supporting the fundies against Assad. Most of the crazies were concentrated in US supported Saudi Arabia. With the constant US brutalization of the entire region, that set up an environment where conservative religious views can much more easily spread. http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/12/eye-opening-graphic-map-of-muslim-countries-that-the-u-s-and-israel-have-bombed/ This “three-decade war for domination of the Middle East” becomes apparent when we consider how many Muslim countries the peace-loving United States and her “stalwart ally” Israel have bombed:...
Under Barack Obama, the U.S. is currently bombing Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Libya. According to some reports (see here and here), we can add Iran to this ever-expanding list. [Update: An Informed Comment reader named Shannon pointed out that in fact the United States bombed Iran in 1988 during Operating Praying Mantis, an act that “cannot be justified” according to the International Court of Justice.] Thanks to American arms and funding, our “stalwart ally” Israel has bombed every single one of its neighbors, including Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Egypt. Israel has also bombed Tunisia and Iraq (how many times can Americans and Israelis bomb this country?). The total number of Muslim countries that America and Israel have bombed comes to fourteen: Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Libya, Iran, Sudan, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Tunisia. These very same people that the US has so badly abused are now being condemned on DU for being inferior. With this attitude that is so prevalent in the US, it should not be surprising that the US is the number one war mongering nation in the world. |
Response to cpwm17 (Reply #29)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:40 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
40. "This is not surprising considering the acute conflicts raging
in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, and other parts of the Middle East."
promoted by many in the US works in favor of those that want to promote more war.
right, all criticism of Islam is intended to "promote war." There you have it, OP; in a nutshell, why so many on the left constantly give Islam protected status; they think they're avoiding war, even when the war is waged on us. Some of these types would rather we experience more terror if it means avoiding any use of the military. |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #40)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:49 PM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
47. How have all our wars against the Muslim world turned out?
You know, our aggressive actions against the Muslim world have been going on for many decades. We should worry about our own behavior instead of congratulating ourselves for being superior to those barbarians over there, like Guiliani:
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:29 PM
MariaThinks (2,495 posts)
31. Those stats are scary and what has me concered.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:32 PM
MariaThinks (2,495 posts)
34. Even scarier is what muslims think of other religions in muslim majority countries
there certainly isn't the same tolerance that is expected for islam
|
Response to MariaThinks (Reply #34)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:40 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
42. Do you know the oldest Christian/Jewish communities are in muslim countries?
I agree about how scary these polls are, and something should be done about it.
But Islam has being around for 1,500 years. If this was not an issue 100 years ago, then the primary factor can not be islam. |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #42)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:04 PM
MariaThinks (2,495 posts)
50. have you read the numbers? what is the acceptance of Christianity or Judaism in the
Islamic majority countries versus say the US, England France and their acceptance of Islam?
I think the beheadings throughout history of nonconverts to Islam would repudiate the notion that this is a recent problem. |
Response to MariaThinks (Reply #50)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:14 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
51. It is recent problem because there is nothing inhiretently in Islam against Jews/Christians
You see this in the fact the oldest communities are in Muslim countries.
Only 52% of Americans view Islam favorable. This to me is the more maddening part because there should be little to no excuse for ignorance in such a well developed country. I give a bit more leeway to people in the 3rd/2nd world because the general wide ignorance due to lack of developed institutions and secondly their experience with for example Christians have not being of the best (e.g Iraq war, dominionism, colonialism, etc). |
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #51)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:15 AM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
83. Not only recent. There is a long history of persecutions of non-Muslims in Muslim lands.
It is not only recent.
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #51)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:45 AM
riderinthestorm (23,272 posts)
145. Except that Jews/Christians and that 2nd status thing
And paying the jiyza tax because they're not Muslim.
Stuff like that from the Quran... |
Response to MariaThinks (Reply #34)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:18 AM
demosincebirth (12,384 posts)
95. You are so right!
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:40 PM
ck4829 (34,496 posts)
41. "Asked of Muslims only" I wonder what the results would be if we only asked Muslims about...
Last edited Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:23 AM - Edit history (1) The Iraq War
Healthcare delivery Social stratification Protections for the environment I see things like this from time to time, these polls are almost always invariably about chopping hands off, enacting Shariah, etc. I think a poll like this would not go over very well with almost anyone though. This is potentially problematic for us, we won't find a beneficial solution as long as we convince ourselves Muslims have different mindsets than non-Muslims. "What can be done about it?" Muslims aren't a hive mind and while Muslim majority countries have atrocious practices, they aren't "not us". We should stop treating the Muslim psyche like it is different than the non-Muslim psyche for starters, there is certainly a religious reason and motivation for Islamic violence just like there is when Muslims do good in the world, but it isn't the sole reason, and acting like it is as unhelpful as dismissing it. (There is an unconscious attempt to portray Muslims as 'different' and even 'alien' from us, it's a bias and it's clearly showing both in the polls cited and in this very thread. And here's the problem, we really won't find a solution as long as we think this, as long as we don't want to see commonalities and parallels. A good and happy solution anyway.) |
Response to ck4829 (Reply #41)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:43 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
44. Most sensible answer
The solution is not to look at Islam. Progress comes from 3 things. Economic development. Education. Democratization. Those 3 things feed off each other, and if successful, all these problems go away. Unfortunately this will take time, and we most likely won't see it during our life times.
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #44)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:46 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
45. You can repeat that mantra all you want.
Yes those play a role, but politically regressive forces play a massive role aswell. I provide a very good example in my OP.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #45)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:49 PM
kcjohn1 (751 posts)
48. Your whole arguement is based on the gulf countries
Who are rich not because of development, but because of oil. If oil didn't exist these countries would not be any different from sub-Saharan countries. They basically cheated and skipped 3-4 levels.
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #48)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:56 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
49. No, compare nations like Brazil/Bolivia/Vietnam/ to nations like Egypt/Iran/Algeria/Morocco.
Again, there is a massive difference, despite having a similar HDI.
There are even pockets of progress in Sub-Sharan Africa, which is well below the middle east on these metrics. However, these pockets of progress are almost entirely absent from the Middle East. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #45)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:54 PM
Gothmog (130,700 posts)
181. Go to an ultra-orthdox community is you want to see repression
Do you have any idea as to how regressive and repressive the ultra-orthodox community is in Israel?
|
Response to kcjohn1 (Reply #44)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:33 AM
sibelian (7,804 posts)
150. No.
"Those 3 things feed off each other, and if successful, all these problems go away."
This is exactly what has not been happening in the self-segregated Islamic communities in modern Europe. Radicalisation and more extreme versions of Islam are emerging at higher rates despite the robust establishment of the three processes you mention, therefore there than can be no meaningful causative connection. You have no real basis from which to choose the avoidance of discussing the content of Islam at all. What is it that you think will go wrong if we describe Islam's homophobia as homophobia? |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 10:46 PM
The Straight Story (48,121 posts)
46. It certainly can be. The biggest problem are people who are conservative/Fundamentalist types
Here in the US and in western democracies we have become more liberal and progressive (much to the sadness of republicans and christians).
Islam is a crutch used by many in power to hold onto said power. The only way to change people is education (something else conservatives here in the US hate - they think it is 'liberal'). Wars, hate, etc aren't going to change people. Showing them a better way and explaining why their ideas are stupid will; look at how many christians here in the US now have changed their tune on gays, blacks marrying whites, etc because they became less ignorant through education and showing them that jesus wouldn't kill em dead just because they didn't beat up people who are different than them. The world is seeing the last gasp of fundie islam as technology floods the world with education and showing that people are just people and not tools of made up gods. |
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #46)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:26 AM
True Dough (15,477 posts)
96. Becoming Liberal and progressive...
Yours is one of the best posts in the thread. That "last gasp" of fundamental Islam that you refer to does not make it insignificant, of course. It involves large masses of people still clinging to archaic and pernicious ideology (I won't endeavor to put a number on it). The adoption of more progressive views could take another generation or longer. Change is gradual, frustratingly gradual, even with advancing technology.
I believe socio-economics and politics do play significant roles in some of the abhorrent practices in the Middle East, but Islam, at least with Wahhabists and other fundamentalists, is also at the forefront. That said, Canada has welcomed 28,000 Syrian refugees since last year. Australia has taken in 25,000. No acts of terrorism ensued. Screening was in place through the UN and respective federal governments, so it's not like in Europe where millions of unvetted refugees -- including existing criminals -- flooded over borders. Many of the existing Muslims in Canada, numbering almost 1 million, and in the U.S., estimated at 3 million, embrace Western values as they settle in. Maybe mom and dad retain more hard-line views, but their kids invariably start to blend in with their Western peers. Even if they're wearing hijabs, they become enamored of pop culture and social media, often get involved in organized sports and other extra curricular activities, drink alcohol, engage in premarital sex, befriend gay people, etc. They often drift toward more progressive stances due to peer pressure. Anyway, here's an excellent column by the National Posts' Andrew Coyne with a great overview of where we stand in the war on terror: http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/andrew-coyne-a-war-that-cannot-necessarily-be-won-but-must-be-fought-all-the-same |
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #46)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:56 AM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
97. Yes
Last edited Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:35 AM - Edit history (2) On that subject, this is an interesting study which finds a strong relationship between 'religiosity' and anti LGBT opinions.
(As an aside, I can remember un-wed mothers and homosexuals being personally denounced from a 1960s Scottish pulpit - one of the ugliest spectacles I've ever witnessed.) The Global Divide on Homosexuality Greater Acceptance in More Secular and Affluent Countries The survey also finds that acceptance of homosexuality is particularly widespread in countries where religion is less central in people’s lives. These are also among the richest countries in the world. In contrast, in poorer countries with high levels of religiosity, few believe homosexuality should be accepted by society.
Age is also a factor in several countries, with younger respondents offering far more tolerant views than older ones. And while gender differences are not prevalent, in those countries where they are, women are consistently more accepting of homosexuality than men. There is a strong relationship between a country’s religiosity and opinions about homosexuality.2 There is far less acceptance of homosexuality in countries where religion is central to people’s lives – measured by whether they consider religion to be very important, whether they believe it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral, and whether they pray at least once a day.
In Israel, where views of homosexuality are mixed, secular Jews are more than twice as likely as those who describe themselves as traditional, religious or ultra-Orthodox to say homosexuality should be accepted (61% vs. 26%); just 2% of Israeli Muslims share this view.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2013/06/04/the-global-divide-on-homosexuality/ |
Response to The Straight Story (Reply #46)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:59 AM
Squinch (48,356 posts)
129. Straight, we have, at long last, found a subject on which we wholeheartedly agree. Great post.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:21 PM
PlanetaryOrbit (155 posts)
55. 6 percent?
Why is Turkey so anti-Christian? Compared to the other polled countries, it's an anomaly.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:23 PM
jpak (41,486 posts)
56. This is bullshit
Saudi Arabia should be at the top of the list.
not Turkey (at least 4 now) |
Response to jpak (Reply #56)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:48 AM
muriel_volestrangler (99,534 posts)
147. The top of which list?
There's a list on the OP in which Turkey is less demanding of draconian punishments than other Muslim majority countries. Are you saying Saudi Arabia is more liberal than that?
In practice, the non-appearance of Saudi Arabia in poll results is probably because the country is too authoritarian to allow polls to be freely answered. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:27 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
57. The more we attack them, the more they radicalize, the worse they get
We need to stop meddling in their affairs, invading their countries to steal oil, and slaughtering their people. Iraq is a perfect example of a secular Islamic country radicalized by US policy.
|
Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #57)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:15 AM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
65. Iraq gives us one more country that we can look down on as inferior to us.
Never mind the fact that it was us that destroyed it in the first place, totally unprovoked.
The neocon list of nations to destroy are Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Iran. The US is making great progress in destroying those nations and we can expect more progress on that front in the future. We will continue to bomb them, and also arm and support many of the worst elements in the region. As the region gets progressively worse, we will make that an excuse to declare ourselves superior and also an excuse for some more bombings. |
Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #57)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:02 PM
EX500rider (8,972 posts)
193. "invading their countries to steal oil" Where did that happen?
Far as i know all countries we "invaded" still sell their oil for money.
|
Response to EX500rider (Reply #193)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:56 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
206. It happened in Iraq
Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #206)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:08 PM
EX500rider (8,972 posts)
211. Iraq sell their oil on the open market like every other oil producing country.
crude oil export revenues accounted for over two-thirds of GDP in 2009
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_industry_in_Iraq |
Response to EX500rider (Reply #211)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:18 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
220. Am I supposed to believe
That you think 'Stealing oil' means digging up the oil fields and moving them out of the country?
![]() Oil companies were allowed to come to the oil ports and pump all the oil they wanted, unmetered. Otherwise known as stealing it. |
Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #220)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:12 PM
EX500rider (8,972 posts)
232. So you think we invaded the country for a few months of free oil? lol
Response to EX500rider (Reply #232)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:50 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
235. Oil was still being stolen unmetered as of 2007
Iraq was a massive GOP money laundering operation, as well as an opportunity to steal natural resources.
Do you believe GW Bush had honorable motives for his invasion? Lemme guess, the WMD were moved to Syria, right? ![]() |
Response to AgingAmerican (Reply #235)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:20 PM
EX500rider (8,972 posts)
237. "Oil was still being stolen unmetered as of 2007" Any reputable links for that?
Response to EX500rider (Reply #237)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:52 PM
AgingAmerican (12,958 posts)
240. Why are you so defensive of the Bush administrations Iraq invasion?
And subsequent oil theft?
The Bush Administration GAO admitted in 2007 that unmetered oil was still being stolen 100,000 to 300,000 barrels a month. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2005/jul/07/iraq.features11 http://www.alternet.org/story/51218/how_much_iraqi_crude_oil_is_being_stolen_mystery_of_the_missing_meters http://content.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1622785,00.html http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=17056&Cr=Iraq&Cr1=#.V42jorgrKUk |
Response to EX500rider (Reply #232)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:22 PM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
238. The UK had very keen interest in it I'm ashamed to say
US and Britain wrangled over Iraq's oil in aftermath of war, Chilcot shows
But Sir David Manning, foreign policy adviser to Tony Blair, told Condoleezza Rice, the US national security adviser, in Washington on 9 December 2002 that Britain still wanted more of the spoils.
“It would be inappropriate for HMG [Her Majesty’s government] to enter into discussions about any future carve-up of the Iraqi oil industry,” he said. “Nonetheless it is essential that our [British] companies are given access to a level playing field in this and other sectors.” UK government officials called in a team from BP for a briefing about the prospects for the Iraq energy sector on 23 January 2003, two months before the invasion, which ended in May. Later that year, the British oil company started a technical review of the Rumaila field, the second largest in the world. By 2009 BP had won a service contract to raise production on the field, which has 20bn barrels of recoverable oil. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/jul/07/us-and-britain-wrangled-over-iraqs-oil-in-aftermath-of-war-chilcot-shows |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Sun Jul 17, 2016, 11:57 PM
alain2112 (25 posts)
58. Invade their countries, execute their leaders, and convert the people
While that scheme would certainly take care of the Islam issue, it's not what I would expect from a group of leftists.
|
Response to alain2112 (Reply #58)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:19 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
66. who ever said that? Not everyone who criticizes any aspect of Islam is a warmonger!
that's just a way to shut down the conversation.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
closeupready This message was self-deleted by its author.
Response to closeupready (Reply #61)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:34 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
72. That's why nuclear, solar and fracking are such good ideas
To eliminate the need for/reliance on repressive theocracies like Qatar and Saudi Arabia
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:21 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
67. the data you show is also a good case to
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:26 AM
bluestateguy (44,173 posts)
68. Islam has not yet modernized as many other religions have
But overwhelmingly most Muslims reject terrorism.
|
Response to bluestateguy (Reply #68)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:32 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
70. See the OP: most Muslims do not reject oppression of gays and free speech
And a large minority can be found supporting terror acts if they further the cause of Islam
(this cause always being presented as defensive, as we all know Islam cannot be offensive and imperialistic) |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:28 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
69. Worse: Islam has been devised as an regressive force extremely difficult to reform
The original text, the Quran, contains hundreds of verses which proclaim Muslim supremacism over non believers, admonishng believers to subjugate the inferior infidels. A programmatic religious 'racism' = Religionism?
And the system has been locked by the original guru by saying the text is from god and absolutely intangible. Then come the hadiths or Sunnah. These books were written 200 years after the Quran by a handful of people who went to see people who were supposedly descended (after about 10 generations) of the people who knew Muhammad. To think that, filtered by the consensus opinion of ten successive generations, the words of these 'witnesses of the future' has even a minimal degree of reliability is a joke. If it were not enough, it's is reported the caliphs routinely paid the composers of these hadiths to post-justify their own beliefs and attitudes. But, believe it or not, this Sunnah ragtag bunch of grandmothers' gossip is revered by the Sunni (of the Sunnah) 90% majority of the Muslim world. And the Sunnah is a text surpassing the Quran in medieval brutality. So we have two regressive texts, one violent, vague and irreformable, and the extremely violently medieval Sunnah which constitutes the cultural identity of the Sunni majority . Good luck reforming this poisoned chalice. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:05 AM
ram2008 (1,238 posts)
79. The numbers don't lie. Islam Is REGRESSIVE
Worse than evangelical Christians. Sorry, it's the truth, no need to walk on eggshells around the topic.
You can blame it on whatever you want, but the root cause is teachings that are incompatible with a free and open society, just like with radical Christians. |
Response to ram2008 (Reply #79)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:07 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
80. And the causes go back hundreds of years
Rooted in medieval rejections of natural causality and rationalism following an age of impressive scientific achievements. Not just to the last 100 of Colonialism.
This is a point many people fail to understand. |
Response to ram2008 (Reply #79)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:19 AM
Doodley (8,820 posts)
87. Most Muslims just want to live in peace. Deal with it.
Response to Doodley (Reply #87)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:36 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
90. Death penalty for gays, adulterers and blasphemers is peace?
OK then. Some kind of eternal peace..
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:17 AM
Doodley (8,820 posts)
85. So why are crime rates a small fraction in Muslim nations, compared to USA?
Response to Doodley (Reply #85)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:29 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
88. Maybe because reporting crimes gets you in trouble?
Raped women forced to marry their attacker? Maybe best not to report the rape.
A Dutch woman raped in Dubai or Qatar was sentenced for illicit extra marital sex. If Islam was teching good behavior, how come young males sexually frustrated in Muslim societies have such an abnormally high frequency of rape offense? Rape cases in Norway and Sweden are disproportionately perpetrated by Muslim offenders. Islam doesn't provide a moral compass, Muslim societies just provide a deterrent to report crime. |
Response to Albertoo (Reply #88)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:38 AM
Doodley (8,820 posts)
91. Where's the moral compass in Christianity.
Just said to love your enemy, turn the other cheek, give to the poor, that a rich man cannot enter the kingdom of God. The Christian Right does not tend to believe that if the overwhelmingly support Republicans who are pro=war, pro=guns, anti-healthcare and aid for those who need it. I ask again, where is the Christian moral compass?
We could use 10,000 examples of Americans killed by guns in the past year. Don't tar a whole religion with the same brush. |
Response to Doodley (Reply #91)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:03 AM
JI7 (87,946 posts)
93. we already know right wing christians suck and it's good we have separation of church and state
Response to Doodley (Reply #91)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:16 AM
Albertoo (2,016 posts)
100. I don't care. And "turn the other cheek" and "slay the infidels" are two very different ideologies
I do not think Christianity provides a useful moral compass beyond common, shared humanist values.
But I'm pretty sure Islam instills destructive, hateful supremacist dictates in its unfortunate believers. |
Response to Doodley (Reply #91)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:14 AM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
116. I truly don't know
Here in the UK we have a long and honoured history of purported (often strident) Christians like Thatcher, Blair and Cameron supporting, appeasing and selling arms to the execrable Wahabists.
Moreover, the general population (64% self-identified Christian) doesn't particularly care. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/25/david-cameron-brilliant-uk-arms-exports-saudi-arabia-bae David Cameron boasts of 'brilliant' UK arms exports to Saudi Arabia
David Cameron has boasted of his efforts to help sell “brilliant things” such as Eurofighter Typhoons to Saudi Arabia on the day the European parliament voted for an arms embargo on the country over its bombardment of Yemen. Britain’s relations with Saudi Arabia are based on extensive business and investment links, including defence sales and a secretive security connection that is routinely cited as vital by the UK government – especially when public opinion hones in on the Gulf country’s strict legal system.
In 2006 the Saudi government threatened to end cooperation with Britain unless the serious fraud office dropped its investigation into BAE Systems over the al-Yamamah arms deal. It was shelved by Tony Blair on national security grounds. David Cameron alluded to the same argument recently when asked about UK willingness to rock the Saudi boat over the planned execution of Ali Mohammed Baqir al-Nimr, sentenced for allegedly taking part in a protest when he was 17. “It’s because we receive from them important intelligence and security information that keeps us safe,” the prime minister told Jon Snow on Channel 4.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/oct/13/uk-saudi-arabia-relationship-under-growing-strain http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/iraq-crisis-how-saudi-arabia-helped-isis-take-over-the-north-of-the-country-9602312.html |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:18 AM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
86. Islam is in need of a reformation towards the progressive end.
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #86)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:08 AM
cprise (8,445 posts)
94. But repeating the West's history would make them
...a very big threat. No?
And how does a population that is constantly interfered with (to put it mildly) find the generosity of spirit to pursue progressive goals? |
Response to cprise (Reply #94)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:50 AM
hrmjustin (71,265 posts)
101. You're talking politics, I am talking religion.
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #86)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:37 AM
DetlefK (16,423 posts)
106. Islam needs a Renaissance.
Christianity has had the Renaissance: An age of great intellectual curiosity, an age of inter-mixing between Christianity and pagan ideas and influences, an age of massive artistic productivity, the age that laid the philosophic groundwork for what would eventually become "science" 100 years later, and so so much more... Powerful cultural memes that echo in western society to this day.
(That isn't to say that everything was great: Such scholars threaded a thin line between being a celebrated revolutionary thinker and being a heretic who should be put to death.) The christian Renaissance was triggered by an intellectual hunger for the wisdom of the past, for babylonian, egyptian and greek sources. (Especially egyptian and greek.) And by the 15th century, such old books became available to european scholars by way of trading-routes with the Byzantine Empire. And after some re-interpretation (and mis-interpretation due to dating-errors) it was found that this wisdom was complementary to christian wisdom. What Islam needs is such a trigger, such a desire for new ideas, for ideas outside of the realm of what's considered acceptable, an age of cultural and intellectual experimentation and curiosity. There have been islamic Renaissances in this or that country, but they were small and isolated and without wider significance. |
Response to DetlefK (Reply #106)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 02:12 PM
Seeking Serenity (2,660 posts)
173. Islam already had its Renaissance, sadly
It kinda peaked back in the 12th century. Read up on Averroes (Ibn Rushd), the Andalusian polymath, for example.
It was because of more liberalising Muslim thinkers who said there was no conflict between science and faith that Wahhabism came about in the 18th century to combat. Unlike the Counter-Reformation in western Christendom, which failed to halt the Protestant Reformation, Wahhabism was Islam's counter-reformation, and sadly, it succeeded. |
Response to hrmjustin (Reply #86)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:38 AM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
107. True. But confrontations started by outsiders can't cause that. n/t.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:10 AM
BlueMTexpat (15,168 posts)
103. You have just won a
one-way trip to my Ignore List. Buh-bye.
|
Response to BlueMTexpat (Reply #103)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:53 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
111. Truth hurts EOM
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:58 AM
mwrguy (3,245 posts)
112. Islamophobic Underground
![]() |
Response to mwrguy (Reply #112)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:31 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
122. Yeah, sorry for posting polls and actual hard data EOM
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:02 AM
randome (34,845 posts)
114. All of the 'hat religions' are regressive.
That includes Judaism, Mormonism, Islam, Catholicism, etc. Every religion that depends in large measure on identifying oneself through clothing or ritual sets us apart from one another.
They are the 'cross' we must bear to advance as a species. [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:13 AM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
115. In case anyone is wondering, here's the reason the OP started this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512257760
The OP here and the OP there are trying to push Hillary to go anti-Muslim. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #115)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:30 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
119. its all a conspiracy!!!
but its not; read the effin polling;
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2016/images/07/17/rel8a.-.2016.pdf "Now I'm going to mention a few issues and for each one, please tell me if you think Hillary Clinton or Donald Trump would better handle that issue if they were elected president. ..."
"Terrorism" 7/13-16/16 45% Hillary, 51% Trump, remainder "neither/no opinion" "ISIS" 7/13-16/16 40% Hillary, 53% Trump, remainder "neither/no opinion" Trump has zero FP experience; he should not be winning on those issues. People just don't want to see newspapers printing the words "President Trump." If the GOP can paint Democrats as soft on terror, than we'll have to get used to terms like that, "Trump Administration," etc. |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #119)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:38 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
176. Not a conspiracy...an agenda...a bigoted agenda...
We don't need to co-opt Trump's anti-Muslim agenda any more than FDR needed to intern the Japanese(historical fact: the main reason FDR did that was that Earl Warren, the 1940 GOP vice-presidential candidate and current governor of California, was trying to make himself into "presidential timber" by pushing for the persecution of Japanese-Americans).
There is a need to be against any type of repression...but that isn't what this OP and the other OP are actually about. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #115)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:27 AM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
132. Ah, thought I'd seen this before somewhere fairly recently n/t
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:14 AM
Democat (11,617 posts)
117. DU loves extreme right wingers
As long as they aren't Christian and white.
|
Response to Democat (Reply #117)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:26 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
118. well said; and its sad and makes progressives look like jokes
Response to ericson00 (Reply #118)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:38 AM
Angel Martin (942 posts)
152. represents the thinking of too many on DU
![]() |
Response to Angel Martin (Reply #152)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:07 PM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
158. I just googled Dixon Diaz - the author of that cartoon
![]() |
Response to Angel Martin (Reply #152)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:35 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
175. Poignant
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:46 AM
ck4829 (34,496 posts)
120. Orientalism is alive and well
Response to ck4829 (Reply #120)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:41 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
128. Edward Said was anti-American and an apologist for terror
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:49 AM
ileus (15,396 posts)
121. But Islam is our best weapon against Christianity here at home.
Last edited Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:58 AM - Edit history (1) American muslim are our voters, and we need those votes.
|
Response to ileus (Reply #121)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:41 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
127. Please tell me ur being sarcastic;
Because what good is a Dem party if an increasing portion of its constituency is virulently anti-choice, and anti-woman? Sure they'll vote Dem for now, but either they'll push Democrats in a more socially regressive direction, or they'll go Republican again (as they did before 2004) once the GOP starts courting them.
|
Response to ileus (Reply #121)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:14 AM
leftynyc (26,060 posts)
136. You should be embarrassed by that
post. Islam is, by a magnitude of 100, way more regressive than Christianity. I would think that American Muslims want to keep the jihadis out every bit as much as everyone else does. If not, they don't belong here.
|
Response to leftynyc (Reply #136)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:30 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
140. for a second, I thought he was being satirical;
sadly, I think I was wrong.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:34 AM
modem77 (191 posts)
125. Death penalty for leaving? It's like the East Germany of religions.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:17 AM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
137. I was looking at your maps
If I were to draw the same conclusions from those maps about countries with black-dominated rule that you draw from those maps about countries with Muslim-dominated rule, I would be correctly identified as a flaming racist.
Fortunately, I do not. On the other hand, I am not pushing an anti-Muslim agenda, nor am I willing to divide important Democratic Party constituencies to achieve it because THAT WEAKENS OUR PARTY. |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #137)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:26 AM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
138. no you couldn't because its not nearly as uniform red, and
nor do black-majority countries have these kind of apostasy laws:
![]() nor is sub-Saharan Africa (black Africa) as virulently anti-Semitic: ![]() etc. and Islam is not a race or ethnicity! It is a religion, and for adults, religion is voluntary, race is never voluntary. |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #137)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:29 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
139. You've managed to entirely miss the point
Name a developed black ruled country with regressive social policies, I can name 5 regressive high or medium HDI nations that are dominated by political Islam. The point is that social progress is deeply tied to economic progress, except in areas with strongly regressive political forces tied to religion (the best example is Islam).
That is why calling Islam a progressive political force is laughable. Political Islam is the force that links all these inexplicably strongly second or borderline first world nations that still have social policies out of the third world (which could actually be an insulting comparison to many third world nations, that still manage to be more socially advanced than places like Saudi Arabia). |
Response to Kurska (Reply #139)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:25 AM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
149. Oh no, I've got the point entirely
Some people are trying to pit supporters of one set of core Democratic issues, i.e., LGBT rights, women's rights, the sanctity of the establishment clause etc., against supporters of another set of core Democratic issues, i.e., the eradication of racism, religious tolerance, opposition to imperialism/military occupation, etc..
It is some people's hope that those of us who see racism and/or religious tolerance as important issues will EITHER accept semantic nonsense about "political Islam" (shorthand for saying it really isn't about religious bigotry) and/or (disturbingly ethnocentric) crap about Saudi Arabia being "more socially advanced" than the countries of sub-Saharan Africa and separate out our hatred of anti-Islamic bigotry from our hatred of racism etc. OR that those Democrats for whom LGBT rights and/or women's rights are their primary issues will see us for whom racism and/or religious tolerance is a primary issue as their enemies. It is Machiavellian divisive BS whose only goal is to foment hatred of Islam. |
Response to Uponthegears (Reply #149)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:23 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
224. Right as a gay man there is no way I'm concerned about the plight of gay people in those countries
I just want oil. How dare I be concerned about those people.
You find objective information offensive, so you shout imperialist. It is name calling, not an argument. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #224)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:25 PM
Uponthegears (1,499 posts)
233. If you keep building straw men
at this rate, horses will starve all over the world.
It hasn't been much more than 20 years that gay people could be jailed for physically expressing their love in this country. When I was born, they were still chemically castration gay men. I watched one of my best friends die of AIDS and his parents wouldn't even go to his funeral. I hate to burst your bubble but we ain't that progressive here. So no I am not buying it, particularly when your little diatribe hardly stopped at the persecution of gay people but was instead a wholesale attack on Islam. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:46 AM
no_hypocrisy (42,741 posts)
155. It seems to me that Islam was largely ignored until 1979 when the Iranians
protested the Shah and then took control of the American Embassy in Tehran and took hostages.
The only reference until then was "I Dream of Jeannie" and that was Hollywood altogether. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:01 PM
rjsquirrel (4,762 posts)
156. Nice to see straight up religious bigotry
doing so well on DU.
|
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #156)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:44 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
165. Oh please. Islam is damned deserving of the criticism it gets. n/t
Response to backscatter712 (Reply #165)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:51 PM
rjsquirrel (4,762 posts)
167. Oh please
Your bigotry is deserving of every consideration.
See how that works? Oh please, don't bother trying to convince me to condemn a billion fellow humans. |
Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #156)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:27 PM
leftynyc (26,060 posts)
172. Ask yourself why
no whining about religious bigotry when the target is something other than Islam. ONLY Islam gets a pass from supposed progressives. It's time for you and others to ask yourself why that is.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:46 PM
romanic (2,841 posts)
166. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me and others
why Islam gets such a pass for being so regressive. And no, the "All Abrahamic religions are..." b.s. doesn't work with me; that's a lazy answer.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 12:56 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
168. Eleven Things Women in Saudi Arabia Can't Do:
http://www.theweek.co.uk/60339/eleven-things-women-in-saudi-arabia-cant-do
Eleven things women in Saudi Arabia cannot do
Feb 4, 2016 Ban on women entering a Starbucks store in Riyadh is latest in long line of restrictions Women in Saudi Arabia claim to have been temporarily banned from entering a branch of Starbucks in the capital Riyadh. A sign was placed in the window of the coffee shop saying: "Please no entry for ladies only send your driver to order thank you", after a wall designed to segregate men and women was reportedly removed during renovations. A customer who tweeted a picture of the sign, which was written in English and Arabic, said the store "refused to serve me just because I'm a woman and asked me to send a man instead". In a statement, the shop said: "We are working as quickly as possible as we refurbish our Jarir store, so that we may again welcome all customers in accordance with local customs." ... Other things women cannot do in Saudi Arabia...
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 01:22 PM
YoungDemCA (5,714 posts)
171. The parroting of right-wing tropes about Islam on DU is a curious thing
Especially from a painfully chauvinistic worldview.
"Those backwards cultures are fundamentally incompatible with liberal values" - said from a comfortable perch of wealth, education, and other forms of privilege which are all protected by American military might and cultural imperialism. People who are culturally provincial and incredibly ignorant about the world's second-largest religion really should check themselves before they regurgitate ridiculous and offensive inanity about said religion. But I expect many DU'ers who read this to condemn me for being a "liberal apologist for a backwards and repressive religion." ![]() |
Response to YoungDemCA (Reply #171)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:22 PM
backscatter712 (26,355 posts)
174. If the shoe fits...
Telling women they're required to wear burqas when it's 120 degrees out, or that they're not allowed to drive cars, or that they can't leave their house without a chaperone IS backwards, and IS fundamentally incompatible with liberal values. Having women who have been raped thrown in prison for "adultery" IS backwards and IS incompatible with liberal values. Executing people for the crime of being gay, or for the crime of disbelieving in their skydaddy IS backwards, and incompatible with liberal values.
Not all Muslims peddle that backwards shit, but a hell of a lot of them do, with the power of government force. Let's face it. Islam needs a reformation. Badly. If pushing feminism and LGBT rights is "cultural imperialism", then ALL GLORY TO THE EMPIRE! |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 03:42 PM
Gothmog (130,700 posts)
178. What an amusing but wrong post
I am Jewish and the Jewish ultra orthodox are just as crazy as the idiots cited in the OP. The Jewish ultra orthodox no more represent my faith than the nut cases cited in the OP represent Islam. I am very good friends with a number of Muslims and they disagree strongly with the sad and wrong claims made in the OP
|
Response to Gothmog (Reply #178)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:12 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
182. Is there an 'Islamic underground' that tries to change these beliefs that gays should be killed?
I'm sure there is but we never hear about it, probably because such a group would be in danger for their lives.
As for the Jewish orthodoxy, there have been some isolated stabbings of innocent people by them, and of course they believe they have a moral right to others' land but they are a subset, are they not, of the larger Jewish religion, and not the centerpiece, supported and encouraged by national leaders, correct? [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #182)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:25 PM
Gothmog (130,700 posts)
185. The ultra-orthodox has a tremendous amount of influence in Israel
Bibi's ruling coalition is based on and relies on the support of many of the fringe groups.
|
Response to Gothmog (Reply #185)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:31 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
187. The ultra-orthodoxy of just about every religion should be condemned.
However, it's only the ultra-orthodoxy of Islam that goes about stoning gay people and keeping women repressed. Whereas if a woman of the Jewish orthodoxy wanted to leave, she would be able to, right?
Isn't that a significant difference between the two? [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #187)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:34 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
190. Only because the second orthodoxy does not as yet have the power to do so.
There have been violent fundamentalist attacks against gays in Israel, and women have been assaulted for sitting in the same part of a city bus with Orthodox men.
|
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #190)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 06:59 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
197. Bleh. I did not know that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr]
|
Response to randome (Reply #182)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:31 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
188. There actually are LGBTQ activists in a lot of Arab/Muslim countries.
It's not as if no one in those places is against repression.
Those countries(largely due to their retention of pre-Islamic repressive social customs that also existed when those places were Christian(most of the Arab world)or Zoroastrian(Iran) or Buddhist(Afghanistan). It's reasonable to call for those customs to be changed(neither honor killings nor FGM are called for in the Koran). It is not reasonable to fight(as the logic of the OP implicitly calls for us to do)for the abolition of Islam as a set of religious traditions. The first objective is human and decent; the second is imperialism(and, if achieved in name, could ONLY lead to a massive increase in terror attacks from those who felt forced to give up their faith by outsiders). |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #188)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:00 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
208. The abolition of a belief is a non-starter.
But two things western civilization has going for it that the Muslim world does not is 1. the separation of church and state and 2. free speech.
These are not practiced to perfection by any stretch of the imagination but in general, they serve to differentiate ourselves from other cultures and they are, on balance, imo, things to celebrate and to promote. [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #208)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:15 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
219. Ok.
But that mainly means the Arab/Muslim world needs a secularizing movement that isn't tied to "The West".
It has to develop from within. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #219)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:39 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
229. It won't happen from without, I'm sure we agree on that.
And it's probably happening as we speak, just so slowly that we can't appreciate it. The Internet unites the world at the same time it encourages us to withdraw into our own comfort zones. But the genie can't be put back into the bottle. We will advance as a species, and that means putting the final nail in the coffin of the GOP, as well, another repressive culture that is slowly losing power.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #219)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:23 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
239. So sit on our hands and pretend it isn't happening
Got you.
|
Response to Kurska (Reply #239)
Tue Jul 19, 2016, 04:13 AM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
241. No. Support those who work for secularism and tolerance in those countries.
But let people IN those countries take the lead and don't tie it into conquest and the discredited "clash of civilizations" thing.
Regional history since 2003 proves that Western military intervention can never achieve lead to secularism, tolerance or democracy. Instead, try things that might actually make a difference, such as freezing all Western assets of the countries that fund ISIS(like Saudi Arabia and possibly Turkey), or pushing the Iraqi government to stop making life hard for the Sunni minority(the rise of ISIS was largely a result of how Iraqi Sunnis were treated. |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #241)
Tue Jul 19, 2016, 06:00 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
242. I really don't think you understand we're in agreement on some parts
Bloodshed is obviously useless
1. Develop alternative resources aggressive to replace our dependence on foreign oil. 2. Stop arming and stop protecting regimes like Saudi Arabia 3. Start treating them like the international Pariahs they deserve to be. Stop meeting their diplomats and stop cooperating with them. Lets see how long those states keep up their current line without our protection. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #242)
Tue Jul 19, 2016, 04:44 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
243. What makes me suspicious is that you've posted these inflammatory graphics
historically, imagery like that is exactly the kind of thing that leaders who want wars use to create war fever.
And that you've focused on Islam as a religion rather on other factors...such as the fact that the customs you and I both denounce in the countries called "Muslim" existed before those countries were Islamic(sadly, they existed when most of the Arab world was Christian, which by itself discredits the idea, held by some, that crushing Islam as a set of religious traditions would end those customs and turn those countries into bastions of liberal tolerance). There is cultural work for change, a cultural reformation led by people in the Arab/Muslim world, that is needed. As to getting those countries anathemized...well, nice thought, but most of them have oil. How likely is it that we'd see politicians anywhere in "the West" taking measures that would drastically drive up gas and heating oil prices? |
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #243)
Wed Jul 20, 2016, 02:22 AM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
244. Tribalism predates any religion
But the modern justification for it is based on religion, especially in the middle east.
I posted them, because I think many people sleep walk through their life thinking Islam is something besides what it is. I know people like to side with the victim and the middle east has been victimized by the west, but it does the world no good to pretend religious radicalism isn't widely supported in most Muslim countries. But yes, like I said, invasions and arms doesn't solve cultural issues. |
Response to Gothmog (Reply #178)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:33 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
189. Thank you for that post.
You clearly get it:
The issue is fundamentalism in ALL forms. |
Response to Gothmog (Reply #178)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:15 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
218. Except the overwhelming support for ultra-orthodox like positions in the Muslim world.
Arguing against polls with anecdotes is only acceptable evidence for someone who has a bias going in. Of course there are good and moderate Muslims, but the fact is that these positions find little support in the Muslim world as a whole. Political Islamic power representing fundamentalism is the overwhelming line of thinking in the Muslim world.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 04:44 PM
KamaAina (78,249 posts)
192. But Kurska, you could replace Islam with most other religions and the statement would still be true
except maybe Buddhism, Judaism and the Baha'i Faith.
So why parrot right-wing talking points by sinling out Islam? ![]() |
Response to KamaAina (Reply #192)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:41 PM
TubbersUK (1,427 posts)
194. All too true - sadly.
I just came across this:
Head of Russian Orthodox Church warns equal marriage is a sign of the apocalypse
The head of the Russian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow, has condemned the advance of marriage equality in the West, calling it a symptom of the apocalypse. While giving a sermon in Red Square’s Kazan Cathedral today, Patriarch Kirill said of the growing number of countries accepting same-sex marriage around the globe: “This is a very dangerous and apocalyptic symptom… It means that people are on the path of self-destruction.” While some countries debate extending marriage rights to same-sex couples, Russia has recently enacted a law banning “propaganda of non-traditional relations”. The law has caused concern among the LGBT community, and activists say it has already encouraged homophobia and will continue to do so while it stands.
The Russian Orthodox Church has been a key supporter of the law, and Patriarch Kirill has maintained the Church’s view that homosexuality is a sin – although he has cautioned against punishing people for their sexuality “Morality is either absolute or it does not exist. If you excuse homosexuality, why not excuse paedophilia?” he said in an interview with the German magazine Der Spiegal.
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2013/07/21/head-of-russian-orthodox-church-warns-equal-marriage-is-a-sign-of-the-apocalypse/ The head of the Russian Orthodox Church has partially blamed an increased acceptance of homosexuality for the rise of Isis.
Patriarch Kirill claimed he was not surprised that some Muslims are flocking to Isis' quasi-religious state as a way of escaping the “godless civilization” that celebrates events such as Gay Pride. In an interview published on the Church’s official website, Kirill said: “[Isis] is creating a civilization that is new by comparison to the established one that is godless, secular and even radical in its secularism.” In August 2013 he declared same sex marriage to be a sign of the impending Apocalypse and urged people to do more to combat the rise of gay rights.
“This is a very dangerous apocalyptic symptom, and we must do everything in our powers to ensure that sin is never sanctioned in Russia by state law, because that would mean that the nation has embarked on a path of self-destruction,“ Christian Post quoted him as saying. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/head-of-russian-orthodox-church-blames-the-rise-of-isis-on-the-godless-worlds-acceptance-of-a6818826.html |
Response to KamaAina (Reply #192)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 05:55 PM
Bluenorthwest (45,319 posts)
196. Anyone who does not call out all the religions that push bigotry is parroting the right wing.
The attempt to say 'Well Johnny does it too so it's not right to criticize anyone who does it' is bogus. Single out the bigots. Why should bigotry be defended?
|
Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #196)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:46 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
201. Yes, single out the bigots. Absolutely.
Just don't align with people like Cheney and Netanyahu when doing so.
That's all anybody is saying. |
Response to KamaAina (Reply #192)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:13 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
216. Because it is true of most religions, but saying it of Islam is offensive here.
If I had said so about Christian political power, would you be asking me this question?
Even more so, do people still die brutally at the hands of my Islamic political power? Then what good person would be silent on the issue? This isn't about left or right, it is about human rights. |
Response to Kurska (Reply #216)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 10:27 PM
KamaAina (78,249 posts)
234. Harping on Islam exclusively is offensive.
Fox and its friends have done a good enough job demonizing Islam that they hardly need our help.
![]() |
Response to KamaAina (Reply #234)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 11:20 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
236. How bout not criticizng Islam at all, while one attacks ever other organized religion.
Is that offensive? I see that a lot here, yet never have I seen someone call that offensive.
Apparently saying anything negative about Islam, without including the disclaimer of (all religions) is offensive. Never have I seen something that be requested of posts about other religions. So strange. Again, you don't have an argument. All you can do is harp on about a political viewpoint being unacceptable. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 07:12 PM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
198. Not surprisingly, the OP is written by a supporter of oppression and aggressive wars against Muslims
as evidenced by Kurska's support of Israel's 2014 atrocities against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, who are some of the most oppressed people in the World:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025323095 |
Response to cpwm17 (Reply #198)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:37 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
200. you've just demonstrated one of the sad reasons too many
so-called progressives give Islam special treatment other religions don't get; hatred of Israel as some kind of "legitimate" reason for Muslim dislike of America and radical Islamist attacks, as well as oppressive societies.
|
Response to ericson00 (Reply #200)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:48 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
202. Not "hatred of Israel"...justified anger at the oppression of Palestinians.
It was never reasonable to expect the Arab/Muslim world to recognize and make peace with Israel without the occupation bwing brought to an end and the illegal West Bank settlements being removed.
|
Response to Ken Burch (Reply #202)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:00 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
207. why does no other religious group around the world take such extreme offense
to geopolitical conflicts like the broader Muslim world re Israel/Palestinians? Where was mass global hatred for Indonesia re East Timor from Christendom? Or terror attacks against East Timor to that cause? Or such a campaign against Sudan re South Sudan?
Also, how the hell in any way is any Muslim in Malaysia or Saudi Arabia affected by Israel/Palestinian? Or Mauritania? Even if they feel a certain way about it, the intensity and focus, as well as far more monolithic opinion on it than from Jews on the issue, is just sick. |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #200)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:49 PM
cpwm17 (3,829 posts)
203. Support for atrocities is not a liberal value.
It's not surprising that supporters of blanket hatred against over a billion people on this Earth also defend war crimes.
|
Response to cpwm17 (Reply #198)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:55 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
205. Please do not attempt to introduce reality into this thread.
It interrupts the flow of the meme.
|
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 08:54 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
204. 1) How many nuclear devices have been used by a majority Muslim country?
2) Is the country with the largest war budget in the world a majority Muslim country?
3) Is the country with the largest number of imprisoned citizens a majority Muslim country? 4) Is the country founded on slavery and genocide really a role model? A country were non-whites are still discriminated against? Shall I continue? No, there is really no point in attempting to respond to such a ridiculous post, however thinly disguised as an honest attempt to discuss the issues. |
Response to guillaumeb (Reply #204)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:04 PM
ericson00 (2,707 posts)
209. who started the slave trade in Africa? Which country was the last to formally abolish slavery?
and are you claiming racial discrimination doesn't exist in the Muslim world? Remember the anti-Condi cartoon from the Palestinians that depicted her as a monkey?] Or was it ok because she was in the Bush admin?
See: https://web.archive.org/web/20060808210743/http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=77392&d=5&m=8&y=2006 http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/06/black-iraqis-face-discrimination-racism.html https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline#1900.E2.80.93present (note which countries were the last to formally abolish slavery) |
Response to ericson00 (Reply #209)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:08 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
212. I am waiting for the answers to my questions.
Something tells me that I will wait for a long time.
Remember the cartoons in the US media that portrayed Bush as a monkey? Remember the racist, anti-Semitic cartoons from Charlie Hebdo? Feel free to answer my initial questions any time. |
Response to guillaumeb (Reply #204)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:07 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
210. Does any of that matter to people stoned to death for loving the 'wrong' person?
Does any of that matter to women who give up their dreams because they're told to do so?
The Muslim world has had its share of atrocities throughout history. The human species is both contemptible and heroic. That passes through all cultures. [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #210)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:10 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
215. Which does not erase what is said here.
Any women in the US who have given up their dreams?
Any anti-gay bigotry? Still waiting for the answers to my questions............ And waiting....................... And waiting............................ |
Response to guillaumeb (Reply #215)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:13 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
217. If a woman in a western country wants to walk away from a religion or a marriage, she can.
She can't do that in many Muslim nations. Arguing about whether or not America is perfect is a non-issue. We agree on that.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #217)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:19 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
221. Unless the woman is beaten or killed in the attempt.
Witness the large number of domestic violence incidents that are reported in the US press.
What I reject, and object to, are simplistic attempts to frame Islam, or any religion, as "THE PROBLEM" when there are similar problems all over the world. If rape were a problem confined to Muslim countries, if intolerance were a problem confined to Muslim countries, if misogyny and anti-LGBTQ issues were unique to Muslim countries, that would be an issue. But sadly, as you point out, they are not. So why then, if all of these problems are common to countries everywhere, post something like this? What motivates the poster to do this? |
Response to guillaumeb (Reply #221)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:28 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
227. I agree, religion is not the problem. Culture is. Killing for minor offenses is codified in law.
That's the major difference between western culture and religious-oriented cultures.
Maybe a hundred years from now historians will relate how quickly the world became more united because of the Digital Age but to us, here on the 'ground', it seems to be moving at a glacial pace with hardly any progress to note. I think progress is being made, but it's like the moving of an hour hand. You can't catch the moment when it changes, you just know that it has. [hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to randome (Reply #227)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:37 PM
guillaumeb (42,641 posts)
228. 100% agreed. Well, 99%.
Saudi Arabia is truly a feudal kingdom. Paradise for misogynists. And many African countries have no real structure. Is that due to repeated Western interference and colonialism? Perhaps.
But ,in my view, any posts that attempt to "explain" everything through the lens of Islam or general religious intolerance are too simplistic and agenda-driven by far. |
Response to guillaumeb (Reply #228)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:44 PM
randome (34,845 posts)
230. It's ALWAYS more complicated than at first glance, isn't it?
I just had this same conversation with one of my daughters and she pointed out that, in effect, killing of minorities has become 'normal' in America when you look at unjustified cop killings. It may not be codified in law but is the effect the same? And your point about the prevalence of domestic violence edges into that, too. You both have a point. And I have no answers, just speculation.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Everything is a satellite to some other thing.[/center][/font][hr] |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:08 PM
On the Road (20,783 posts)
213. I Thought The Era of Evangalizing the Globe
ended a century ago. And if conversion is not the goal, I don't understand what this is about.
Problem with trying to convert Muslims is that Islam provides for the individual, family, and community in ways that most nonreligious systems don't even attempt to understand or address. Probably more than any other system of thought, Islam has to change from inside. Because neither you or I have a say in it. |
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:09 PM
MohRokTah (15,429 posts)
214. As a rule, I have a great dislike philosophically for all of the Abrahamic religions.
They are all regressive, IMO. The degree to which they are regressive is identical among the most fundamentalist of all three. I see little difference between Wahabists, Sikrikim, and Army of God other than some base religious references. All three are equally terrorist.
|
Response to MohRokTah (Reply #214)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:46 PM
Ken Burch (50,254 posts)
231. Thank you for that post. n/t.
Response to Kurska (Original post)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:23 PM
struggle4progress (114,739 posts)
223. I'm gonna guess you don't know a majority of Muslims in the world and so
are ill-prepared to speak about them
|
Response to struggle4progress (Reply #223)
Mon Jul 18, 2016, 09:24 PM
Kurska (5,739 posts)
225. Who does? That is why opinion polling is useful.
Do you think the polls in the OP are incorrect?
|
Response to struggle4progress (Reply #223)
Wed Jul 20, 2016, 04:55 AM
Democat (11,617 posts)
245. I'm gonna guess you don't know a majority of Republicans in the world and so
are ill-prepared to speak about them
|