It's not about terrorists, it's about theocracy

[Augustus]

what's the definition of "radicalized" that you used to make this assessment?

Any standard usage of of the term.

What definition do you use for it to make sense?

 

[Sabour]

What Sharia-related errors did he make?

As far as I watched, he did not talk about the Sharia.

But to saying "muslims who are in support of applying sharia law in the Islamic countries are radicals" is a very ignorant statement.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

No doubt in my mind that this is true. Islam is absolutely anti secularism, and anti human rights.

A Christian should be the last one to use that argument against another religion. Every time Christianity is not kept in place by the law, you guys go nuts with your discrimination, persecution, genocide, murderous moral panics, hysteria, etc. That nuttiness was the biggest part of the reason why Enlightenment secularism came about in the first place.

 

[Moishe3rd]

No, you are completely wrong. The cultural differences between the Jews and Hitler were too much for Hitler to take, and so he took it upon himself to extinguish the Jewish people from this planet.

Your belief is factually incorrect.
The Jews of Germany and Austria in particular; the two major countries where Hitler would have been in contact with Jews, were nearly 100% assimilated into German culture. They were, in most ways, far, far more "German" than was Hitler.
Jew hatred was canonized by the Roman Catholic church and continued through the "Enlightenment" as the Western world had created the ideas that "Jews" were somehow a separate race of people no matter their origins; ethnicity; nationality; or indeed, their religious beliefs.
The was nothing that distinguished a German Jew from a German non Jew.

And - here is why Hilter hated Jews:

 

[Moishe3rd]

I stopped at 143 million Indonesians are "radicalised" which was the first stat he quoted.

Do you understand why this figure is ludicrous to anybody utilising the slightest amount of critical thinking?

He stated that according to one poll, nearly 50% of Indonesian Muslims support strict Sharia Law - or about 100 million Indonesians.
And that 70% blame Israel, the United States or somebody else for 9/11, which is where he gets his 143 million figure as "radicalized."

Which part don't you like? The numbers? Or the idea that over 100 million Indonesian Muslims who believe in the application of very strict Sharia and/or believe that Muslims did NOT commit 9/11 should be consider "radicalized?"

If you don't like radicalized, what term would you use to describe these Indonesian Muslims?

 

[icehorse]

Any standard usage of of the term.

What definition do you use for it to make sense?

first google hit for me:

cause (someone) to become an advocate of radical political or social reform.

Let me ask this, are there aspects of Sharia that you think would represent radical departures from western secularism?

 

[icehorse]

As far as I watched, he did not talk about the Sharia.

But to saying "muslims who are in support of applying sharia law in the Islamic countries are radicals" is a very ignorant statement.

Wait, in post #99 you said he didn't know what Sharia was? So, you don't think the basic tenets of Sharia are radical?

 

[Augustus]

He stated that according to one poll, nearly 50% of Indonesian Muslims support strict Sharia Law - or about 100 million Indonesians.
And that 70% blame Israel, the United States or somebody else for 9/11, which is where he gets his 143 million figure as "radicalized."

Which part don't you like? The numbers? Or the idea that over 100 million Indonesian Muslims who believe in the application of very strict Sharia and/or believe that Muslims did NOT commit 9/11 should be consider "radicalized?"

If you don't like radicalized, what term would you use to describe these Indonesian Muslims?

first google hit for me:

Let me ask this, are there aspects of Sharia that you think would represent radical departures from western secularism?

As I mentioned before, 70+% of Indonesians voted for secular political parties.

This is a very strange way to choose to voice your support for "strict Sharia law".

What Sharia law means to Muslims is often pretty different from what it means to non Muslims.

Also looking at polls regarding countries you are totally unfamiliar with can give you a very misleading picture. Ever been there?

There are radicals in Indonesia, but there certainly aren't 140 million of them.

It's hyperbolic tabloid journalism, not a serious attempt at critical insight.

 

[Moishe3rd]

As I mentioned before, 70+% of Indonesians voted for secular political parties.

This is a very strange way to choose to voice your support for "strict Sharia law".

What Sharia law means to Muslims is often pretty different from what it means to non Muslims.

Also looking at polls regarding countries you are totally unfamiliar with can give you a very misleading picture. Ever been there?

There are radicals in Indonesia, but there certainly aren't 140 million of them.

It's hyperbolic tabloid journalism, not a serious attempt at critical insight.

I don't understand.
Do you believe that there is NO description to describe Muslim Indonesians who do not believe that Muslims committed 9/11?

 

[Augustus]

I don't understand.
Do you believe that there is NO description to describe Muslim Indonesians who do not believe that Muslims committed 9/11?

Naive?

Honestly, the international political knowledge of many Indonesians is practically zero (a legacy of the educational system) and what they have is often rooted in conspiracies (again a legacy of the nationalistic education system and political system).

Something like 25% of French people hold the same belief.

Are 25% of frenchies "radical Muslims"?

 

[icehorse]

Augustus,

You're treating Sharia as if it's another religious shell game, for which no definitions can be made. This is a common tactic and I think it's counter-productive. Can we at least agree that the foundational idea of Sharia is fundamentally counter to the idea of secularism?

 

[Sabour]

Wait, in post #99 you said he didn't know what Sharia was? So, you don't think the basic tenets of Sharia are radical?

When you say radical, what definition is in your mind ?

 

[Augustus]

Augustus,

You're treating Sharia as if it's another religious shell game, for which no definitions can be made. This is a common tactic and I think it's counter-productive. Can we at least agree that the foundational idea of Sharia is fundamentally counter to the idea of secularism?

Can you explain why radicalised Sharia supporters voted for secular parties first?

 

[icehorse]

When you say radical, what definition is in your mind ?

As I said back in post #106:

radicalize: to cause (someone) to become an advocate of radical political or social reform.

 

[icehorse]

Can you explain why radicalised Sharia supporters voted for secular parties first?

I'm going on the assumption that you're discussing Indonesia at this point? If so, at around 1:50 of the video he says (more or less) :

Almost 50% of Indonesians support strict Sharia.

Remember that voting is mostly orthogonal to Sharia vs. secularism.

 

[Augustus]

I'm going on the assumption that you're discussing Indonesia at this point? If so, at around 1:50 of the video he says (more or less) :

Remember that voting is mostly orthogonal to Sharia vs. secularism.

The guy in the film knows nothing about Indonesia, I'm guessing you are not particularly familiar with Indonesia.

Which is why I'm asking you why so many Sharia fanatics in Indonesia are voting for secular parties. Does this not seem a bit incongruous to you?

Over 70% of Indonesians voted for secular political parties (Golkar, PDI, Demokrat) whereas less than 30% voted for nominal Islamists (PKS, PAN, PPP).

Why should anyone believe that lots of people who support strict Sharia don't actually vote for it?

 

[icehorse]

Hey Augustus,

Well we have two data points:

1 - The video guys claims 50% want Sharia.
2 - You claim that only 30% voted for Islamists.

Those two categories don't perfectly overlap, but even if I grant you your 30% number, that's still a lot of Islamists.

 

[Sabour]

As I said back in post #106:

"radicalize: to cause (someone) to become an advocate of radical political or social reform."

I asked you to define the word radical, and you used the word radical in the definition? Seriously ?

 

[Marsh]

As far as I watched, he did not talk about the Sharia.

But to saying "muslims who are in support of applying sharia law in the Islamic countries are radicals" is a very ignorant statement.

Sharia law supports stoning of women for consensual sex, it supports the cutting off of hands for theft, it supports the killing of homosexuals, and I believe it is not unreasonable to suggest many Muslims in countries practicing Sharia law also support these things. In my books this makes them radical Islamists. Certainly these are medieval practices that have been brought into the modern age. Any country supporting these practices is backward, and any people or culture supporting these practices is backward. All of this needs to be outlawed. Do you agree?

 

[Marsh]

A Christian should be the last one to use that argument against another religion. Every time Christianity is not kept in place by the law, you guys go nuts with your discrimination, persecution, genocide, murderous moral panics, hysteria, etc. That nuttiness was the biggest part of the reason why Enlightenment secularism came about in the first place.

The problem of persecution by religious groups is always at its worst anytime those groups gain political power. Currently, in our present age, it is Islam that has political power and it is abusing that power by subverting human rights. The examples are legion.