Supporting Muslims as members of our communities

[Lyndon]

What does any of this have to do with the deaths of 50 innocent people in NZ, you act like it was their fault for being Muslims, that's what severe Islamophobia is about.

 

[Notanumber]

Is this man correct about CNN?

 

[Notanumber]

Should people like these men be condemned for sharing the truth?

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

What does any of this have to do with the deaths of 50 innocent people in NZ, you act like it was their fault for being Muslims, that's what severe Islamophobia is about.

What does discussion of Islam & Islamism have to do with the Christchurch massacres? Muslims are already weaponising the shootings and using it to shut down debate about extremism.

Link: Bristol university Islamic Society gets talk on extremist speakers cancelled

And I defy you to either point out one instance where I've said the Christchurch victims are to blame; or to retract that baseless claim and apologise. It's a rhetorical challenge as I know you're incapable of doing either.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Is there a problem with that? Worse than promoting Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, Paganism, etc.?

Considering how much of an ideological threat Islam & Islamism are to paths like yours and mine, yes. I would say it's a problem.

 

[The Emperor of Mankind]

Oh, I know. I'm just sick of people acting like Islam is some evil religion. I notice the Muslim posters have been MIA lately. This board has a problem with Islamophobia. Can't even have a thread for sympathy with the victims without the haters ruining it.

And I'm sick of Pagans, LGBTs, Jews, Buddhists, atheists etc all working to silence legitimate criticism of a religion which is, where its adherents are in a majority, almost uniformly an existential threat to these demographics and their ability to worship/live freely.

LGBTs: 'Don't be Islamophobic, show tolerance and love!'

The Muslim response: *Indulges in gay indoctrination/propaganda myths* 'Don't teach my kids that gay people exist!'

 

[Earthling]

I wish harm to no one. I am sorry for everyone's losses in this truly tragic and horrific event.

Well put, I agree completely.

That said, unreformed Islam is a truly horrible ideology. Whether wittingly or not, when Muslims enter non-Muslim communities, they are tacitly asking us to accept all the intolerance that comes with Islam. This is not acceptable.

Other religions have reformed. So must Islam.

This, I don't agree with so much. At least not with the conclusion. I would agree that Islam can be a truly horrible ideology, and that it is up to us to reject it, but calling for reformation of a religion we aren't a part of is just asking for trouble. Sooner than you think you may find yourself in the same position. Islamic reformation is up to Islam. It's dangerous and selfish to suggest reformation, especially based upon cultural mores. A culture can reject the ideology but once you start dictating a change and what that change will involve it doesn't take a genius to foresee the possibility of the same response to your own. You can't accept your own while denying another's.

 

[icehorse]

Well put, I agree completely.

This, I don't agree with so much. At least not with the conclusion. I would agree that Islam can be a truly horrible ideology, and that it is up to us to reject it, but calling for reformation of a religion we aren't a part of is just asking for trouble. Sooner than you think you may find yourself in the same position. Islamic reformation is up to Islam. It's dangerous and selfish to suggest reformation, especially based upon cultural mores. A culture can reject the ideology but once you start dictating a change and what that change will involve it doesn't take a genius to foresee the possibility of the same response to your own. You can't accept your own while denying another's.

I'm an advocate for modern human rights. I would encourage you to read the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR), and ask yourself who would oppose such a benign and common sense document? Well it turns out that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), opposed it. This 57 member nations organization opposed the UDHR and drafted instead a Sharia-friendly version called the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI).

 

[Earthling]

I'm an advocate for modern human rights. I would encourage you to read the Universal Declaration on Human Rights (UDHR), and ask yourself who would oppose such a benign and common sense document? Well it turns out that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC), opposed it. This 57 member nations organization opposed the UDHR and drafted instead a Sharia-friendly version called the Cairo Declaration on Human Rights in Islam (CDHRI).

Okay, but I don't think it matters much. An advocate of modern human rights? What does that even mean? How vague, convoluted and temporal is that? The point is, today it's them and logically you conclude from there, tomorrow it will be you. Modern human rights should be no different than ancient human rights. The trouble is you get groups of people who decide what they think is right applies to everyone else without recognizing that the same applies to them. So . . . majority rules? Mob rules?

If you were born after 1933 your parents signed away your human rights upon your birth. Every law you follow, every fine you pay, every loan you take out, every license you apply for negates the rights you may have had since then. It's about consent. But I digress.

Conspiracy truth of the day (some people might call it, facts and evidence) . . .

 

[icehorse]

An advocate of modern human rights? What does that even mean? How vague, convoluted and temporal is that? The point is, today it's them and logically you conclude from there, tomorrow it will be you

The UDHR is not vague, it's very clear. And it's certainly a far better set of guidelines than any ancient scripture is.

 

[Earthling]

The UDHR is not vague, it's very clear. And it's certainly a far better set of guidelines than any ancient scripture is.

That's your opinion. That's the point.

 

[icehorse]

That's your opinion. That's the point.

Are you arguing from the perspective of moral relativism? Christianity? Make a stand, man.

 

[Firemorphic]

Other religions have reformed. So must Islam.

Beating the same old dead horse. Considering you like forced reformation so much, you seem to be advocating for Wahhabism, which repeats all your same talking points but from the opposite point of view as you.
"The friend of my enemy is my friend", well, you seem to be siding with the terrorists (who aren't as free-ranged as you think to begin with) whether you realize it (and are being intellectually dishonest, knowing better) or not.

 

[Earthling]

Are you arguing from the perspective of moral relativism? Christianity? Make a stand, man.

The trouble with arguing from a perspective as you seem to be suggesting is that you have to take the good with the bad. Oh, sure, they may say, I'm all for Christianity . . . meaning the inquisition, crusades, apostasy, etc. So I have to ask myself, in fact, I have to look up "moral relativism" and what, generally, that is thought to mean. Because what I think it is and what you think it is and what they think it is might be altogether different.

Make a stand? That's what I'm doing. So when they come and get me you will know that it won't be long before they come and get you. You see, now?

Okay . . . there's a group of teenagers down the road from where I live that have the peculiar hobby of gathering together at the local park and beating the hell out of one another. Now our society frowns upon that sort of thing. Killing a million innocent children in the Gulf War, not counting anyone under 5 years of age, that's cool, but this?! Who wants to go to the park and see that?

But then, if you can manage to think for yourself . . . down the road a ways, who the hell wants to see me at the beach in a speedo?! Not me, that's for sure . . .

Social warriors are the most dangerous people.

 

[icehorse]

Beating the same old dead horse. Considering you like forced reformation so much, you seem to be advocating for Wahhabism, which repeats all your same talking points but from the opposite point of view as you.
"The friend of my enemy is my friend", well, you seem to be siding with the terrorists (who aren't as free-ranged as you think to begin with) whether you realize it (and are being intellectually dishonest, knowing better) or not.

As I've said many, many, many times, I advocate for the modern human rights as described in the UDHR. The leaders of the Muslim world rejected the UDHR and created the CDHRI in its stead.

So it's simple, I'm for the UDHR and against the CDHRI, and so I'm against the world's Muslims leaders.

 

[icehorse]

The trouble with arguing from a perspective as you seem to be suggesting is that you have to take the good with the bad. Oh, sure, they may say, I'm all for Christianity . . . meaning the inquisition, crusades, apostasy, etc. So I have to ask myself, in fact, I have to look up "moral relativism" and what, generally, that is thought to mean. Because what I think it is and what you think it is and what they think it is might be altogether different.

Make a stand? That's what I'm doing. So when they come and get me you will know that it won't be long before they come and get you. You see, now?

Okay . . . there's a group of teenagers down the road from where I live that have the peculiar hobby of gathering together at the local park and beating the hell out of one another. Now our society frowns upon that sort of thing. Killing a million innocent children in the Gulf War, not counting anyone under 5 years of age, that's cool, but this?! Who wants to go to the park and see that?

But then, if you can manage to think for yourself . . . down the road a ways, who the hell wants to see me at the beach in a speedo?! Not me, that's for sure . . .

Social warriors are the most dangerous people.

I've been clear on my values, you have not.

 

[Earthling]

As I've said many, many, many times, I advocate for the modern human rights as described in the UDHR. The leaders of the Muslim world rejected the UDHR and created the CDHRI in its stead.

So it's simple, I'm for the UDHR and against the CDHRI, and so I'm against the world's Muslims leaders.

Well, what world leaders are you for and what, essentially, is the difference?

 

[icehorse]

Well, what world leaders are you for and what, essentially, is the difference?

I'm for the UDHR. What are your values?

 

[Earthling]

I've been clear on my values, you have not.

My values are my own, to whom do your values belong? You seem to think that Muslim values are yours to decide. That's what I take issue with. As I've said, I find many Muslim practices to be, well, to put it honestly, corrupted. Like in the past and to a certain extent to a lesser degree "Christian" practices are corrupt.

If a Muslim woman chooses to be a Muslim you think that should be outlawed because of a history of misogyny? That's her choice isn't it? Like . . . well . . . take me for example. I'm homosexual, inactive because of my Bible beliefs. I haven't had sex in over a decade. Now aside from any charges made against my irritable disposition, do you think a reformation on the Biblical Christian position on homosexuality is necessary because this decade, unlike the previous ones, are inhumane?

You would tell them and me what we should think? How we should behave? Our policy? What? because it doesn't agree with your own modern day values?

I don't think so.

 

[Earthling]

I'm for the UDHR. What are your values?

Nothing to do with the United Nations, that's for sure. A limp and ineffective puppet of the Anglo American World Power.