This week in Islam

[DogOnPorch]

But can you?

[Marocc]

DoP saw Nazis on tv. The idea is still cool — talking against what no longer exists because other people died and killed for it, is almost like being a warrior of a kind. The defender of all that is good.

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, Marocc said:

DoP saw Nazis on tv. The idea is still cool — talking against what no longer exists because other people died and killed for it, is almost like being a warrior of a kind. The defender of all that is good.

 

No...as many here already know, I had a German relative that worked for the Grand Mufti in exciting locations such as Yugoslavia and Hungary. 

[Guest]

34 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Those are the kind you know, the kind you judge and/or the kind you consider 'evil' (with evil not entirely fitting as a word)?

Now you're getting there.  Those are ones I mean.  I've often stated so.  (amongst other who do similar things)

 

37 minutes ago, Marocc said:

What is?

You mean what does?  Who knows? 

 

38 minutes ago, Marocc said:

You mean murder them or just lend one to them? I don't think killing a person makes one evil.

Evil might apply to those who take actions.  But evil means different things to different people.  Look at Blaise Pascal.

 

39 minutes ago, Marocc said:

You mean murder them or just lend one to them? I don't think killing a person makes one evil.

It doesn't have to, no.  But murdering someone for offending you does in my book.  Our books might differ, of course.

41 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Depends on the society and the definition of wrong. The problem may not be the hair that is shown, but what it signifies.

Sure, and the letter could have been about full frontal nudity in a school zone.  When it comes to wrong, that's an opinion.  The writer expressed theirs.  I expressed mine.  Both allowed.

 

45 minutes ago, Marocc said:

— homosexuality is not an act.

— sodomy is unlawful regardless of gender.

— fornication and adultery are unlawful regardless of gender

 None of the above are anyone's business but the people involved and most definitely should not be unlawful in any way at all.

 

48 minutes ago, Marocc said:

Apostasy includes warring against the ummah.

Blasphemy, I think, also includes other crimes such as treason, in order to be punishable by law.

It cannot be wrong to say what women — or men should wear. Forcing women to wear something and advising them on what they should wear are two entirely different things.

If I tell someone they should put on a thicker coat, am I forcing them to put on a thicker coat?

It doesn't matter what it involves.  Don't do it if you don't want to, but don't tell anyone else not to.  It's so simple.

Treason I can see.  No religion involved there.

True.  Did I say should?  Sometimes I err.  That would come under freedom of expression.  It's perfectly okay to say what ever you want.  (You can even say that everything I find abhorrent about Islam is perfectly acceptable, encouraged even, and I should be killed for objecting.  As long as you don't suggest anyone actually does kill me)

[Guest]

45 minutes ago, Marocc said:

It's certainly worth thinking about, what leads into this type of thing. Who has been spreading a negative attitude against Islam and Muslims? Have you been? Do you not think it influences anything or anyone? Don't you have any sense of responsibility?

If you think one should avoid the truth for fear of spreading a negative attitude I would have to disagree.

Do you think the Chinese read this forum?

[Marocc]

28 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I've been saying it for years.

That's not a good thing. You need to develop both your thinking and the way you express yourself.

29 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

The point of my posts usually reinforce that.

I'm referring to the statistical situation. How many percent of the posters understand what you think you make clear? I don't care at all — just pointing out how it can be defined whether you do express your points as you say or whether you do not.

32 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If you define bigotry as a refusal to except certain ideas as valid

I accept the definition of Merriam-Webster and I try not to give English words a definition on my own.

bigotry  1 : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices

bigot  : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

33 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I don't know any evil Muslims.  I only know of evil Muslims.  From the news and such. 

I see. But can you trust mere news articles to inform you of all the details about a person and/or acts of a person that are necessary for you to judge that person?

I think not. Yet if you try, you would certainly have to go through the articles carefully. Otherwise your judgment will be more questionable than the Taliban court.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Marocc said:

That's not a good thing. You need to develop both your thinking and the way you express yourself.

Only to please you, and a half a dozen others on here.  And then I would be lying.  I don't see why any of you would want that.

 

5 minutes ago, Marocc said:

I'm referring to the statistical situation. How many percent of the posters understand what you think you make clear? I don't care at all — just pointing out how it can be defined whether you do express your points as you say or whether you do not.

If they don't they can argue.  I enjoy that, and so do they.  Or why come on here?

 

6 minutes ago, Marocc said:

I accept the definition of Merriam-Webster and I try not to give English words a definition on my own.

bigotry  1 : obstinate or intolerant devotion to one's own opinions and prejudices

bigot  : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices especially : one who regards or treats the members of a group (such as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance

Okay, with that one, I would have to say neither.  Obviously we are all devoted to our opinions, but if that makes me a bigot, there are only bigots on this forum.  As for the rest, not me.

 

8 minutes ago, Marocc said:

I see. But can you trust mere news articles to inform you of all the details about a person and/or acts of a person that are necessary for you to judge that person?

I think not. Yet if you try, you would certainly have to go through the articles carefully. Otherwise your judgment will be more questionable than the Taliban court.

It's getting harder.  I still trust the BBC, the Guardian, the CBC, NYT, WP and others of that stripe.  And I look for confirmation.  Recent events have forced that task on me.

And then, after all that, one has to rely on one's intelligence and experience.  I'm happy with mine.

[Marocc]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

If you think one should avoid the truth for fear of spreading a negative attitude I

I don't see why one would have to lead to the other. I have confronted many horrible truths, but I do not recall ever having been forced to spread a negative attitude. I understand how that may happen though, to someone who suffers of a low self esteem, for instance. Some people like to spread a negative attitude. One typical thing such people have in common is an incessant need to gossip.

9 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Do you think the Chinese read this forum?

I think the Chinese collect every bit of information.

When I talk about the influence you may have, I do not of course refer only to the particular people your writing here could affect. I'm talking precisely of the negative attitude you spread.

[Guest]

Just now, Marocc said:

I don't see why one would have to lead to the other. I have confronted many horrible truths, but I do not recall ever having been forced to spread a negative attitude. I understand how that may happen though, to someone who suffers of a low self esteem, for instance. Some people like to spread a negative attitude. One typical thing such people have in common is an incessant need to gossip.

I agree.  I'll just tell the truth, and let the attitude take care of itself.

 

1 minute ago, Marocc said:

I think the Chinese collect every bit of information.

When I talk about the influence you may have, I do not of course refer only to the particular people your writing here could affect. I'm talking precisely of the negative attitude you spread.

Those bastards, eh?  (for the record, just the ones collecting every bit of information)

As for the attitude, see my comment above.

And if you ever disagree with anything I say, tell me, and we'll have it out.  Like I said, that's why we're here.

[Marocc]

2 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Only to please you, and a half a dozen others on here.

If I'm understanding,....for your own sake for it is natural for man.

3 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

If they don't they can argue. 

The subject here, I think, is whether it is suffient to say those few words or not.

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

on one's intelligence and experience.  I'm happy with mine.

How can anyone be happy with either of those? Can you actually not have desire to better yourself? Isn't that almost like death?

BBC is reasonably reliable regarding what happens in UK or USA. Unfortunately they also make news articles regarding lots of other countries and those are not accurate in general, imo.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Marocc said:

If I'm understanding,....for your own sake for it is natural for man.

I don't get that.  See, I told you it happens to the best of us.

 

1 minute ago, Marocc said:

The subject here, I think, is whether it is suffient to say those few words or not.

If it's not, ask for clarification.  I'm not proud.

 

2 minutes ago, Marocc said:

How can anyone be happy with either of those? Can you actually not have desire to better yourself? Isn't that almost like death?

BBC is reasonably reliable regarding what happens in UK or USA. Unfortunately they also make news articles regarding lots of other countries and those are not accurate in general, imo.

I do, all the time.  I meant I was happy with regard to my ability to discern fact from fiction in the mainstream media. (within 5 percentage points, 19 times out of 20)

That's why confirmation is a good idea, whenever one is a bit suspicious.

[Marocc]

1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

No...as many here already know, I had a German relative that worked for the Grand Mufti in exciting locations such as Yugoslavia and Hungary. 

No what? Who doesn't have a relative that went to war? What does that have to do with what I said?

[Marocc]

39 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

.  I meant I was happy with regard to my ability to discern fact from fiction in the mainstream media.

How do you test that?

[Guest]

49 minutes ago, Marocc said:

How do you test that?

See my previous post re:

1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

Recent events have forced that task on me.

It's tested for us.  All the time.  You don't think you'd let me get away with one, do you?

[eyeball]

16 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Don't be so hard on yourself. I said no such thing.

You're free to defend Islam and its association with the Nazis. 

It's funny how you refer to your own association with Nazis and use it as an excuse to fault millions upon millions of people for an association that doesn't come anywhere near as close as your own. 

Of course you're free to continue with your bizarre shtick that apples never fall far from their trees.

[DogOnPorch]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

It's funny how you refer to your own association with Nazis and use it as an excuse to fault millions upon millions of people for an association that doesn't come anywhere near as close as your own. 

Of course you're free to continue with your bizarre shtick that apples never fall far from their trees.

 

It's always good to forget that my father and his brothers were all in the RCAF...you know...Canada. That would be blowing-up Nazis and things related to that. In my father's case, swapping engines on Lancasters and Halifaxes. 

Some of the 13th SS were the last to die as they defended the Reichstag from Soviet armies. I'm not questioning the loyalty of the Muslim troops. They fought to the death for their Führer. 

Had Hitler won, the Mufti would've been a hero, the Jews would all be dead and the Russians would be slaving in the fields growing wheat for Germany...a perfect world for some.

Alas...for the Mufti's supporters...that didn't happen. His plans to bring his Holocaust activities to British Palestine didn't happen. Mostly due to Rommel losing at El Alamein.

Islam seeing eye to eye with the Nazis isn't a big surprise. Both hate Jews and want them all dead...fellow travelers in ideology.  

The Mufti, since you seem ignorant of his activities, was responsible for the Holocaust taking place in Axis Minor countries...such as Hungary...as well as killing Tito's partisans.

[jacee]

On 12/27/2019 at 5:53 PM, Argus said:

So what I'm left with is a parade of Muslim names and faces in my newspaper every week detailing shootings, robberies, human trafficking, assaults and the like.

So cite those.

Links please!! 

You can't smear a whole group of people in Canada without data to prove the truth, because that would be "promoting hatred" under the law.

Truth is your defense. So prove it.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, jacee said:

So cite those.

Links please!! 

You can't smear a whole group of people in Canada without data to prove the truth, because that would be "promoting hatred" under the law.

Truth is your defense. So prove it.

I've posted them any number of times. I've also posted the most wanted lists for various departments. You'll see few white faces on most of them. And stop with your continuing bullshit threats about the law. You know absolutely nothing about the law and aren't smart enough to understand if it was explained.

Edited January 4, 2020 by Argus

[Marocc]

On 1/5/2020 at 1:51 AM, Argus said:

You'll see few white faces on most of them

If there were more you wouldn't see them. Not here at least.

[Goddess]

On 1/3/2020 at 6:56 PM, Marocc said:

 

If I tell someone they should put on a thicker coat, am I forcing them to put on a thicker coat?

Yes.  If you convince them they are morally inferior without the thicker coat and that they will burn in hell for not wearing the thicker coat.  By doing those things, you have essentially taken the choice out of their hands.

[Marocc]

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

If you convince them they are morally inferior without the thicker coat and that they will burn in hell for not wearing the thicker coat.  By doing those things, you have essentially taken the choice out of their hands.

I disagree somewhat. They should be able to stand their ground if they are speaking the truth.

However, I think saying any such thing:

2 hours ago, Goddess said:

are morally inferior without the thicker coat and that they will burn in hell for not wearing

Is wrong.

If I recall correct, the point was in someone saying that a Muslim woman should cover.

I say that, and here I am told I don't have a right to tell anyone what to wear etc.

What does it mean to tell someone what to wear? We would need to agree on a context.

I would never force someone to cover as I think a Muslim woman should. Nor do I think a Muslim who covers is automatically a better Muslim than one who doesn't cover.

[Goddess]

12 minutes ago, Marocc said:

 

If I recall correct, the point was in someone saying that a Muslim woman should cover.

I say that, and here I am told I don't have a right to tell anyone what to wear etc.

You don't have a right to say that to individuals.

When you say they "should" cover, you're automatically making a judgment that being uncovered is inferior.

If YOU feel that YOU should cover, you are free to do that.

You are NOT free to tell other women that they "should" cover - even other Muslims.

Now, "some" people here will accuse me of telling women they should NOT cover.

I do not do that to individuals.  Here, we are on a discussion forum discussing the very subject and I am allowed to have and express my opinion.  The same as you do - HERE you can say that "Women should cover" but you should be prepared to say why and have others disagree.  When you tell individual women that they "should" cover, you are both making a judgment that uncovered women are not doing something they "should" be doing AND you are pressuring others to follow what you believe.

Have your opinion or belief.  But keep it to yourself unless you are asked.  Or are on a discussion forum.

[Marocc]

44 minutes ago, Goddess said:

When you say they "should" cover, you're automatically making a judgment that being uncovered is inferior.

So what if I did?

Choosing to smoke is inferior to abstaining.

Lying is inferior to being honest.

Dressing indecently is inferior to dressing decently.

Obeying one's own God is superior to disobeying.

47 minutes ago, Goddess said:

If YOU feel that YOU should cover, you are free to do that.

It's not a feeling. It's a command. That's what you don't take into account; the very concept of religion. The Bible tells Christians not to commit adultery. Is it immoral for a religious teacher of Christianity to advise his fellow Christians that they should not commit adultery?

49 minutes ago, Goddess said:

You are NOT free to tell other women that they "should" cover - even other Muslims.

Yes, i am. And I thought you were all about freedom of speech.

50 minutes ago, Goddess said:

Now, "some" people here will accuse me of telling women they should NOT cover.

I do not do that to individuals. 

If I have said or insinuated that, it is not because it is wrong to speak freely, but because you are making statements about which you know nothing about and also because your attitude is highly hypocritical.

Individuals or not. I don't think it matters at all. It is best that what you want to say here and think is okay to say here, you can also say to someone directly. If you cannot then clearly you see there something wrong or inconvenient about what you want to say.

52 minutes ago, Goddess said:

you should be prepared to say why and have others disagree. 

Certainly I am.

53 minutes ago, Goddess said:

AND you are pressuring others to follow what you believe.

It isn't about telling others to follow what I believe, but what they believe.

53 minutes ago, Goddess said:

But keep it to yourself unless you are asked.

Do you assume I go about randomly criticising Muslim's due to their clothing?

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, Marocc said:

So what if I did?

Choosing to smoke is inferior to abstaining.

Lying is inferior to being honest.

Dressing indecently is inferior to dressing decently.

Obeying one's own God is superior to disobeying.

You are comparing things that are universally wrong and harmful to things that are universally good.  Are you saying that an uncovered woman is like a smoker or a liar?  That is a judgement on your part.

 

Quote

It's not a feeling. It's a command.

Other Muslims say it is not a command.

Quote

Is it immoral for a religious teacher of Christianity to advise his fellow Christians that they should not commit adultery?

No.  They came there to hear his opinion on that.  They basically ask for that information by attending.

2 hours ago, Marocc said:

Yes, i am.

It would be rare exceptional circumstance where you would be entitled to tell another Muslim what they should or should not be doing.  Do Muslims lose their right to privacy and self-determination when they join the religion?  I told an experience of a friend of mine who worked with quite a few Muslim women and one did not cover.  The others harassed her mercilessly for it and my friend supported her.  I was told that that does not happen and that my friend was lying. Now you are saying that Muslims have a right to harass each other for what they do or do not do.    ???

Quote

you are making statements about which you know nothing about and also because your attitude is highly hypocritical.

You don't know what I know or don't know.  My attitude is critical towards all religions because I have dealt extensively with the damage it does to people.  Religions all use the same tactics with slight variations on the details.  Your's is no different.

Quote

Do you assume I go about randomly criticising Muslim's due to their clothing?

Well, you and the other one here assume all the time that because some of us are critical of Islam that we randomly go about criticizing and yanking off hijabs.......

Is covering a choice or not?  If it's a choice, then a woman who is uncovered should be allowed to be uncovered without anyone shaming or humiliating her or telling her she must cover to be saved.

 

[Marocc]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

You are comparing things that are universally wrong and harmful to things that are universally good. 

What is universally good?

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

They came there to hear his opinion on that.  They basically ask for that information by attending.

Since when was that some exceptional circumstance no average Muslim ever gets into? That kind of situation is the first thing I have in mind in this discussion even though at the end of the day... If you're morals/ethics/religious opinions change from situation to another, they aren't very strong, are they?

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

It would be rare exceptional circumstance where you would be entitled to tell another Muslim what they should or should not be doing.

Why? How? Why?

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Do Muslims lose their right to privacy and self-determination when they join the religion?

No. Does that relate to the topic?

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Now you are saying that Muslims have a right to harass each other for what they do or do not do.    ???

You tell me.

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

You don't know what I know or don't know. 

I know you don't know Islam or acknowledge to know Islam.

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

My attitude is critical towards all religions because I have dealt extensively with the damage it does to people. 

Critical and hypocritical aren't mutually exclusive. Have you ever had to face the damage your type of people spreading such slander as you do, does to people?

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Well, you and the other one here assume all the time that because some of us are critical of Islam that we randomly go about criticizing and yanking off hijabs.......

I don't. You wouldn't have the guts.

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

Is covering a choice or not?

Yeah, usually.

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

If it's a choice, then a woman who is uncovered should be allowed to be uncovered without anyone shaming or humiliating her

Of course.

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

or telling her she must cover to be saved.

Sounds like Christian rethoric, but Muslims are obliged to advise other Muslims. It is wrong not to.