Michael Hardner Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 What would you call those that have distain for the likes of the Westboro Baptist Church or Pat Robinson. Christaphobic? Wait - so are you saying that generalizing your views of a "group" (as defined by the viewer) based on extremists is ok or not ok ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Wait - so are you saying that generalizing your views of a "group" (as defined by the viewer) based on extremists is ok or not ok ? I think most in the west can objectively define what is extremist. It does seem that some have a lot more patience with people that hold extremist views if their skin colour is anything other than white. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 It does seem that some have a lot more patience with people that hold extremist views if their skin colour is anything other than white. And "some" are the opposite. Is it right though ? You didn't answer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 And "some" are the opposite. Is it right though ? You didn't answer. If the group can be objectively defined then sure. Saying Muslims are terrorists? Clearly a bigoted thing to say. But to say that there are elements of Islam that don't align with Western values. I don't think that's extreme or racist at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) Deep. You don't hate Muslims, you just really "disgusted" by what some of them do. It's almost like you get it. Are you sure you're liberal? Well, that's nice, but the point I was making seems to have gone a bit over your head. As Canada First first implied and many others quickly agreed, racism is not the correct term to refer to sentiments such as yours, yet the proper term which would be more encompassing is also rejected. Canada First's views are his or her own. Not mine. In other words, it's a whole lot of arguing semantics. But sure, now that you've voiced your opinion, please go ahead an tell me how your feeling of cultural superiority and disdain isn't really 'phobia' or 'racism' because you don't hate ALL Muslims. <rolling eyes> You do seem to be just confirming exactly what I said. You haven't actually made a point here except, "Oh yes you are", just louder. Edited July 21, 2015 by bcsapper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 Wait - so are you saying that generalizing your views of a "group" (as defined by the viewer) based on extremists is ok or not ok ? Surely only those doing that in the case you quoted are the same who would categorize those who find only certain aspects of Islam repulsive? Am I misinterpreting you? My definition of the group I abhor is based on their extremism. Any generalization is mistakenly done by those who would have me a racist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 21, 2015 Report Share Posted July 21, 2015 (edited) I don't think people should be killed for apostasy or homosexuality. I guess this makes me an 'Islamophobe'. I think the correct term is progressive. Liberals like Bill Maher get it. Yeah, I should have said "some" liberals. Heck, if I can refrain from tarring all members of other groups with the same brush I can sure do that with liberals too. Edited July 21, 2015 by bcsapper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Surely only those doing that in the case you quoted are the same who would categorize those who find only certain aspects of Islam repulsive? Can you try that sentence again ? My definition of the group I abhor is based on their extremism. Any generalization is mistakenly done by those who would have me a racist. The generalization is done by you, as per your first sentence. If you follow principles, then you would abhor any group based on extremist values held by members of that group, which means you would abhor all groups. Do you hate Christians, then, based on Westboro ? Why not ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 Do you hate Christians, then, based on Westboro ? Why not ? I certainly dislike them. But they're only using their freedom of speech to attempt to provoke. But as far as I know, they don't call for people to be killed like certain people in Islam do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 (edited) Can you try that sentence again ? The generalization is done by you, as per your first sentence. If you follow principles, then you would abhor any group based on extremist values held by members of that group, which means you would abhor all groups. Do you hate Christians, then, based on Westboro ? Why not ? Just the extremist ones. Like Muslims. It's that Fermat thing again. Of course, as Boges said, they aren't quite as bad. I still don't like them though. Westboro Baptists, that is. I don't really have views regarding most Christians Same as Muslims. As for the sentence, your comment in your second sentence would indicate you misunderstood it. My mistake. it's too early to reconstruct it. I have to go to work. Edited July 22, 2015 by bcsapper Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 I certainly dislike them. You dislike Christians in general ? Really ? If not, then maybe you didn't understand my question and I don't understand your use of "them" ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 it's too early to reconstruct it. Fair enough. Also it seems - I think - that you (both of you) don't like extremists but don't think that they represent the whole group. I think that's a mainstream view, so I concur with that. Still a lot of questions to answer, and still a lot of areas to disagree on, eg. profiling. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boges Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 You dislike Christians in general ? Really ? If not, then maybe you didn't understand my question and I don't understand your use of "them" ? I dislike the WBC. And I dislike Fundamentalist Islam as anyone who believes in Western Values also should. And if you want to look at a definition. Anyone who's looking to have Sharia Law legitimized. That's something we can't allow in this country. EVER! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 The problem is that radical Islam is much more prevelant in the Islamic population. Radical ideas are much more mainstream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 The problem is that radical Islam is much more prevelant in the Islamic population. Radical ideas are much more mainstream. It's a qualitative assessment at best that you've done there. If you were forced to define "radical" "prevalent" and so on, then people could turn it around on something else.... I'm not saying that your instinctive ways of reacting to groups is worse than mine, just that if you try to apply rules and principles to it then others can turn it around on you. Free advice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shady Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 It's a qualitative assessment at best that you've done there. If you were forced to define "radical" "prevalent" and so on, then people could turn it around on something else.... I'm not saying that your instinctive ways of reacting to groups is worse than mine, just that if you try to apply rules and principles to it then others can turn it around on you. Free advice. No, it's a quantitative assessment, based on real data, of the opinions polled in Muslim countries and amoung Muslim populations. Large percentages for instance agree with death being an appropriate punishment for leaving the Islmaic faith. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 No, it's a quantitative assessment, based on real data, of the opinions polled in Muslim countries and amoung Muslim populations. Large percentages for instance agree with death being an appropriate punishment for leaving the Islmaic faith. The percentages are all over the map, though. How do you deal with that ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 The percentages are all over the map, though. How do you deal with that ? They're not all over the map in the countries polled. Oh, certainly there's variation. Unquestionably. But the bulk of Muslim countries show a certain unanimity of belief with regard to the values being taught in the Koran. The social values derived from the Koran and accompanying religious texts are the antithesis of the evolved western values of personal freedom and equality. This is not about 'extremism' or 'radicalism'. A Muslim man living in Turkey or Egypt or Jordan or Lebanon or Syria or Iran or Indonesia or Malaysia or Pakistan or Nigeria who feels gays should be imprisoned, blasphemers who insult the prophet should be killed, and women must wear a chador and obey her husband is not a radical or extremist in those societies by any means. He's pretty much mainstream. The extremists, of course, are far more severe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 22, 2015 Report Share Posted July 22, 2015 They're not all over the map in the countries polled. Oh, certainly there's variation. Unquestionably. But the bulk of Muslim countries show a certain unanimity of belief with regard to the values being taught in the Koran. That's pretty self-evident isn't it ? That's like saying Christian countries believe in the bible. "Social values derived from the Koran" is an association that you're creating. The poll numbers vary by country, as they do with Christians of varying degrees... As I said, if you were to ever decide on a stated % and a statement then your principles could be turned against you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WIP Posted July 23, 2015 Report Share Posted July 23, 2015 The problem is that radical Islam is much more prevelant in the Islamic population. Radical ideas are much more mainstream. Sure it is! "Radical Islam" is Islam that doesn't follow American or Western ways of doing business! So, the Saudi's and Gulf Sheiks are good Muslims, while the Muslims in Yemen and Bahrain, fighting against foreign oppression, are the 'bad Muslims.' I've noticed that as much as everybody claims to be unbiased and basing their arguments on evidence, that if you actually step back and reassess your ideas and presumptions and change your mind on a few of them...LOOK OUT! Nobody is allowed to change their minds on anything, anywhere these days, or they are attacked for being a turncoat or lying about their original beliefs. On this whole War On Terror..Muslim extremism meme that took off after 9/11, I was pretty much following the standard line until I really started noticing some of the inconsistencies in the arguments by the coalition of atheist/Christian fundamentalist anti-Islam advocates. I think it started back when it became clear that the US Gov had left a sectarian mess in Iraq back in 05 that they would never be able to fix. The biggest flaw in the story about how much Islam and Muslim adherents are incompatible with allowing any other religions was they had no plausible explanation for how or why one million Christians were living in the boundaries of modern day Iraq for the last...close to 2000 years! Same goes for Lebanon, Syria, Palestine, Egypt and others; it's only during the last 10 years that persecution of Christians and other religious minorities has become genocidal and forcing them to leave the lands they had been living in since the time of the first apostles moving east to make Christian converts. Recently, I read that some of the very last Christians in eastern Syria are being forced to leave because of the threat of ISIS. According to our atheist and Christian...and Jewish anti-Muslim talkers, groups like ISIS...which allow no variance from their version of Islam, are the doctrinally correct expression of their religion. So, why now? Why have all of these minorities been able to live in the middle east for so long and never faced the ethnic cleansing that erased similar minorities in Europe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted July 24, 2015 Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 (edited) That's pretty self-evident isn't it ? That's like saying Christian countries believe in the bible. "Social values derived from the Koran" is an association that you're creating. Oh I'm creating that association? I see. So it's just coincidence that ALL Muslim countries are deeply, violently hostile to homosexuals? It's just a coincidence that ALL Muslim countries are extremely misogynistic? When Muslim terrorists (by far the majority in the world) cut off peoople's heads or rape children and enslave women (which is what the prophet's armies did in the Koran) that's a coincidence? The poll numbers vary by country, as they do with Christians of varying degrees... Sure. In some countries 95% of people believe anyone bad mouthing the prophet should be executed, while in others its only about 60-70% Edited July 24, 2015 by Argus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted July 24, 2015 Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 Sure it is! "Radical Islam" is Islam that doesn't follow American or Western ways of doing business! So, the Saudi's and Gulf Sheiks are good Muslims, while the Muslims in Yemen and Bahrain, fighting against foreign oppression, are the 'bad Muslims.' Not everyone that disagrees with your 'politically correct' progressive narrative takes this position. Many view the Saudi's and the Gulf Sheiks as a problem, some even take the position that the Saudi's and the Gulf Sheiks are a bigger problem then ISIS + Iran combined. The Saudi's and the Gulf Sheiks having been using their oil money to spread Wahhabism for decades. That is one of the reasons for the development of groups like Boko Haram, ISIS, Al Shabab, etc. I think that Tarek Fatah, who is muslim (which matters to you for some reason), takes this position. Nobody is allowed to change their minds on anything, anywhere these days, or they are attacked for being a turncoat or lying about their original beliefs. To be fair, that is preferable to being killed for being an apostate. According to our atheist and Christian...and Jewish anti-Muslim talkers, groups like ISIS...which allow no variance from their version of Islam, are the doctrinally correct expression of their religion. Some of what they preach is doctrinally correct, some of what they preach is doctrinally incorrect. Some of what they preach is ambiguous. So, why now? Many factors. One of them is decades of funding of Wahhabism from the Saudis. Why have all of these minorities been able to live in the middle east for so long and never faced the ethnic cleansing that erased similar minorities in Europe? If you think there hasn't been cleansing of non-muslims in regions conquered by muslims over the past 1400 years, then your understanding of history is very incorrect. Just for starters, why don't you look up the Armenian genocide? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hardner Posted July 24, 2015 Report Share Posted July 24, 2015 Sure. In some countries 95% of people believe anyone bad mouthing the prophet should be executed, while in others its only about 60-70% I believe that's the Pew research you're referring to, can you post the link ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.