Islamophobia in Canada

[Guest]

Just now, dialamah said:

Do you see any difference in these two statements?

"Killing homosexuals for being homosexual is wrong and is not supported by either science or religious teachings, according to experts."

"Muslims want to kill homosexuals Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

Or these two:

"FGM is practiced in many countries in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, by adherents from many different religions.  It is more prevalent in poor villages among the illiterate than in urban centers with a higher education level."

"Muslims practice FGM; Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

Which statements discuss an issue?   Which statements use an issue to denigrate Muslims?

 

Of course there are differences.  You can do the same with any group. But to say that "Some Muslims want to kill homosexuals because those Muslims are backwards and ignorant." might be blunt, but there is nothing wrong with it.

[eyeball]

25 minutes ago, dialamah said:

So, neither the word racist nor Islamaphobia is acceptable to use for those who hate/fear Muslims; what term should be used, do you suppose?

 

I suggest right wing conservative...stupid f-kers.

Edited May 8, 2017 by eyeball

[dialamah]

5 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Islamaphobia is open to debate.  Racism certainly should not even be considered.  I cannot understand how racism is even connected to someone's concerns about religious practices.

Would you feel the same way about the WBC moving in next door to you as you would about Mary Glasspool, (Yes, I had to look Mary up) the first open lesbian to be consecrated a bishop in the Church of England? They are the same race.

I would prefer Mary, and I daresay you would too.  Why is it so hard to imagine someone who hates the excesses of Islam being perfectly comfortable with a moderate?

 

 

I personally try to use the phrase anti-Islam or anti-Muslim; I save Islamaphobia for those people/statements that I think are truly over the top in terms of factual accuracy, fearful and hateful rhetoric.  

WBC - Westborough Baptist Church, yeah?   So yeah, inasmuch as I could make a choice I'd choose Mary.

I think the question for me isn't "would I rather live next door to a nice person than a not-nice person", but more along the lines of  "This person has never done anything wrong that we know of, but his family may have although again we don't really know for sure.   Or he might have agreed with something wrong that his family did, but we don't know that for sure either.   So, do you want him as a neighbor?  (No is the right answer, otherwise you are an idiot.)"

 

[Guest]

Just now, dialamah said:

I personally try to use the phrase anti-Islam or anti-Muslim; I save Islamaphobia for those people/statements that I think are truly over the top in terms of factual accuracy, fearful and hateful rhetoric.  

WBC - Westborough Baptist Church, yeah?   So yeah, inasmuch as I could make a choice I'd choose Mary.

I think the question for me isn't "would I rather live next door to a nice person than a not-nice person", but more along the lines of  "This person has never done anything wrong that we know of, but his family may have although again we don't really know for sure.   Or he might have agreed with something wrong that his family did, but we don't know that for sure either.   So, do you want him as a neighbor?  (No is the right answer, otherwise you are an idiot.)"

 

But you had the question right the first time.  A little on the over simplified side, I'll grant you, but still basically correct.

I'm assuming for the purposes of this argument that we do know for sure.  That way we can separate out the racism.  If two people who look the same but who have completely different beliefs want to move in next to you and you object to both, even though one set of beliefs is not all objectionable, then sure, you're a racist.  If race was the deciding factor, of course. 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, eyeball said:

I suggest right wing conservative...stupid f-kers.

But that would be the bad Muslims, wouldn't it?

[dialamah]

13 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Of course there are differences.  You can do the same with any group. But to say that "Some Muslims want to kill homosexuals because those Muslims are backwards and ignorant." might be blunt, but there is nothing wrong with it.

 

 

 

Yes, but the context is the claim that some people are ignoring valid issues that are being raised by calling the people/remarks "racist/islamaphobic".  The question was "Which of the statements discuss an issue and which use an issue to denigrate Muslims".  Here are the statements again, so you don't have to go look back:

"Killing homosexuals for being homosexual is wrong and is not supported by either science or religious teachings, according to experts."

"Muslims want to kill homosexuals Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

"FGM is practiced in many countries in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, by adherents from many different religions.  It is more prevalent in poor villages among the illiterate than in urban centers with a higher education level."

"Muslims practice FGM; Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

 

[dialamah]

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

But you had the question right the first time.  A little on the over simplified side, I'll grant you, but still basically correct.

I'm assuming for the purposes of this argument that we do know for sure.  That way we can separate out the racism.  If two people who look the same but who have completely different beliefs want to move in next to you and you object to both, even though one set of beliefs is not all objectionable, then sure, you're a racist.  If race was the deciding factor, of course. 

 

Well, for the purposes of the discussion at large, nobody knows what the thought processes, experiences or beliefs of any individual Muslim are.  Yet, some on this board keep insisting that Muslims believe x,y,z, and all Muslims should be viewed with suspicion.  Our discussion is not removed from the greater discussion.   Therefore, I think my second question is the right one for what happens on this board.   

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yes, but the context is the claim that some people are ignoring valid issues that are being raised by calling the people/remarks "racist/islamaphobic".  The question was "Which of the statements discuss an issue and which use an issue to denigrate Muslims".  Here are the statements again, so you don't have to go look back:

"Killing homosexuals for being homosexual is wrong and is not supported by either science or religious teachings, according to experts."

"Muslims want to kill homosexuals Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

"FGM is practiced in many countries in the Middle East, Africa and Asia, by adherents from many different religions.  It is more prevalent in poor villages among the illiterate than in urban centers with a higher education level."

"Muslims practice FGM; Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

 

I would say it that an accusation of bigotry would be a valid response to "Muslims want to kill homosexuals Muslims are backwards and ignorant.", and a request for clarification would be justified. (not racism.  I still don't get the racism thing)

I would not say that about  "Some Muslims want to kill homosexuals because those Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

If you ever catch me in the former, please feel free to ask for clarification.

Edited May 8, 2017 by bcsapper

[Goddess]

9 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I save Islamaphobia for those people/statements that I think are truly over the top in terms of factual accuracy, fearful and hateful rhetoric.  

What makes what YOU think Islamophobia is, the right definition?

Your definition of an Islamophobe is very very broad.

I base my opinion of THE RELIGION on how its adherents act.  90% of the Muslims I've met have been demanding, violent, rude, selfish, unhappy people.  The other 10% basically ignored me because I'm A.)  Not Muslim, and B.) A woman.

In spite of this, I don't go around ripping off hijabs and burkas, or screaming at them to go back to wherever they came from.  In spite of this, I still give every single one of them that I meet the benefit of the doubt.  Yes, I'm cautious around them, and that apparently makes me an Islamophobe.  I don't "hate" Muslims, and the only "fear" I have is legitimate, as I have been physically attacked, screamed at, yelled at, slapped, watched in horror while they all verbally abused an Israeli girl telling her she and her family in Israel all needed to die, etc.  I'm sorry, but I completely disagree with your assessment that it's only a TINY, TINY, BARELY PERCEPTABLE, "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT" MINORITY who are bringing these kinds of attitudes to Canada.  It's not.

But yeah,the problem is all me.  I'm an Islamophobe because I don't like being treated like $hit,

 

 

[Omni]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

I would say it that an accusation of bigotry would be a valid response to "Muslims want to kill homosexuals Muslims are backwards and ignorant.", and a request for clarification would be justified. 

I would not say that about  "Some Muslims want to kill homosexuals because those Muslims are backwards and ignorant."

If you ever catch me in the former, please feel free to ask for clarification.

Sounds like you spent a lot of breath simply sorting out the difference between "some" and "all". 

[Guest]

27 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Well, for the purposes of the discussion at large, nobody knows what the thought processes, experiences or beliefs of any individual Muslim are.  Yet, some on this board keep insisting that Muslims believe x,y,z, and all Muslims should be viewed with suspicion.  Our discussion is not removed from the greater discussion.   Therefore, I think my second question is the right one for what happens on this board.   

Of course. I am in full agreement with the notion of knowing what drives anyone at all, before passing judgement on them. You can give the WBC a chance if you want.

[Guest]

4 minutes ago, Omni said:

Sounds like you spent a lot of breath simply sorting out the difference between "some" and "all". 

Well, of course.  That's exactly the definition problem that so many seem to have difficulty grasping.  I bet you that's not my longest effort at it.

Edited May 8, 2017 by bcsapper

[dialamah]

10 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Of course. I am in full agreement with the notion of knowing what drives anyone at all, before passing judgement on them. You can give the WBC a chance if you want.

 

 

The WBC as an institution is a known quantity; it's individual members are not.    I may not be entirely pleased to see a WBC Church set up in my neighborhood, because of what the church itself represents.   But I doubt I'd care if a member of the congregation moved in next door.

Now, someone will no doubt pop up and say "Yeah, but you know what Islam represents!"  So, I would feel about the same about a mosque of the Wahhabi sect setting up shop in my hood as I would about the WBC.  I would be more welcoming to a Christian church who was more tolerant than WBC and I'd be more welcoming of a mosque that was more progressive than Wahhabi.

I would not object to individual members of any congregation moving next door.  I would object if they somehow impinged upon my right to live my life as I saw fit, regardless of whether or not they were Christian or Muslim.   

Edited to add:  I hope I spelled Wahhabi right.

Edited May 8, 2017 by dialamah

[eyeball]

47 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

But that would be the bad Muslims, wouldn't it?

It would ALSO be them.

If you've seen one conservative right winger you've seen them all.

Edited May 8, 2017 by eyeball

[dialamah]

6 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

Well, of course.  That's exactly the definition problem that so many seem to have difficulty grasping.  I bet you that's not my longest effort at it.

I do find it odd that you spend so much more effort reminding the left when you think they are assuming too much, but fail to remind the right when they do the same.   So, you'll get on my case for calling someone's remarks bigotted, fearful, hateful or Islamaphobic, but say nothing when someone makes some sweeping and negative generalization about Muslims.  

[scribblet]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

I suggest right wing conservative...stupid f-kers.

You really need to stop projecting your own shortcomings onto others

[scribblet]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It would ALSO be them.

If you've seen one conservative right winger you've seen them all.

Oh gee...   I could say the same for liberals ...   seen one arrogant liberal who thinks he's God's gift to politics and thbe people - seen 'em all.

[eyeball]

6 minutes ago, scribblet said:

You really need to stop projecting your own shortcomings onto others

No, I've only been serious about expressing my disgust and loathing for rwc's for a fraction of the time I've endured their crap.

If they don't like having their nose rubbed in it they should do something about it.

[eyeball]

14 minutes ago, scribblet said:

Oh gee...   I could say the same for liberals ...

What do you mean could say the same? You've been crapping on leftists around here as long as anyone else.

[Guest]

31 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I do find it odd that you spend so much more effort reminding the left when you think they are assuming too much, but fail to remind the right when they do the same.   So, you'll get on my case for calling someone's remarks bigotted, fearful, hateful or Islamaphobic, but say nothing when someone makes some sweeping and negative generalization about Muslims.  

When you make those remarks that I get on your case about, are you doing so because you find them to be sweeping and negative generalization about Muslims?  If I'm getting on your case about it, I must be disagreeing about that. 

That said, I think I have made such comments to the likes of MrCanada, who never tried to hide the fact he just hated people who were different from him.    I would agree my tolerances are different from yours.  I don't get offended by much in the way of speech.

[dialamah]

7 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

When you make those remarks that I get on your case about, are you doing so because you find them to be sweeping and negative generalization about Muslims?  If I'm getting on your case about it, I must be disagreeing about that. 

That said, I think I have made such comments to the likes of MrCanada, who never tried to hide the fact he just hated people who were different from him.    I would agree my tolerances are different from yours.  I don't get offended by much in the way of speech.

 

Indeed.  You accept statements such as "Muslims are (something negative)" without asking for qualification, and object if I (or someone else says) "Many Muslims aren't (something negative)", with the admonishment that the other person "didn't mean all Muslims".   At the same time you seem to expect me and others to always qualify their responses with "Yes, there are bad Muslims in the world and we disapprove of all the bad things those bad Muslims do".  

You declined twice to admit that there is a very different agenda between "Here is an issue in which Muslims are involved; let's discuss that issue." and "Muslims do X; Muslims are terrible people" with some deflection.   

I wouldn't call you Islamaphobic, or racist or even particularly anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim, but I'd certainly accuse you of having a double standard and sympathetic to the anti-Muslim rhetoric.

I believe MrCanada is before my time here so your support of minorities against rhetoric has been missed by me.  

[dialamah]

42 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What do you mean could say the same? You've been crapping on leftists around here as long as anyone else.

Yup.  In 2015, I didn't even know I was "leftist", till certain right-wingers on here started crapping on me for it.  Still, despite the box those people want to put me in, for easy labeling and dismissing, I shall continue to feel myself beholden to no political party or ideology.   

[Guest]

1 minute ago, dialamah said:

Indeed.  You accept statements such as "Muslims are (something negative)" without asking for qualification, and object if I (or someone else says) "Many Muslims aren't (something negative)", with the admonishment that the other person "didn't mean all Muslims".   At the same time you seem to expect me and others to always qualify their responses with "Yes, there are bad Muslims in the world and we disapprove of all the bad things those bad Muslims do".  

You declined twice to admit that there is a very different agenda between "Here is an issue in which Muslims are involved; let's discuss that issue." and "Muslims do X; Muslims are terrible people" with some deflection.   

I wouldn't call you Islamaphobic, or racist or even particularly anti-Islamic or anti-Muslim, but I'd certainly accuse you of having a double standard and sympathetic to the anti-Muslim rhetoric.

I believe MrCanada is before my time here so your support of minorities against rhetoric has been missed by me.  

What I'm doing is disagreeing with you.  That doesn't make you right.  If I post that a blogger has been hacked to death in Bangladesh I will not blame all Muslims for it, but nor will I bother to make the point that not all Muslims were responsible.  In many cases, such is a given.

I declined nothing.  I agreed with you, and qualified it with a statement of my own, which you declined to acknowledge. 

 

The problem here is you want me to compare egregious actions with potentially offensive statements.  If I make a point of bringing up the Bangladeshi Blogger killer, and do not bring it up when someone omits a qualifying statement while discussing same, it's because one is so much worse than the other.  Except as a device to point out such behaviour in others, I will rarely bring up statements that tar men, white men, white people, gun owners, Republicans, Americans, Brits, etc.  I just don't care that much.  Sometimes I have to grin and bear it, but I'm able to do that.

[Guest]

7 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yup.  In 2015, I didn't even know I was "leftist", till certain right-wingers on here started crapping on me for it.  Still, despite the box those people want to put me in, for easy labeling and dismissing, I shall continue to feel myself beholden to no political party or ideology.   

Most people are like that, actually.  I'm probably considered right wing on here, but actually I'm centre left.

[eyeball]

44 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yup.  In 2015, I didn't even know I was "leftist", till certain right-wingers on here started crapping on me for it.  Still, despite the box those people want to put me in, for easy labeling and dismissing, I shall continue to feel myself beholden to no political party or ideology.   

Whatever else becomes of me, I'll never be a right winger.

Ever.