dialamah Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 Are you serious or do you think if you make sweeping racist assumptions they are ok because they are against white Christians. Hmmm? You complain about this, while you make sweeping, racist assumptions about Syrian refugees, goats and body odor? Ever look in the mirror?
eyeball Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 Islam. You figure Islam is liberal and progressive? I repeat, hard-boiled conservatism is the wellspring of the oppressiveness. Islam is merely the pump. You can bet there's a conservative think-tank somewhere in which people are desperately working overtime to find any kind of link they can to tie Islam to progressives. Apparently it's harder than it looks. Harper tried to make the association but look at what happened to him. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Guest Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 You figure Islam is liberal and progressive? I repeat, hard-boiled conservatism is the wellspring of the oppressiveness. Islam is merely the pump. You can bet there's a conservative think-tank somewhere in which people are desperately working overtime to find any kind of link they can to tie Islam to progressives. Apparently it's harder than it looks. Harper tried to make the association but look at what happened to him. The best way to tie Islam to progressives is to use some serious blinkers. Cast iron, double rivetted, rust proofed and padded to prevent soreness and bruising. Wearing them is the only way progressives can look at Islam.
eyeball Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 The best way to tie Islam to progressives is to use some serious blinkers. Cast iron, double rivetted, rust proofed and padded to prevent soreness and bruising. Wearing them is the only way progressives can look at Islam. Hmmm, I think Islam is as goofy as anti-vaxxing, sasquatches and the law of attraction so I fail to see what it is I'm missing. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Guest Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 so I fail to see what it is I'm missing. That's what blinkers are for... What's the law of attraction? I could google it, but then, what would happen to conversation?
Shady Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 The best way to tie Islam to progressives is to use some serious blinkers. Cast iron, double rivetted, rust proofed and padded to prevent soreness and bruising. Wearing them is the only way progressives can look at Islam. I would agree. Which is why it's so perplexing that progressives go to bat for Islam on a regular basis.
Guest Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) I would agree. Which is why it's so perplexing that progressives go to bat for Islam on a regular basis. It's not perplexing. The blinkers allow them to believe they are going to bat for an underprivileged group, as progressives are wont to do. The blinkers allow them to shut out all the underprivileged groups that Islam is oppressing. Women, other religions, other Muslims, gays, cartoonists, etc. If they didn't have the blinkers, why, they would have to hate them more than they hate Republicans. Edited December 29, 2015 by bcsapper
Argus Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 I'm sure I'm going to be verbally attacked on this one, but has anyone notice when ever some kind of phobia, especially with Islam, its mostly the white-man Christian being most fearful. We don't seem to hear from the First Nation or the Black, or other communities within North America being so fearful. I think that might have something to do with your mischaracterizing things as 'fear', as opposed to 'concern' and the fact no one is asking them. All you hear on the media are the opinion makers, and they don't tend to come from those communities. "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
eyeball Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 That's what blinkers are for... I must have x-ray vision because I can see right through them. I can't see whatever it is you think I should be seeing but of course I'm not wearing kaleidoscope sunglasses so. What's the law of attraction? I could google it, but then, what would happen to conversation? It's a notion as goofy as religion. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
DogOnPorch Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 You figure Islam is liberal and progressive? I repeat, hard-boiled conservatism is the wellspring of the oppressiveness. Islam is merely the pump. You can bet there's a conservative think-tank somewhere in which people are desperately working overtime to find any kind of link they can to tie Islam to progressives. Apparently it's harder than it looks. Harper tried to make the association but look at what happened to him. You can repeat your opinion as often as you wish. The problem is Islam. Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
DogOnPorch Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 I'm sure I'm going to be verbally attacked on this one, but has anyone notice when ever some kind of phobia, especially with Islam, its mostly the white-man Christian being most fearful. We don't seem to hear from the First Nation or the Black, or other communities within North America being so fearful. I suppose you could always set everybody straight and explain how folks like myself are misunderstanding the Quran and Islam. You can always give some majority examples of the goodness Islam brings to the cultures it touches. Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
dialamah Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 (edited) It's not perplexing. The blinkers allow them to believe they are going to bat for an underprivileged group, as progressives are wont to do. The blinkers allow them to shut out all the underprivileged groups that Islam is oppressing. Women, other religions, other Muslims, gays, cartoonists, etc. If they didn't have the blinkers, why, they would have to hate them more than they hate Republicans. It's not that "progressives" think of Islam as an 'underprivileged' group; more that "progressives" don't see a need to assume that any and all Muslims are a minute away from radicalism and terror attacks. No "progressive" has denied that terrorism isn't a problem around the world, or that Muslims haven't carried out terror attacks. The "progressives" have pointed out that the actual danger from terror attacks, especially in Canada, is practically nil. The "progressives" have pointed out that other groups, in Canada and around the world, have also carried out terror attacks and in Canada and in the US, have been more deadly than Muslim terrorists. The progressives have also pointed out that as far as terror attacks go, most have been carried out by people born and raised in the countries they attack; for the most part they aren't carried out by new immigrants or refugees. The "other side" (would that be "regressives"?) ignore every single easily seen fact about Muslims, Islam and terrorists, preferring instead to focus entirely on the actions of a small minority, to repeat Quranic verses written during a war 1400 years ago, as if that were the only part of the Quran worth mentioning, to blatantly and without apology paint every single Muslim with the same brush as a handful (relatively speaking) of people who've done terrible things. The other side does not present a *balanced* view; ignoring so much that is non-violent within the Muslim population and within the teachings of Islam in order to focus on the least likely outcome as the one major thing we should worry about is neither balanced nor reasonable. The fact that billions of Muslims are not violent, and that hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, have lived peacefully in Western countries for decades, and that the majority of Muslims around the world have denounced extremists, extremism, and terror attacks as being against Islam is ignored by the supposedly "reasonably concerned". The ridiculous notion that a few hundred people marching in the streets means that 'sharia law is upon us', when thousands of people demonstrating for days for equality does nothing is just one example of the fear-driven rhetoric some are indulging in. Somebody is wearing blinkers, but it sure isn't the 'progressives'. Edited December 29, 2015 by dialamah
DogOnPorch Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 What do you consider the Christian version of 9/11? Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest Posted December 29, 2015 Report Posted December 29, 2015 It's not that "progressives" think of Islam as an 'underprivileged' group; more that "progressives" don't see a need to assume that any and all Muslims are a minute away from radicalism and terror attacks. No "progressive" has denied that terrorism isn't a problem around the world, or that Muslims haven't carried out terror attacks. The "progressives" have pointed out that the actual danger from terror attacks, especially in Canada, is practically nil. The "progressives" have pointed out that other groups, in Canada and around the world, have also carried out terror attacks and in Canada and in the US, have been more deadly than Muslim terrorists. The progressives have also pointed out that as far as terror attacks go, most have been carried out by people born and raised in the countries they attack; for the most part they aren't carried out by new immigrants or refugees. The "other side" (would that be "regressives"?) ignore every single easily seen fact about Muslims, Islam and terrorists, preferring instead to focus entirely on the actions of a small minority, to repeat Quranic verses written during a war 1400 years ago, as if that were the only part of the Quran worth mentioning, to blatantly and without apology paint every single Muslim with the same brush as a handful (relatively speaking) of people who've done terrible things. The other side does not present a *balanced* view; ignoring so much that is non-violent within the Muslim population and within the teachings of Islam in order to focus on the least likely outcome as the one major thing we should worry about is neither balanced nor reasonable. The fact that billions of Muslims are not violent, and that hundreds of thousands, maybe even millions, have lived peacefully in Western countries for decades, and that the majority of Muslims around the world have denounced extremists, extremism, and terror attacks as being against Islam is ignored by the supposedly "reasonably concerned". The ridiculous notion that a few hundred people marching in the streets means that 'sharia law is upon us', when thousands of people demonstrating for days for equality does nothing is just one example of the fear-driven rhetoric some are indulging in. Somebody is wearing blinkers, but it sure isn't the 'progressives'. Yes it is. The fact that progressives counter every argument about the oppression of "Women, other religions, other Muslims, gays, cartoonists, etc." by Islam by insisting that not all Muslims are terrorists is a dead giveaway.
dialamah Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) Yes it is. The fact that progressives counter every argument about the oppression of "Women, other religions, other Muslims, gays, cartoonists, etc." by Islam by insisting that not all Muslims are terrorists is a dead giveaway. And there are better ways of addressing those issues than demonizing a specific group. And if you address the issues and how to combat extremism, instead of focusing on a single group as if that's the ONLY problem, you're better prepared for all extremists, including White Supremacists, who've killed people and planned mass shootings in Canada. Why isn't it a problem for these anti-Muslim conservatives that white supremacist groups are radicalizing young boys, who then kill? White Supremacists are currently the most dangerous and violent group in Canada, when it comes to terror attacks either planned or carried out. When the anti-Muslim conservatives decide to address extremism, instead of simplistically deciding it's "because of Islam" and "Muslims are violent/stoneage/vengeful/backward/commanded to kill/etc", then they'll start looking reasonable instead of phobic. Edited December 30, 2015 by dialamah
Big Guy Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 There appear to be a number of posters on this board who feel that Islam, as a religion, preaches violence and the idea that Muslims are supposed to take over the world. There are 1.6 billion Muslims in the world. There are 30 million Canadians (including a few Muslims) in Canada. So how do these bright lights on this board who are convinced that Muslims intend to take over the world propose that Canadians react and/or protect ourselves from this invasion? "They" outnumber us in Canada by about 55 to 1 and that ratio is increasing daily. What do you suggest that the Canadian government do to protect us from being taken over or murdered by these Muslims? Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
eyeball Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 You can repeat your opinion as often as you wish. The problem is Islam. No I'm afraid you're badly misinformed and I'll point out your mistake as often as you make it. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
eyeball Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 I suppose you could always set everybody straight and explain how folks like myself are misunderstanding the Quran and Islam. It's almost entirely due to you viewing it through the same backward ideological lens that Islamic extremists do. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Guest Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) And there are better ways of addressing those issues than demonizing a specific group. And if you address the issues and how to combat extremism, instead of focusing on a single group as if that's the ONLY problem, you're better prepared for all extremists, including White Supremacists, who've killed people and planned mass shootings in Canada. Why isn't it a problem for these anti-Muslim conservatives that white supremacist groups are radicalizing young boys, who then kill? White Supremacists are currently the most dangerous and violent group in Canada, when it comes to terror attacks either planned or carried out. When the anti-Muslim conservatives decide to address extremism, instead of simplistically deciding it's "because of Islam" and "Muslims are violent/stoneage/vengeful/backward/commanded to kill/etc", then they'll start looking reasonable instead of phobic. Right. I could never condone demonizing a specific group. Those Muslims who don't believe women should be treated differently than men, those who don't believe blasphemers should be punished, those who are okay with gay marriage, rampant cartoonists and atheists who think their religion is just as loopy as anyone else's, are welcome in my house. Meanwhile I reserve the right to call any of the others barbaric religious primitives. Same as any other religion that believes those things. No distinction. Nutters are nutters, barbarians are barbarians. What do I think of White Supremacists? Same as I think of Islamists. I have the utmost contempt for them all. Edit> The difference is, now that I read that back, is that there aren't entire countries run by White Supremacists, with their laws based on their religion. None that come to mind, anyway. I'm willing to be corrected if you know of any. Islamists, on the other hand... Edited December 30, 2015 by bcsapper
eyeball Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 Those Muslims who don't believe women should be treated differently than men, those who don't believe blasphemers should be punished, those who are okay with gay marriage, rampant cartoonists and atheists who think their religion is just as loopy as anyone else's, are welcome in my house. The progressive and liberal muslims in other words as opposed to regressive conservative muslims It's interesting how you've characterized muslim atheists in terms of being atheistic towards their religion. I always thought atheism was more a universal trait, like conservatism. I said now watch what you say they'll be calling you a radical, a liberal, oh fanatical criminal
Argus Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 And there are better ways of addressing those issues than demonizing a specific group. Without addressing the group responsible? I'm still waiting for you to enlighten me on which of the world's 50 Muslim majority countries are peaceful, democratic, inclusive and care about human rights and equality. Any of them? Come on! There's 50! Any of them where it's illegal to rape your wife? Any of them where you can't beat your wife? Any of them with gay pride days or parades? Any of them where there's no violence directed at non-believers? "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
dialamah Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 . Meanwhile I reserve the right to call any of the others barbaric religious primitives. Same as any other religion that believes those things. No distinction. Nutters are nutters, barbarians are barbarians. What do I think of White Supremacists? Same as I think of Islamists. I have the utmost contempt for them all. Feel free to call nutters, nutters and those who practice barbaric practices, barbaric. Good by me. What I object to is statements such as "Islam is the problem" or "a Muslim who isn't willing to fight/kill nonbelievers is not a true Muslim". I certainly do agree that the countries in the Middle East and Africa tend to be oppressive, as do many countries in Asia. Oppression of women and other minorities isn't terribly uncommon in the world; we in the oh-so-advanced West are only just allowing equal rights for gays and there are still a significant number among us who feel acceptance of gay rights puts our country on a sure path to hell; a very small minority feel justified in taunting, beating or killing gay people. Especially in Christian households and communities, women still hold a subordinate position - though it rarely progresses to the stage of full-body covering. We have come farther along in terms of progression towards equality and human rights than many other countries, but we aren't so far along that we have any moral right to judge an entire religion as 'less than' us.
Guest Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) The progressive and liberal muslims in other words as opposed to regressive conservative muslims It's interesting how you've characterized muslim atheists in terms of being atheistic towards their religion. I always thought atheism was more a universal trait, like conservatism. I never mentioned Muslim atheists. I was talking about Muslim attitudes towards atheists, like me. My bad for not being clearer. Edited December 30, 2015 by bcsapper
Argus Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 Feel free to call nutters, nutters and those who practice barbaric practices, barbaric. Good by me. What I object to is statements such as "Islam is the problem" or "a Muslim who isn't willing to fight/kill nonbelievers is not a true Muslim". So you believe that the 120 million Pakistanis who believe in executing apostates are nutters? 84% of Egyptian Muslims feel the same way. What about a few other public opinion polls? http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/opinion-polls.htm "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Guest Posted December 30, 2015 Report Posted December 30, 2015 Feel free to call nutters, nutters and those who practice barbaric practices, barbaric. Good by me. What I object to is statements such as "Islam is the problem" or "a Muslim who isn't willing to fight/kill nonbelievers is not a true Muslim". I certainly do agree that the countries in the Middle East and Africa tend to be oppressive, as do many countries in Asia. Oppression of women and other minorities isn't terribly uncommon in the world; we in the oh-so-advanced West are only just allowing equal rights for gays and there are still a significant number among us who feel acceptance of gay rights puts our country on a sure path to hell; a very small minority feel justified in taunting, beating or killing gay people. Especially in Christian households and communities, women still hold a subordinate position - though it rarely progresses to the stage of full-body covering. We have come farther along in terms of progression towards equality and human rights than many other countries, but we aren't so far along that we have any moral right to judge an entire religion as 'less than' us. Well, exactly. No-one is perfect, and no-one is ever likely to be. There are stages of civilization, though, on the way to perfection, and while we are only a certain way along the path, there are those who haven't gotten as far as the starting line yet. As to your point about Islam itself, I have argued and continue to argue that it is only the interpretation that matters. If a book says "kill", you don't actually have to. The question remains why so many Muslims seem to put the word of the book first, above reason and compassion. Say what you like about any religion, the numbers these days do support the notion that Muslims do it more than others.
Recommended Posts