Progressives and Islam

[Argus]

You are assuming that every last one of them is going to want to impose their personal beliefs on us, and that's simply not true.

I make no such assumption. However, this is an ideology, not merely a religion, and it is intrinsically hostile to all other religions and ideologies.

It explicitly gives permission to lie to and deceive, rape, and murder unbelievers. It explicitly states that unbelievers will have no power, no ability to influence government, no authority over any Muslim. Muslims are told not to befriend a non-believer. Muslim owners are told not to hire a non-believer and put him in charge of Muslims. The religion is jammed with such things. So Muslims who believe in the tenets of Islam are hostile to anyone not a Muslim.

As long as their numbers are low that isn't a huge deal. Or as long as they are convinced to adapt Canadian values and abandon their belief in these anti-social aspects of Islam. The real problem lies in the 'unholy' alliance between progressives and Islam. It is progressives who are doing their damnedest to make sure that newcomers are allowed to retain those anti-social aspects of their beliefs. It is progressives who are doing their best to shield them from any and all criticism, from any pressure to adapt.

In 1971 Muslim numbers in Canada were so small they were lumped in with "other faiths". Yet their numbers doubled between 1981 and 1991. And between 1991 and 2001 their numbers doubled again and they took over from Jews as the third most biggest religious group. Most statisticians agree their numbers have doubled again since 2001. A group which doubles its population every 7-10 years is a group which is growing in power and influence, certainly in a democracy, where their votes count as much as anyone's. Which means that you can't simply dismiss their violent chauvinism, bigotry and religious fanaticism as quaint and not something which will affect you.

Muslim numbers according to Stats Canada were 3.2% of the population five years ago. If the growth rate remains unchanged that will be 6.5% in five years, 13% in ten (greater than France is now), 26% in twenty. What fun that will be. So many Shawarma places, eh?

Perhaps it doesn't affect you now, but how about in another twenty or thirty years. I plan to still be living here then. How about you?

MOST Muslims, just like MOST Christians, keep their beliefs and practices private.

That's nice. But Muslim's are required to spread Islam, and are told that the world is divided into two houses, the house of peace - Islam - and the house of war - everyone else. It will be that way until Islam conquers all others. I'm sure they keep that belief private, but I don't like them holding it as long as their numbers continue to grow so fast. And their 'private' beliefs won't stop them from voting for politicians who promise to criminalize homosexuality, you know, or require more modest dress from women.

I'm so glad Canada isn't ruled by people such as yourself. I love the tolerance and inclusiveness that Canada represents and that the majority of Canadians support. I despise the ignorance and close-minded bigotry that is exemplified by your comments here.

The ignorance is yours. And it makes me sometimes wish to be around to see the faces of you progressives if Muslim influence grows apace with their numbers, and their harsh social views start slapping down everything you believe in. You despise people like me but you adore Muslims who follow an ideology which calls for the death of every homosexual in the country. Some progressive!

Edited August 21, 2016 by Argus

[eyeball]

Would somebody please throw a ? at this baloney.

Hey how about this, shoe throw/ or #throwshoe?

[DogOnPorch]

Throw a shoe at this....

And fight them until there is no fitnah and [until] the religion, all of it, is for Allah . And if they cease - then indeed, Allah is Seeing of what they do.

https://quran.com/8/39

[eyeball]

I'll throw you a diaper instead.

[DogOnPorch]

Ecce homo.

[Argus]

Throw a shoe at this....

Most of the progressives know absolutely nothing about Islam or its requirements. And if they know anything at all they dismiss it since 'nobody really thinks like that'. Since they are all secular they assume Muslims must be too. All they know is most of the believers are 'brown people' and therefore it must e defended and protected above all other things.

Edited August 21, 2016 by Argus

[dialamah]

Most of the progressives know absolutely nothing about Islam or its requirements. And if they know anything at all they dismiss it since 'nobody really thinks like that'. Since they are all secular they assume Muslims must be too. All they know is most of the believers are 'brown people' and therefore it must e defended and protected above all other things.

People such as yourself know only that which confirms their bias and fear. Islam, just like any other religion, has a variety of teachings. It's followers pick and choose what they'll follow. It's unfortunate that governments choose the most inhumane teachings of Islam to codify, but then non-Islamic governments do the same. These are called oppressive regimes - whether Islamic-based or secular and their goal is to keep power and control. Generally the populace goes along, regardless of personal belief, with some people trying to engender change. An oppressive government often reacts by punishing such people severely, Islamic or not.

Before you go all apeshit about defending brown people, if I ran across brown people expressing misogynistic views, or supporting violent conversions to Islam, or declaring gays a scourge on the earth, I'd call them on their bullshit just like I'm calling you on yours.

Edited August 21, 2016 by dialamah

[Guest]

Before you go all apeshit about defending brown people, if I ran across brown people expressing misogynistic views, or supporting violent conversions to Islam, or declaring gays a scourge on the earth, I'd call them on their bullshit just like I'm calling you on yours.

That's basically just what happens on here with regard to Islam. Why does it allways seem to upset people?

[dialamah]

That's basically just what happens on here with regard to Islam. Why does it allways seem to upset people?

Because they aren't focusing on the *people* who do this BS, but instead choose to vilify all 1.5 billion people who happen to call themselves Muslims, while grudgingly conceding that some might not be so bad.

I, personally, have been raped once and sexually assaulted three times. First sexual assault happened when I was 12 years old. I hear about sexual assaults and rapes almost daily on the news. Were I to think like Argus, I'd be wanting all men to prove they weren't rapists, before being allowed unaccompanied in public. But you know, most men - although they love sex - do not think it's OK to force sex on women.

Imagine if I were to start a thread called "Men and Progressives", then list some of the sexual crimes men have committed in the last few weeks in Canada, declare that it's because men love sex and believe it's their inherent right, call men backward and savages, at odds with a civilized society, demand that limits be put on all men and bemoan the fact that people who point out that most men don't commit sexual assault are apologizing for and protecting rapists. It would be ridiculous and no doubt even Argus would lambaste me for being misandrist and out of touch with reality.

But if it's Muslims ... well, that's different.

[GostHacked]

Comes from experience, from the media, and from viewing the polls on world Muslim attitudes.

I was referring to your rhetoric. But I am sure you were aware of that.

[Guest]

Because they aren't focusing on the *people* who do this BS, but instead choose to vilify all 1.5 billion people who happen to call themselves Muslims, while grudgingly conceding that some might not be so bad.

I, personally, have been raped once and sexually assaulted three times. First sexual assault happened when I was 12 years old. I hear about sexual assaults and rapes almost daily on the news. Were I to think like Argus, I'd be wanting all men to prove they weren't rapists, before being allowed unaccompanied in public. But you know, most men - although they love sex - do not think it's OK to force sex on women.

Imagine if I were to start a thread called "Men and Progressives", then list some of the sexual crimes men have committed in the last few weeks in Canada, declare that it's because men love sex and believe it's their inherent right, call men backward and savages, at odds with a civilized society, demand that limits be put on all men and bemoan the fact that people who point out that most men don't commit sexual assault are apologizing for and protecting rapists. It would be ridiculous and no doubt even Argus would lambaste me for being misandrist and out of touch with reality.

But if it's Muslims ... well, that's different.

No they are not. That's exactly what they are not doing. (with the odd exception that generally gets banned, but it's the internet, what can you do?)

Your first sentence is the stock argument against pointing out reasons for behaviour that are not supposed to be pointed out. I'm sorry for your experiences, but what was the reason behind them? Please, start the thread. Why did the men act the way they did? Was it their religion, their barbaric cultural practices, or something else? Why hide it?

You can certainly call some men all the things you note here. You can say that of any members of an identifiable group, so long as you make it plain what you are talking about.

I would never tell you that you shouldn't, because you are tarring all 4 billion of them.

Edited August 21, 2016 by bcsapper

[dialamah]

No they are not. That's exactly what they are not doing. (with the odd exception that generally gets banned, but it's the internet, what can you do?)

Really? What is this then, but a blanket statement about Islam and all Muslims: Islam - which is a political philosophy, as well as a religion, which despises every single thing liberalism and progressivism is supposed to be about. That social code does not allow for equality between genders. In fact, it explicitly prohibits it. It requires homosexuals of any sort be killed. It does not permit argument or disagreement, and any attempt at rebelling against its laws brings death

This is hyperbole of the worst kind. There are some Islamic countries where being homosexual is punishable by death; there are some Islamic countries where it's a jail-able offence, and there are many Islamic countries where it's not illegal at all. The Qu'ran itself says that homosexuality is a sin, just as the bible does. The Qu'ran has the same story as does the bible, about an entire city being put to death because of homosexual activity; Lot is familiar to most Christians, and for Muslims it's Lut. The Qu'ran condemns homosexuality, just as the bible does - but does not punish by death - that comes from Hadiths. The Bible is the holy book that recommends death to homosexuals. But try to point this out to people who make claims such as Argus and what happens? It's ignored and denied.

I agree that in Canada and other Western countries, we've progressed farther in our freedoms and acceptance of people different than ourselves - but not that far. And to provide one example of someone who changed his beliefs due to the influence of a Westerner - by brother-in-law condemns homosexuality, but never supported the death penalty. Thanks to my sister's influence, he now questions whether imprisonment is appropriate.

Argus' characterization of all Muslims as being a certain way is just as wrong as if I characterized all men as being rapists.

[Guest]

Really? What is this then, but a blanket statement about Islam and all Muslims: Islam - which is a political philosophy, as well as a religion, which despises every single thing liberalism and progressivism is supposed to be about. That social code does not allow for equality between genders. In fact, it explicitly prohibits it. It requires homosexuals of any sort be killed. It does not permit argument or disagreement, and any attempt at rebelling against its laws brings death

Argus' characterization of all Muslims as being a certain way is just as wrong as if I characterized all men as being rapists.

I notice you inserted "all Muslims" in there when it was not stated.

With which bit of the statement do you disagree? I'm no Islamic scholar, but just from reading quotes from the Koran on here and listening to radicals banging on about Sharia Law on the news it would seem that statement is not at all far from the truth.

The trick is not abiding by it. Just as most Christians don't stick too closely to the more lurid bits of the Old Testament, most Muslims don't adhere to the awful bits of the Koran, as stated above. Lots do though. Entire countries base some of their laws on it, as you acknowledge.

There's nothing wrong with pointing out how wrong that is.

Edited August 21, 2016 by bcsapper

[dialamah]

I notice you inserted "all Muslims" in there when it was not stated.

The statement "Islam Is ______ " is not different from stating "Muslims are ______ ". Given that many of the statements made about Islam are outright untrue or vastly exaggerated is also a problem.

Islam disapproves of homosexuality. So does Christianity. Islam disapproves of extra-marital sex and abortion. So does Christianity. If you look strictly to their holy books, it's actually Christianity that imposes the harshest penalties for those 'sins'. Islam is a patriarchal religion; so is Christianity. Islam teaches that only those that follow the book (Muslims, Christians and Jews) will be allowed into paradise - although Muslims are the most holy, of course. Christianity teaches that only Christians will be allowed into paradise. When the bible and the qu'ran are compared, they are surprisingly similar in what they teach, from defining sin to meting out punishment, even to the stories or parables contained with it's pages. It's in the interpretations of what is written that one finds significant difference.

It is true that Islamic governments impose harsh penalties taken from Hadiths, but those are not necessarily Qu'ranic and thus Islamic. One could say that if there's a Hadith, that's "Islamic" enough; on the other hand, there is one hadith which says that 'forgers and liars' will create Hadiths to mislead people from Islam. I'm told that people can actually pay money to an Imam to have him create a Hadith that will suit whatever it is wanted. Of course, these would be relatively small matters; certainly it is the most famous and 'respected' Imams whose Hadiths will be most widely recognized and followed.

With which bit of the statement do you disagree? I'm no Islamic scholar, but just from reading quotes from the Koran on here and listening to radicals banging on about Sharia Law on the news it would seem that statement is not at all far from the truth.

Perhaps if you actually understood what the Qu'ran teaches and understood the wide range of beliefs contained within Islam, these outrageous statements by frightened Westerners and Islamic extremists wouldn't sound so believable.

Edited August 21, 2016 by dialamah

[DogOnPorch]

Most of the progressives know absolutely nothing about Islam or its requirements. And if they know anything at all they dismiss it since 'nobody really thinks like that'. Since they are all secular they assume Muslims must be too. All they know is most of the believers are 'brown people' and therefore it must e defended and protected above all other things.

Or openly lie about Islam's nature as we see in the past few posts. In Sunni Islam, The Hadiths, for example, are the 6 books of collected sayings of Muhammad. They are ranked in their order of accuracy and status. The first two, al-Bukhari and al-Muslim are thought 100% authentic...no new ones suddenly appearing, either. The others are trusted according to their order after that...abu-Dawood, Jami at-Tirmidhi, et al.

All the yummy bits are in the first two anyways...punishments, etc.

[dialamah]

Or openly lie about Islam's nature as we see in the past few posts. In Sunni Islam, The Hadiths, for example, are the 6 books of collected sayings of Muhammad. They are ranked in their order of accuracy and status. The first two, al-Bukhari and al-Muslim are thought 100% authentic...no new ones suddenly appearing, either. The others are trusted according to their order after that...abu-Dawood, Jami at-Tirmidhi, et al.

All the yummy bits are in the first two anyways...punishments, etc.

Oops, I believe I am mistaken - I am thinking of Fatwas, not Hadiths.

Nonetheless, the Hadiths are interpetations and not necessarily an accurate representation of what Mohammed taught.

Properly trained hadith scholars (such as the authors of the books mentioned above) are well aware that the hadith in collections such as Bukhari vary from highly reliable to relatively unreliable. Instead it is Muslims who have been brought up to believe that they must accept what they are told without critical thinking who are prone to believe that if a hadith is in Bukhari, it must be accurate and true.

Some Muslims do not accept any Hadiths:

I do not share the approach of Quranists who disregard all hadith on the grounds that the reliability of hadith cannot be established indisputably. To do so isolates one from a great deal of historical and religious information that has some value, provided it is approached in the spirit of critical enquiry used by most hadith scholars. While regarding all hadith as 100% reliable is simply naive, choosing to ignore all hadith completely is in my view going to the opposite extreme.

There is plenty of disagreement between Islamic scholars and clerics about the teachings of Islam. Islamic extremists, ignorant Muslims and Western bigots are the people most likely to belief that "real" Islam is represented accurately by governments such as Saudi Arabia or groups such as ISIS.

[Guest]

The statement "Islam Is ______ " is not different from stating "Muslims are ______ ". Given that many of the statements made about Islam are outright untrue or vastly exaggerated is also a problem.

Yes it is. It's very different. In your next paragraph you state that Christianity disapproves of Homosexuals, but I would never accuse you of stating that all Christians do. Just those who choose to interpret their holy words in such a way. Same with Islam and Muslims.

Islam disapproves of homosexuality. So does Christianity. Islam disapproves of extra-marital sex and abortion. So does Christianity. If you look strictly to their holy books, it's actually Christianity that imposes the harshest penalties for those 'sins'. Islam is a patriarchal religion; so is Christianity. Islam teaches that only those that follow the book (Muslims, Christians and Jews) will be allowed into paradise - although Muslims are the most holy, of course. Christianity teaches that only Christians will be allowed into paradise. When the bible and the qu'ran are compared, they are surprisingly similar in what they teach, from defining sin to meting out punishment, even to the stories or parables contained with it's pages. It's in the interpretations of what is written that one finds significant difference.

Absolutely. Your last sentence there says everything that is needed about the argument.

It is true that Islamic governments impose harsh penalties taken from Hadiths, but those are not necessarily Qu'ranic and thus Islamic. One could say that if there's a Hadith, that's "Islamic" enough; on the other hand, there is one hadith which says that 'forgers and liars' will create Hadiths to mislead people from Islam. I'm told that people can actually pay money to an Imam to have him create a Hadith that will suit whatever it is wanted. Of course, these would be relatively small matters; certainly it is the most famous and 'respected' Imams whose Hadiths will be most widely recognized and followed.

Perhaps if you actually understood what the Qu'ran teaches and understood the wide range of beliefs contained within Islam, these outrageous statements by frightened Westerners and Islamic extremists wouldn't sound so believable.

I don't care what the Koran teaches. I only care what other people do with regard to what the Koran teaches. I already know and acknowledge the wide range of beliefs contained within Islam. Hence the eye rolling exasperation with the "all Muslims" thing.

The bad ones though? Oh my!

Edited August 22, 2016 by bcsapper

[eyeball]

I notice you inserted "all Muslims" in there when it was not stated.

With which bit of the statement do you disagree? I'm no Islamic scholar, but just from reading quotes from the Koran on here and listening to radicals banging on about Sharia Law on the news it would seem that statement is not at all far from the truth.

The trick is not abiding by it. Just as most Christians don't stick too closely to the more lurid bits of the Old Testament, most Muslims don't adhere to the awful bits of the Koran, as stated above. Lots do though. Entire countries base some of their laws on it, as you acknowledge.

There's nothing wrong with pointing out how wrong that is.

Christians are trying to export their ideas and change the laws of other countries.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-kaoma-uganda-gays-american-ministers-20140323-story.html

Like rust, it never sleeps.

[Guest]

Christians are trying to export their ideas and change the laws of other countries.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-kaoma-uganda-gays-american-ministers-20140323-story.html

Like rust, it never sleeps.

Absolutely. there's nothing wrong with pointing out how wrong that is either. I hope the lawsuit wins.

Still, at least President Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and U.N. General Secretary Ban Ki-moon issued strongly worded statements. That should do it.

[Argus]

People such as yourself know only that which confirms their bias and fear. Islam, just like any other religion, has a variety of teachings. It's followers pick and choose what they'll follow. It's unfortunate that governments choose the most inhumane teachings of Islam to codify, but then non-Islamic governments do the same.

Really? What inhumane aspects of Christianity have western countries chosen to codify?

And what inhumane aspects of Islam have Muslim countries chosen to codify which are not considered central to Islam and nearly universally supported by Islamic scholars? As per what I posted on another topic, for example:

Under Islamic law, it is not permissible for men and women to freely mix or socialize with non Mahram men under any circumstances. Islamic scholars are unanimous on this matter because the prophet of Islam left behind his words: “I have not left behind me any temptation more harmful for men than women”

Do Islamic scholars in any number oppose the execution of homosexuals? Do they oppose the execution of adulterers? How about the execution of those who choose to leave Islam or blasphemers? You continue to insist that the religion is not about the religion, that no matter what is said, even though that is generally considered mainstream Islam around the world, people don't really follow that - even though we have many many, many examples of them doing so.

Before you go all apeshit about defending brown people, if I ran across brown people expressing misogynistic views, or supporting violent conversions to Islam, or declaring gays a scourge on the earth, I'd call them on their bullshit just like I'm calling you on yours.

This from the person who was seriously trying to argue just the other day that life for women in Egypt is fine, and that, hey, Canadian women have it just as bad. The fact 95% of Egyptian women have their clitorises cut off is irrelevant to you, I know. The widespread and sweeping violence against women in Egypt even more so.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

Because they aren't focusing on the *people* who do this BS, but instead choose to vilify all 1.5 billion people who happen to call themselves Muslims, while grudgingly conceding that some might not be so bad.

How can you possibly discuss something as general as Islam while focusing on 'the people'? Unless, of course, you mean the views of the people as expressed by polls, which support the conclusion most of them in most of the world are extremely socially backward, even violently so? Or do you mean the behaviour of Muslims around the world? Should I not focus on that? Should I ignore that of the dozens of Muslim countries around the world none is a real democracy, none respects basic freedoms, and none have equal rights for non-Muslims? Should I ignore the fact that every nation with a substantial Muslim minority has to endure terrorism from that minority in their quest for Islamic laws and insistence their religious beliefs be given more prominence?

Edited August 22, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

Really? What is this then, but a blanket statement about Islam and all Muslims: Islam - which is a political philosophy, as well as a religion, which despises every single thing liberalism and progressivism is supposed to be about. That social code does not allow for equality between genders. In fact, it explicitly prohibits it. It requires homosexuals of any sort be killed. It does not permit argument or disagreement, and any attempt at rebelling against its laws brings death

Which of those are untrue?

[Argus]

I was referring to your rhetoric. But I am sure you were aware of that.

What about my rhetoric was exaggerated or untrue? Pick something and refute it.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Argus

[Argus]

With which bit of the statement do you disagree? I'm no Islamic scholar, but just from reading quotes from the Koran on here and listening to radicals banging on about Sharia Law on the news it would seem that statement is not at all far from the truth.

The trick is not abiding by it. Just as most Christians don't stick too closely to the more lurid bits of the Old Testament, most Muslims don't adhere to the awful bits of the Koran, as stated above. Lots do though. Entire countries base some of their laws on it, as you acknowledge.

I've previously posted polling from PEW Research which showed by far the majority in most Muslim countries, especially the ones where our immigrants come from, definitely do support all these things.

[Argus]

Islam disapproves of homosexuality. So does Christianity. Islam disapproves of extra-marital sex and abortion. So does Christianity. If you look strictly to their holy books, it's actually Christianity that imposes the harshest penalties for those 'sins'. Islam is a patriarchal religion; so is Christianity. Islam teaches that only those that follow the book (Muslims, Christians and Jews) will be allowed into paradise - although Muslims are the most holy, of course. Christianity teaches that only Christians will be allowed into paradise. When the bible and the qu'ran are compared, they are surprisingly similar in what they teach, from defining sin to meting out punishment, even to the stories or parables contained with it's pages. It's in the interpretations of what is written that one finds significant difference.

No, no it isn't. What is Islam? Islam is not the koran and hadiths and holy texts alone. Islam is the people who follow Islam, in their entirety, and how they worship and what they believe their religious texts mean and what their scholars say.

It's no good saying the bible says something cruel if Biblical scholars and mainstream churches don't support this and Christians don't follow it. I'm not criticizing Islam for obscure nasty references in this or that religious text but for the fact Islam, as a religion, supports that kind of belief and behaviour, that their religious scholars support it, and their believers support it.

Egypt, which we discussed the other day, wants Sharia law imposed (74% support in poll), with religious courts (95% support). As for adultery, stoning is the appropriate punishment supported by 81% of Egyptians. And 86% of Egyptians want anyone who tries to leave Islam executed. So no, it's not just the government. This is Islam, what the people believe in.

Edited August 22, 2016 by Argus