The Ill feeling between left and right on immigration

[DogOnPorch]

6 minutes ago, Goddess said:

We're not talking about where various religions want to worship privately.  No one is talking about or even advocating preventing any religion from praying.  Nice try, though.

 

Strawman positions are all they have when defending a cult that is openly calling for the murder of those deemed unworthy of Islam.

[Goddess]

55 minutes ago, Argus said:

So going further with this theme of the conflict between left and right on immigration I'd like to address the left wing fascination with Islam as evidenced by almost all the left wingers on this site, and many, many 'liberals' throughout the West. They tend to like to throw around the term 'Islamophobic' which is a made-up nonsense word give the fear of Islam isn't at all unreasonable by any realistic definition. But the counter term s Islamophilia, which I believe large, sweeping numbers of the more politically active Left suffers from.

Islamophiia is the unswerving dedication to the defense of Islam by progressive liberals, to defending it against any and all accusations or criticism, without regard to merit, and to ignoring indefensible practices and social tenets of the religion. Islamophiles regard Muslims as a minority group in need of their paternalistic protection, and are steadfast in their attestation that Islam is no different than any other religion, and no more violent. If you point out thirty thousand Islamic terrorist incidents they will produce one or two non-Islamic terrorist incidents and wave them aloft triumphantly like Chamberlain returning with an agreement for  'peace in our time', to show that 'Christianity is the SAME! If you talk about the deeply violent misogyny of the Muslim world they will assert that women are sexually harassed in the West. If you point out polls and surveys taken in the Muslim world they will pretend that the Islam in western countries is an entirely separate Islam (even though virtually all imams in he west come from the middle east), and that, of course, no Western Muslim thinks that way.

Islamophilia’s most common manifestation is where progressives treat Muslims as vulnerable children whose feathers can’t be ruffled. The Islamophilia crowd damage Western democracies and Islam for they invite us to sacrifice elements of our own freedom to redeem ourselves against the largely imaginary sins against Muslims in the colonial past. They also invite Muslims to pose as victims and demand the rewards of such victimhood. The message of Islamophilia is that Muslims deserve to receive no flak at a time when Islam and Muslims badly need to be criticised.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/06/protective-cloak-islamophilia/#

This, of course, makes it difficult to hold any kind of rational discussion about the problem Islam poses to a western secular culture, since Islamophiles instantly become outraged whenever one asserts there even IS a problem with Islam. To their minds, the only violent people in Islam are a tiny, tiny minority of fanatics who probably have psychological issues. And none, of course, would ever want to come here. What's more, you must be an Islamophobe or Xenophobe to care.

This part of the article:

Quote

Badar is right and exposes the Muslims who have absorbed Western values but pretend their more progressive views are somehow because of Islam. They see Islam as they would like it to be, and not how it is.

.....is exactly what I was trying unsuccessfully to explain to Dialamah.  The article she posted illustrated this point perfectly.  The level of cognitive dissonance needed to say that values such as opportunity, justice, fairness, equality are exclusively "Islamic" values, not "Western" ones and in the same breath admit that almost no Mulsim country practices these, and few Muslims practice them until they get to Western countries.......what can you do but SMH.

[Argus]

10 minutes ago, Goddess said:

This part of the article:

.....is exactly what I was trying unsuccessfully to explain to Dialamah.  The article she posted illustrated this point perfectly.  The level of cognitive dissonance needed to say that values such as opportunity, justice, fairness, equality are exclusively "Islamic" values, not "Western" ones and in the same breath admit that almost no Mulsim country practices these, and few Muslims practice them until they get to Western countries.......what can you do but SMH.

You see the same from leftists who claim that Communism would actually be a perfect system, and dismiss the fact that all Communist countries have been miserable hellholes by saying that those weren't properly Communist. The willingness to lie to themselves is truly amazing. You find probably no Nazis in the Conservative party, but the NDP has got lots of Marxists, and they're not the least embarrassed about it. 

[dialamah]

52 minutes ago, Argus said:

This, of course, makes it difficult to hold any kind of rational discussion about the problem Islam poses to a western secular culture, since Islamophiles instantly become outraged whenever one asserts there even IS a problem with Islam. To their minds, the only violent people in Islam are a tiny, tiny minority of fanatics who probably have psychological issues. And none, of course, would ever want to come here. What's more, you must be an Islamophobe or Xenophobe to care.

 

I've tried to have a rational discussion about the "problem of Islam Extremism", and there was no interest.  The Islamaphobes idea of rational conversation is this:

1.  OMG, Muslims killed a few Westerners (because Muslims killing other Muslims, or Westerners killing Muslims for decades, or Christians killing Muslims in far-flung lands isn't a problem)

2.  OMG, it's because they are all violent extremists due to their religion (ignoring the fact that most Muslims aren't killing anyone)

3.  OMG, all Muslim countries are shitholes for gays and women (ignoring all the other countries in the world that are also shitholes for gays and women, like India - from whom we also accept immigrants)

4.  OMG, Muslims are a scourge upon the earth!   

Here's how Islamophobes work: 

Someone takes a video of British Muslims celebrating a cricket match win in 2009 and posts it on the internet claiming it's Muslims celebrating a terror attack:  Islamaphobes fall for it, hook line and sinker.   

A sensational story about a particularly egregious act comes out of the Middle East:  it's news because it's unusual.  Islamophobes conclude that this is 'business as usual' and all Muslims behave this way.  Islamophobes choose fear over reality.

Someone claims that Muhammed married and had sex with a six-year-old.  Islamaphobes believe it and when evidence is presented to the contrary, they reject it.    Islamophobes choose guilt without evidence.

Islamaphobes demand that Muslims stand up and denounce terrorism; when it's pointed out that Muslims around the world do exactly that, they say it's not enough.  Islamophobes choose hate over understanding.

Islamaphobes claim that Muslims want to implement Sharia law over everybody in Western countries; when it's explained that there are countries around the world where Muslims have the power to do just that and they don't, that's ignored.  Islamophobes choose fear over reality.

Islamophobes claim that Muslims want to take over the West and force everyone to convert and when, again, it's pointed out that in many countries they have the power to do just that and they don't, that's ignored.  Islamophobes choose fear over reality.

Islamaphobes refuse to allow that just like Christians around the world have different beliefs, so do Muslims.   Islamaphobes use the interpretation of Islam to define and condemn all Muslims.   Islamophobes choose hate over understanding.

Islamaphobes accuse those who doesn't jump on their hate and fear bandwagon of supporting human rights violations by Islamic governments and brutal, violent behavior by Muslims.  There is no middle ground with Islamaphobes, there is no way to both be concerned about terrorism, religiously-motivated intolerance and patriarchy and oppressive governments, while also allowing for Muslims who want to leave that behind.  Islamophobes choose irrationality over rationality.

Islamaphobes:  irrational, illogical, ignorant and gullible.

I'm not here to defend Islam; I'm here to fight against Islamaphobes.  

 

[eyeball]

31 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

If you could only come-up with an actual example...

 

[DogOnPorch]

19 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 

 

The Shah WAS a tyrant installed by the Soviet Union...and he WAS torturing the bastards in power today.

Too bad you have issues with truth.

[DogOnPorch]

38 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I'm not here to defend Islam; I'm here to fight against Islamaphobes.  

 

 

#Must-Stop-All-Criticism-Of-Islam

[dialamah]

3 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

#Must-Stop-All-Criticism-Of-Islam

 

Try a legit criticism instead of your hyperbolic lies.  

Here's a critic of Islam I do follow and often agree with:   https://nervana1.org/

 

 

[DogOnPorch]

Just now, dialamah said:

Try a legit criticism instead of your hyperbolic lies.  

Here's a critic of Islam I do follow and often agree with:   https://nervana1.org/

 

 

 

You're free to support Islam. You're free to claim I'm lying about your preferred cult when I quote your holy book.

[Goddess]

1 hour ago, dialamah said:

I've tried to have a rational discussion about the "problem of Islam Extremism", and there was no interest.  The Islamaphobes idea of rational conversation is this:

1.  OMG, Muslims killed a few Westerners (because Muslims killing other Muslims, or Westerners killing Muslims for decades, or Christians killing Muslims in far-flung lands isn't a problem)

2.  OMG, it's because they are all violent extremists due to their religion (ignoring the fact that most Muslims aren't killing anyone)

3.  OMG, all Muslim countries are shitholes for gays and women (ignoring all the other countries in the world that are also shitholes for gays and women, like India - from whom we also accept immigrants)

4.  OMG, Muslims are a scourge upon the earth!   

I notice you have the problem of Islam extremism in quotes.  It doesn't seem like you think there is any problem with Islamic extremism; or at best, you feel it's a very minor problem.  

I'm wondering why you feel that the problem of Islamic extremism (which I feel is a larger problem than you do) should never be discussed without discussing problems in every other religion.  

How does acknowledging a definite problem in Islam (and yes, I get that you feel there is no definite problem with extremism in Islam) equate to "ignoring" other problems.

You're like the men at a breast cancer rally who screech "Yeah, but what about prostate cancer?  Why are you all ignoring that?"

 

Edited April 24, 2017 by Goddess

[Michael Hardner]

Hi folks, this isn't about Islam/Iran but about left and right attitudes, generally, on immigration.  Please stay on topic.

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

The Shah WAS a tyrant installed by the Soviet Union...and he WAS torturing the bastards in power today.

The Shah was a tyrant that was ALSO reinstalled by the CIA - the torture you're celebrating got under way shortly after that.

Quote

Too bad you have issues with truth.

Too bad you can't lie better.

[dialamah]

1 hour ago, Goddess said:

This part of the article:

.....is exactly what I was trying unsuccessfully to explain to Dialamah.  The article she posted illustrated this point perfectly.  The level of cognitive dissonance needed to say that values such as opportunity, justice, fairness, equality are exclusively "Islamic" values, not "Western" ones and in the same breath admit that almost no Mulsim country practices these, and few Muslims practice them until they get to Western countries.......what can you do but SMH.

 

Nowhere did the article claim these were *exclusively* Islamic values and not Western ones.    He said "The Koran's teachings are better represented in Western societies than in Islamic countries" and expanded on that.   Nowhere does he claim these are not also Western values, or that nobody but a Muslim can legitimately claim them.  This entire article is critical of *Islamic* governments, something people like yourself claim you want to see people like myself do more of.  

Maybe your level of anti-Muslim bias is what the issue is here.  

[Argus]

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I've tried to have a rational discussion about the "problem of Islam Extremism", and there was no interest.  The Islamaphobes idea of rational conversation is this:

Thanks for giving us all a classic Islamophilic rant about all those who dare to criticize Islam. 

In truth you try to stop rational discussions about Islam. And your definition of 'extremism' is limited to someone who is actively killing someone today now, like, immediately, on behalf of Islam who has had psychological testing to ensure he has no emotional issues, and who has been deemed drug free and had a happy home life.

Those, to you, are the only people who can be termed extremists. As for polls showing that in some countries 90% of the population says blasphemers and apostates must die, well, those don't count. Nor do those who vote for Islamist parties. That a poll shows almost 70% of British Muslims feel anyone who draws cartoons of the prophet must either die, or at least be imprisoned, has no impact on your feelings about the number of extremists in this religion. 

 

 

 

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

1.  OMG, Muslims killed a few Westerners (because Muslims killing other Muslims, or Westerners killing Muslims for decades, or Christians killing Muslims in far-flung lands isn't a problem)

LOL. You can't even write your silly line about Muslims killing Westerners without including a sweeping apology on behalf of Muslims!

 

 

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

3.  OMG, all Muslim countries are shitholes for gays and women (ignoring all the other countries in the world that are also shitholes for gays and women, like India - from whom we also accept immigrants)

There are shitholes which are not Muslim nations. The thing that gets me is that virtually ALL Muslim nations are violently antogonistic towards anything remotely resembling equality. And ninety percent of Muslims live in such countries.

 

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Someone claims that Muhammed married and had sex with a six-year-old.  Islamaphobes believe it and when evidence is presented to the contrary, they reject it.    Islamophobes choose guilt without evidence.

More apologizing on behalf of Islam. This is something Haidr talked about called confirmation bias If you want to not believe something, then you will determinedly search the internet for one piece of contradictory testimony, and then hold that aloft triumphantly. It doesn't matter if a thousand web sites claim Muhammad and his people took sex slaves, or that he took a six year old as his wife and consummated that marriage a few years later. If you can find one that asserts he didn't actually rape her till she was older, that's all the proof you need.

However, if one examines neutral guides, one finds both your excuse making, and the more learned response.

Faced with the arguments of Western critics, Muslim apologists sometimes piece together information from various accounts in an attempt to deny that Aisha was as young as critics often claim:The problem with the selective and carefully edited defense just given (other than the complete lack of references) is that it ignores the numerous accounts we now possess which record Aisha’s age when Muhammad consummated his marriage to her. Many of these accounts are from Aisha herself. Indeed, the evidence for Muhammad’s marriage to the young Aisha is as strong as the evidence for just about any other fact in Islam. We have copious traditions relating Muhammad’s marriage proposal when Aisha was six or seven years old, as well as his consummation of that marriage when she was nine: https://myislam.dk/articles/en/wood was-muhammad-a-pedophile.php

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Islamaphobes demand that Muslims stand up and denounce terrorism; when it's pointed out that Muslims around the world do exactly that, they say it's not enough.  Islamophobes choose hate over understanding.

What regular people demand is that the Muslim community swears off those aspects of the Koran which cause terrorism, those aspects which justify violence against non-Muslims and the spreading of Islam by the sword and by any other means possible. As long as Muslims believe in the righteousness of these tenets of their religion the very few, intermittent condemnations of Islamic terrorism are disingenuous.

 

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Islamaphobes claim that Muslims want to implement Sharia law over everybody in Western countries; when it's explained that there are countries around the world where Muslims have the power to do just that and they don't, that's ignored.

In point of fact, every poll taken of Muslims out there in the broader world shows they want sharia law. The Muslim majority nations which do not have sharia law have strong components of it in their secular law and are led by dictators who don't want their power reigned in by sharia. 

50 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I'm not here to defend Islam; I'm here to fight against Islamaphobes.  

By defending Islam. Uh huh.

[eyeball]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hi folks, this isn't about Islam/Iran but about left and right attitudes, generally, on immigration.  Please stay on topic.

Michael, this will always be a part of the topic no matter how much you wish it isn't.  Its the nature of having to live with unresolved unreconciled past actions that have lead to such great harm.  It is inevitable and you need to deal with it better than always trying to shut it down.  It will not go away. 

[DogOnPorch]

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

The Shah was a tyrant that was ALSO reinstalled by the CIA - the torture you're celebrating got under way shortly after that.

Too bad you can't lie better.

 

No he was not. The Shah was put on the throne by Stalin. You're mixing-up Mossadeq with the Shah.

[Goddess]

It seems like the only discussion of islamic extremism that you would consider "rational" is if the focus of the conversation is not on Islam but on other extremism or problems.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, eyeball said:

 It is inevitable and you need to deal with it better than always trying to shut it down.  It will not go away. 

There are multiple other threads on Islam to post on.

[Argus]

7 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Hi folks, this isn't about Islam/Iran but about left and right attitudes, generally, on immigration.  Please stay on topic.

You are correct. And thanks for pointing that out. I would also point out, though, that much of the conflict between left-right on immigration is due to what the right considers the reflexive and uncritical acceptance by the Left of harshly anti-western values among immigrants. Why, even the suggestion that there be some screening against such values draws righteous indignation from the Left! 

[DogOnPorch]

Islam is the issue...not immigration.

[dialamah]

7 minutes ago, Goddess said:

notice you have the problem of Islam extremism in quotes.  It doesn't seem like you think there is any problem with Islamic extremism; or at best, you feel it's a very minor problem.  

 

I put "Extremism" in quotes to indicate that I think that is a problem: it's a problem for Islam and it's a problem for peace and goodwill around the world.  A huge fvcking problem, is my personal opinion.

 

8 minutes ago, Goddess said:

 

You're like the men at a breast cancer rally who screech "Yeah, but what about prostate cancer?  Why are you all ignoring that?"

 

And you are like the nazi-feminist who screeches at every man she meets that he is a rapist and needs to be castrated, because she knows a friend of a friend of a friend who was assaulted.

 

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Argus said:

 Why, even the suggestion that there be some screening against such values draws righteous indignation from the Left! 

I think the left is more open to other cultures, and identifies themselves as owning openness as one of their own values.

[DogOnPorch]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

I think the left is more open to other cultures, and identifies themselves as owning openness as one of their own values.

 

Islam is akin to Nazism...be open to it all you like.

[Argus]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

I think the left is more open to other cultures, and identifies themselves as owning openness as one of their own values.

I definitely think they are. But this is the gist of the disagreement. I said earlier I would rather have 10,000 Christian Lebanese immigrants than 1,000 Muslim Lebanese immigrants. Now I'm not a very religious man, so my preference here is basically the belief that the Christians will be much faster to assimilate, join our culture, rather than insist on retaining their old world values. I would say the great majority of my non-economic concern with immigration is for this reason. And it is a reason I would say all conservatives share. As for liberals, I have to say, as a conservative, I find it bizarre that they show zero concern over the importation of hundreds of thousands of people who make our home-grown homophobes and sexists seem enlightened.

[dialamah]

4 minutes ago, Argus said:

In point of fact, every poll taken of Muslims out there in the broader world shows they want sharia law.

For themselves.  Not for everyone else.  There are Muslim-majority countries where Sharia law is only imposed on Muslims, and secular law is used for non-Muslims.   I've already posted about this, listing all the countries and the different ways in which Sharia has been implemented, but your Islamaphobia made it impossible for you to understand.