It is overrated because you yourself could not provide me with an example of Islamophobia. If it were not overrated, you would have been able to provide a real example, not a false one, the first time you tried to provide an example. Your own action prove it is overrated.
Now you need to provide a real example
. I know Berkley would say blacks are currenrly deliberately isupressed and I would not agree, so when you find what is an example, I might not agree using the real definitions of the words and not Berkley's ideology.
Last edited by Common Soldier; August 17, 2020 at 01:42 AM.
What academic institution would you accept?
You asked me for a criteria. I said if you don't want to set one this one will do. The offer for you to provide the criteria for Islamophobia you asked for to begin with stands. Are you familiar with the Oxford English dictionary? There is a definition in there. 100 year old history of the word etc. Doesn't work as well as the criteria you requested though.
I am satisfied with the examples you have provided.
I am just letting you know ahead of time I likely we won"t agree that the example bases on the leftist rheroric. I don't agree when you constantly cry Eurocentric, not as you use the termm
If there is an Oxford English definiton, why not use it? It didn't use Eurocentric. The definition needs to use neutral objective words, and words like Eurocentric are not neutral nor objective. Otherwise it becomes an excuse to label anytbing you don't like Islamophobia.
Last edited by Common Soldier; August 17, 2020 at 02:48 AM.
Funny that you never attempted to reply to my previous statement here, which somewhat explains why is certain prejudice toward Islam healthy for the society.
I think Common your question is about Post #20.
French originally found in a thesis published by Alain Quellien in 1910 to describe a "a prejudice against Islam that is widespread among the peoples of Western and Christian Civilian.
OED
Intense dislike or fear of Islam, esp. as a political force; hostility or prejudice towards Muslims
Why did you bring up the hatred that the so-called Pastor Anderson preached yet you cannot seem able to do the same about Muslims who preach death to non- Muslims? The scale of the one is much less than the scale of the other. The most number of conflicts today involve Muslims, why is that?
I don’t understand what the question is?
Ss far as I can tell all the posts I replied to are still here.
Is the Oxford English Dictionary definition an acceptable criteria as you stated it would be? Once we establish the criteria examples of Islamophobia can be supplied.
Axalon. Did you think to surprise me with things I have seen repeated over and over before?
Lets dig into how “”Moderate Islam” is one of the great lies of our time”.
In order for me to submit appropriate disagreement I need some clarification when you have a moment.
First question. Why quotes around Moderate Islam? Would the sentence not have worked as well without the quotes?
Islamophobia and Moderate Islam are both propaganda. Is Christian Persecution propaganda too?
Your argument is the Jews and Christians don’t also have faith their religion is correct and everyone else got it wrong? (Are you saying Christians do not believe the Bible is “gods untarnished words”? If Basics is around he could explain your fault there better than I.
Are you familiar with the “track record“ of Christianity?
Are there religions to whom freedom of speech is not a structural enemy? Buddhism comes to mind. Maybe Shintoism. Of the Abrahamic faiths the Baha’i are the only ones at all open to it as I see it?
To not just throw questions at you. You seem to be arguing that enforcing a religious structure of dubious morals is a great fault of Islam and brutal violence is inherent to such enforcement. In America such a structure based on Christianity is pervasive. Are we throwing gays off of buildings? No. Did we ever. Not really. But Europe did some awful things to gays for a long long time. And gays and especially transgender people are victims of violent crime in statistically disproportionate amounts.
Religion is never moderate. It’s application sometimes is but that has more to do with strength and opportunity than one absolute dogma being less fanatical than another.
Last edited by wanderwegger; August 17, 2020 at 11:02 PM. Reason: my phone sucks
I use the quotes to mean while they are called moderates, they don't behave like what we would call moderates, just being called that. It alerts the reader of the fact that while label moderates, they not be.
Moderate Islam is propaganda because many of those called "moderate" oppose many moderate positions, and many so called moderate Muslims the death fawtwa on author Rushdie including Yusuf Islam (Cat Stevens). Many "moderate" Muslims in the West were more upset by Charlie Hebo's cartoons than the deaths, showing s skewed moral compass. Many so called moderate Muslim countries have laws against leaving Islam, while not as extreme as fundamentalist, are still not as moderatenas we would expect by western standard.Islamophobia and Moderate Islam are both propaganda. Is Christian Persecution propaganda too?
Most Muslims are true moderates. However, too many are not, a quarter is too high a % to sympathize with Charlie Hebo's attackers in a country like Britain. It like saying to blacks "Majority of our cops aren't racist scumbags. Only 25%!". Would blacks think that statistic ok?.
Islamophobia is propaganda because there is no widespread oppression of Muslims in the West as those using Islamophobia, and somd cite Charlie Hebo cartoons as proof of Islamophobia. I
I have not heard "Christian Persecution" thrown about as a term like Islamophobia, so it is much less commonally used. But it is based on a stark reality many Christians are undergoing persecution in Muslim countries. Christians are often targeted under Pakistan Blasphemy Laws http://www.evangelizationstation.com...ms_under_p.htm
While some Muslim groups have been undergoing persecution, Burma comes to mind, Muslims are far more likely to do the oppressing than be oppressed.
Everybody believes their religion is the right one. But only Islam kills you if you try to leave it. Of the 12 countries in the world that have death penalty for apostates, all are Islamic. And most Muslim countries have penalties for leaving Islam.Your argument is the Jews and Christians don’t also have faith their religion is correct and everyone else got it wrong?
Many Christians believe the Bible is the authorative word of God on matters of faith, but could have errors in other areas. Some merely think it is an inspired work but not perfect. Baskcs views are not shared by all.(Are you saying Christians do not e3believe the Bible is “gods untarnished words”? If Basics is around he could explain your fault there better than I.
yes. Are you with Islams daker side? Have you read "Why I Am Not A Muslim"?Are you familiar with the “track record“ of Christianity?
Religions that can't control society and dictate its beliefs on others or tries to. Catholic Church used to be like Islam, but secular governments control society. It cannot censor speech it disliked. Its when religions control society and dictates its view through things like sharia that is the problem.Are there religions to whom freedom of speech is not a structural enemy? Buddhism comes to mind. Maybe Shintoism. Of the Abrahamic faiths the Baha’i are the only ones at all open to it as I see it?
Islam is inherently more rigid than Christianity. It is why Islam hss the only countries with death penalth for gays. Islam has 11 countries have [BГnone[/B], Islam is far worse today, which matters.To not just throw questions at you. You seem to be arguing that enforcing a religious structure of dubious morals is a great fault of Islam and brutal violence is inherent to such enforcement. In America such a structure based on Christianity is pervasive. Are we throwing gays off of buildings? No. Did we ever. Not really. But Europe did some awful things to gays for a long long time. And gays and especially transgender people are victims of violent crime in statistically disproportionate amounts.
The reasons Islam is inherently is more lf a concern js
1. The Koran is regarded by the najority of uslims as the very word of Allah, which means it can't be questioned, troublesome verse and all, because nobody can question Allah's word. The Bible is mere the inspire word of God, and can more readilly accept that the human writers got a few things wrong and so not have blindly obey no matter what as Muslims do with the Koran
2. The Koran is not chronological. You cannot look at only the Koran and decide which verse has been supecede by another verse. This leaves open for violent Muslim groups to decide that violent Koran verses replace peaceful ones. Worse, there is no context in the Koran itself to interpret a verse, or tell where it stll applies. The Bible is chronological and has narrative structure, which means you czn look at violent passages in the OT and see that these violent command were directed to people of a specific situation and are no longer applicable todaynin a way Islam cannot.
3. Koran is interested in the letter of the law, and Christianity is interested in the spirit or intent of the law. If the letter of the law no longer does the intent of the law do altered circumstances, the intent thd law will supercede the actual letter. Islams more rigid adherence makes it harder adapt to changing circumstances, making what an act of justice and kindness cruel an unjust.
4. Th example of its founder, Muhammud. Muhammad had men tortured and killed for money, massacre entire village, had critic killed. When you have Muslim 50 years old men marrying 11 years olds, they are following in Muhammad's example. Jesus had no one killed
****I BELIEVE ISLAM CAN CHANGE AND BE THE MODERATE RELIGION IT IS FOR MOST MUSLIMS. THE ISSUES UP CAN OVERCOME*]]]]]]]
But some religions are less moderate than others. In Nigeria, only the Muslim areas under Islsmic sharia law have death penalties for gays. That difference is due to IslamReligion is never moderate. It’s application sometimes is but that has more to do with strength and opportunity than one absolute dogma being less fanatical than another.
Last edited by Common Soldier; August 18, 2020 at 03:05 AM. Reason: typo add comments
Nah, I just think it was worthwhile and healthy to present a totally different perspective then yours.
Sure, why not...
Why certainly...
Its my way to express that the concept is as such is utterly unserious (and an impossibility) - from the perspective of Islamic traditional doctrine - as outlined in the Koran and the Hadiths (sahih bukhari, mostly). Its heresy... And heresy will be greeted with death and hellfire in traditional Islam. There is no way around it. Thus there is no future in it - none what so ever - as far as Islamic doctrine is concerned. I have already explained this in previous post.
Yup, totally so... As for Christian persecution, it is irrelevant in this given context. We are discussing "Islamophobia in the west", not "Christian prosecution in the West". Our timeframe is obviously confined to the 20th and 21st century - as both "the west" and "Islamophobia" are modern concepts. Our geographical framework is the traditional western industrialized and secular world - as in western Europe, northern America, Australia and New Zeeland (if we are generous we could also perhaps include Japan, south Korea and possibly Israel into that entity). Regardless the topic is Islam and Islamophobia within that given area, and this naturally within the relevant timeframe.
You are missing the point made in that instance. It is about the perspective of how Islam views such things and how it builds up its supposed legitimacy and relevancy in the world because of those views. As I understand it, (most) Christians do not make the claim that the bible (regardless of version) is "the verbatim words of God" but rather "words inspired by God", as written by man. If true, that's a big fat difference, and that on multiple levels. Likewise, the (pious) Jews does not make any such claims for the Torah either - again it is a case of " inspired by god", as I understand it.
Whataboutism much? It is irrelevant in this given context. This is about Islam and "Islamophobia in the west", not Christianity. If you really want to discuss the Christian track-record set up a dedicated thread for it...
Its a good question... Probably - but I don't dare identifying any movement here and now, save atheism. Besides, all that it is irrelevant anyways as we are talking about Islam now and what goes for that movement - and in that case it is a structural enemy for sure. No question about it...
Incorrect... I would argue that Islam is inherently false, corrupt and revolting in nature. And once we throw in the "kafir" (unbeliever) in the mix we are advised deception, oppression, brutality and hostility as well. It is thus inherent in Islam - especially in its source material (see Koran and hadiths). Especially so in the confrontation and dealings with the kafir. Furthermore, the examples set by Mohammed himself is rather clear for all to see. He was a tyrant, warlord, slaver, killer and child-molester (at a minimum) among many other things - and yet he is still regarded by Islam as the greatest and most perfect example of how one should gloriously walk the path of god and conduct ones life - as declared and explained in the hadiths (among other things). In short, a supposed beacon to follow, admire and aspire too. This naturally includes all actions and violence as well - and by typical western standards much of all that it is just vile and revolting. Yet, this is supposedly the most shining example for all mankind to follow - no wonder, most kafirs have serious problems with it.
Relevancy? The USA is not representative of Islam... It is however representative of the western modern capitalist and secular civilization. If America don't kill their fags/dykes left and right, it probably because of that fact. Same thing goes for the entire western world btw. Islam totally hates gays universally, so what? Its hardly unique or distinct for Islam - so that entire perspective strikes me as rather fruitless in given topic. If you really want to discuss that, set up a dedicated thread for it.
Well, that clearly is a matter of personal opinion. However, much more important then that is whether the movement in question actually affords moderation or not. That is the interesting and relevant part. As in the way the movement is devised and if there are actually any margins for alteration/moderations it without wrecking the entire structure/foundation for that movement (in terms of credibility) as a result. If we look at Islam, it is ultimately a question of what is possible within the existing framework of Islamic doctrine - as devised, explained and presented to us by god (supposedly). That is not the sort of thing you can question, negotiate or compromise with, disregard or ignore, or somehow moderate and alter - and still proclaim yourself that very same gods supposed servant. Not without gigantic irreversible repercussions as direct a result. Because of this reality - it can not happen, it must not happen - ever. If it did happen, it would mean the total bankruptcy and collapse of Islam as a credible movement somehow because of the way Islam is devised.
- A
Last edited by Axalon; August 19, 2020 at 05:52 AM. Reason: upgrade!
Islamophobia is not a problem in the west, its just a result of islamic terrorism. This is as simple as that 2+2=4. That you are even posting a topic like this, makes me think that you are either a troll, or someone with an incredibly naive outlook on the world. People are afraid to die in a terrorist attack ok, you understand that much? Now you want to point fingers at those people who fear for their lives, for their future, for their children? Pathetic.
While it is not as big a problem as the Left makes out, it is a problem.- Trumps travel ban was a clear example - banning Muslims who had no evidence of terrorisr sympathies from.travelling simply because they werw born in the wrong country is Islamophobia.
And yes, islamic terrorist helped create islamophobia, but the west is not as entirely innocent in crearing islamic terrorism as we like to think.
Look at it from a Muslim perspective - US invasion of Iraq killed lot civilians. We did not target the civilians, but they are just as dead anyways. Tne arrogance of the west, coming to Muslim lands and arbritralily drawing national boundaries as they saw fit - if Muslim powers had done the same thing in Europe it would also breed resentment. While if the decaeent West wants to poke fun and insult its own figures, it is the West own business, but the West has no right apply their irreverence to Muslim figures and kmpose their irreverent values on Muslims. Since Muslimms are too weak to meet the West with regular military forces. they use terrorism instead to strike back. That is how.many.Muslims would.see things, I suspect.