|
I love the human genre. I think of all the things that will be lost forever if the world suffered a total extinction event (like being hit by a comet) and I feel sad about all the creations of the human genre that will be lost forever. I think is a feeling that is easy to share, you only need to find your favorite music and play it, and imagine that music vanishing in nothing. Theres beauty in this world that is not creation of nature, but is our own, something we created. It was physically painful to see the buddha statues destroyed by the taliban. It was only a few months before the 11/S. I think these TNT explosions where somehow a warning, the only warning we got before two planes crashed in the world trade center. What type of people would destroy art, art that have existed for millennia? religious fundamentalist that want to erase history, that don't accept that there are different ways to see the world. Tei fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Dec 4, 2015 |
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
Remember to pass the joint after two puffs Tei.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:42
|
|
|
Holy poo poo at this dude's implication, what a loving crazy rear end in a top hat. I mean there's no way that he's sincere, right? So therefore he thinks it's a good idea to direct outrage for mass murders towards the President and gun control? I mean what .... aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:52
|
|
|
Moxie posted:Holy poo poo at this dude's implication, what a loving crazy rear end in a top hat. I mean there's no way that he's sincere, right? So therefore he thinks it's a good idea to direct outrage for mass murders towards the President and gun control? I mean what .... aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Welcome to the reality of Islamophobia.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:55
|
|
|
Helsing posted:
  I have changed my opinion since I started posting in this thread. I think now that islamophobia perhaps is ridiculous and uncalled for. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:56
|
|
|
Good on yer.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
Making such a statement publicly is a fairly serious breach of psychiatric ethics. No wonder he works at Fox.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:05
|
|
|
Ablow claims to have "resigned in protest" from the American Psychiatric Association several years ago. A quick perusal of his wikipedia should tell you everything you need to know about him. For instance, he said in 2014 that Obama wasn't protecting America from ebola because he felt a stronger affinity for Africa. The fact this guy is a regular commentator and columnist for Fox is a great example of how Islamophobia has become both an important political tendnecy in America and a sort of a cottage industry for cranks who know they can make bank on telling the racists what they want to hear, especially in situations where they can offer a patina of scientific or intellectual legitimacy. The late Christopher Hitchens used to do the same thing, albeit pitched at a more high fallutin liberal leaning audience than the one Ablow caters to, and there's a more than passing similarity between Hitchens and some of the posters in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
Helsing posted:The fact this guy is a regular commentator and columnist for Fox is a great example of how Fox News is bullshit for reactionary morons? Yes. You know it to be true because they also recruit as commentators and columnists convicted traitors. How long do you have to dig to find naked display of other forms of bigotry on Fox? Like perhaps something about how the "Black Lives Matter" movement is only made of brutish thugs? Maybe we could get something fun about Hispanics, too!
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Fox News is bullshit for reactionary morons? It's almost as if Islamophobia is a particular strain of reactionary political thought.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
Only right wing people are islamophobes in usa?
Tei fucked around with this message at 10:52 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 09:32
|
|
|
Edit: well maybe I should read back farther. Also, this post is excellent. Goatse James Bond fucked around with this message at 09:37 on Dec 4, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 09:33
|
|
|
Helsing posted:Eh, I can't entirely agree with you on that one. Most traditional religions, whether it's Catholicism, Anglicanism, Calvinism, Orthodox Judaism, Hinduism, Shia or Sunni Islam, etc. have some pretty serious issues with patriarchal attitudes, mistrust of outsiders, and subordination of individual interests to the preservation of the culture or group. I don't have much interest in defending or protecting those attitudes. I wouldn't dismiss any culture outright but I also think that we in the west can sometimes forget just how awful things were in the very recent past (and how awful they continue to be in many places in the west where religion still dominates public life). If you look at Catholicism in Quebec or Ireland, or Mormonism in Utah, or Baptism in many towns in the South, then it's pretty clear that there are some really awful cultural values on display. For that matter, there's lots of problems with Islam. We don't need to shy away from admitting this. I think the issue here is that those negative characteristics are being conflated with religious culture, when there's not really any evidence that a non-religious culture wouldn't also have those beliefs. We don't have any evidence because apparently every culture on earth is either religious or "secretly religious" (i.e., China). In theory though, there's no reason why xenophobia (for example) wouldn't exist within a non-religious society because it often comes from economic factors that are independent of religion. Same with subordination of individual interests (which ironically was the big Commie Atheist thing in the 20th Century).
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I think the issue here is that those negative characteristics are being conflated with religious culture, when there's not really any evidence that a non-religious culture wouldn't also have those beliefs. We don't have any evidence because apparently every culture on earth is either religious or "secretly religious" (i.e., China). Isn't modern Japan extremely secular? It's sexist and xenophobic as hell. Or is it also somehow under the "secretly religious" umbrella because blah blah Shinto blah?
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:42
|
|
|
computer parts posted:In theory though, there's no reason why xenophobia (for example) wouldn't exist within a non-religious society because it often comes from economic factors that are independent of religion. Is easy to imagine that, yes.  You have the movie Starship Troopers movie, where the government promote Xenophobia against aliens to make it easier to get support for the troops. Theres this scene where happy kids scratch bugs and say "I do my part!".
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:46
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Isn't modern Japan extremely secular? It's sexist and xenophobic as hell. Or is it also somehow under the "secretly religious" umbrella because blah blah Shinto blah? Exactly, it's a "No True Atheism" cop-out. You could probably do the same with New Atheists as a subset in the US because they're culturally very similar to Evangelical Christianity (because lots of them are from those households).
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 15:49
|
|
|
Well then I guess it's a good thing I have a Swedish name, despite my too-swarthy skin.  Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Isn't modern Japan extremely secular? It's sexist and xenophobic as hell. Or is it also somehow under the "secretly religious" umbrella because blah blah Shinto blah? In a move that shocks Japan-fetishizing nerds everywhere, Japanese culture is surprisingly racist, sexist, and homophobic. Edit: Or maybe they'd actually like that, given how many atheists from Evangelical backgrounds end up being racist, misogynistic, and homophobic despite their supposed rationality. Pussy Cartel fucked around with this message at 01:03 on Dec 5, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
computer parts posted:I think the issue here is that those negative characteristics are being conflated with religious culture, when there's not really any evidence that a non-religious culture wouldn't also have those beliefs. We don't have any evidence because apparently every culture on earth is either religious or "secretly religious" (i.e., China). When it comes to criticizing various Islamic cultures, I tend to see a lot of false equivalency between de-facto and de-jure patriarchy. Firstly, I believe patriarchy is the crux of the issue for most western critics of Islamic cultures, as it is a structure with even broader repercussions than the obvious denial of rights to women. Rather, patriarchy is a triple-layered form of oppression encompassing not only the subjugation of women by men, but also the subjugation of the young by the old (regardless of sex) and the subjugation of the individual by the (religious) community. (and while we're on that topic - please, let's not have a repeat of the D&D chat thread where criticizing the construct of a religious community ends up in armchair psychoanalysis and death threats against me, hmm? If any of you had come from a mormon family I think you'd understand better just how scary the idea of "community" can be). Anyway, conflating de-facto oppression of women and youth in China with the entirely legal, government supported oppression of women and youth in the average ME/NA country smacks of deflection and religious apologism. Arranged marriage (a.k.a. the polite, neutral term for community-sanctioned rape) and polygamy have been illegal in China for over 60 years.. In the most populous ME/NA muslim countries such as Egypt, Pakistan, Yemen, Morocco etc. (the obvious negative example of Saudi Arabia isn't even needed as an example), arranged marriage is legal and widely practiced to the point that families do not fear legal, never-mind social, consequences for murdering young women who attempt to escape being sold as sex slaves. If you are seriously compare the legal system and culture of Japan, where (well-educated, financially independent) women maybe have to suffer through unkind comments from parents and co-workers about being unmarried by 25, to the Islamic legal system of Pakistan, you are pretty much advertising the fact that you are full of poo poo and will go to any rhetorical lengths to minimize criticism of Islamic laws and societies. Not intangible cultural attitudes of xenophobia or misogyny (that allow you to declare country music songs about cheating women equivalent to the practice of honor killing). Legal systems backed up by force. The reason I am trying to focus discussion on the legal dimensions is because it is my opinion (and I understand why some would disagree) that an extremely domineering, anti-individualist creed such as mainstream (as opposed to liberalized) Islam cannot survive in a world of modern media and free exchange of ideas without resorting to the proverbial cudgel of legal force. The precipitous decline of religious practices, of which arranged marriage is probably the worst, among 2nd and 3rd generation European muslims is exhibit A. This is, again in my opinion, the greatest contributor to the rise of home-grown Islamist terrorism in the west; the perception that various Islamic cultures and their traditions are getting steamrolled by western individualism in the marketplace of ideas, and that Islamic cultural groups maintaining a higher birthrate is going to be totally ineffective in reversing that trend. An Arab or north African woman walking down the street of a majority-Islamic neighborhood in a short skirt unmolested does more damage to authoritarian Islamic cultures than slogan-shouting gunmen attacking a concert or holiday party does to a free western/westernized culture. And this is why the European and American far-right are so try and cut off immigration or acceptance of refugees; far from being an insidious force that will eat away and bring down western civilization from the inside, westernized immigrants are more likely to have an opposite effect, spreading western individualism back into their homelands through acting as examples and cultural osmosis. But many nominally-leftist advocates of multiculturalism seem to have either lost sight of this process, or overtly reject it due to cultural relativism, and advocate in favor of ghettoization and importation of extremist religious scholars. That is why Islam threads on D&D tend to degenerate into a shitstorm despite the vast majority of posters self-identifying with the left. And - let's be honest - it also makes them more vigorous and interesting than threads that end up as an echo chamber or (more often) glorified A/T threads that are great at informing but short on spirited debate.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 22:56
|
|
|
Liberal_L33t posted:When it comes to criticizing various Islamic cultures, I tend to see a lot of false equivalency between de-facto and de-jure patriarchy. Arranged marriages and honor killings are also very common among Hindus in India. Many Latin American countries have long had lesser social sanctions for "crimes of passion," basically honor killings, and Uruguay still has laws on the books that can lead to lower punishments for murder or battery if the violence was committed against an adulterous spouse. Arranged marriage was standard practice in the West for most of its history, and it is still common throughout the non-Western world, with something like 60% of all marriages worldwide being arranged. Even in Japan, about 30-40 percent of marriages are arranged. This is definitely a problem, but I don't see the point in singling out Muslim countries when talking about it. Finally, I'd very much hesitate to describe the "de facto oppression of women in China" as in any way minor considering that China currently has a sex ratio of 117 men for every 100 women due to rampant sex selective abortion and infanticide. Much of which is done with the tacit approval of law enforcement. Liberal_L33t posted:This is, again in my opinion, the greatest contributor to the rise of home-grown Islamist terrorism in the west; the perception that various Islamic cultures and their traditions are getting steamrolled by western individualism in the marketplace of ideas, and that Islamic cultural groups maintaining a higher birthrate is going to be totally ineffective in reversing that trend. An Arab or north African woman walking down the street of a majority-Islamic neighborhood in a short skirt unmolested does more damage to authoritarian Islamic cultures than slogan-shouting gunmen attacking a concert or holiday party does to a free western/westernized culture. You're completely wrong. First, research has found no correlation between conservative Islamic views and support for terrorism. Second, there are plenty of obvious counter-examples. Some of the 9/11 hijackers visited strip clubs and bars during their time in America. One of the Boston bombers, Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, was described by his college friends as "normal" and popular, and he was a fan of weed and hip-hop. One of the Paris attackers owned a bar and the one that is still at large is gay. Third, in virtually every major Jihadist terrorist attack on the West in which the motive is clearly known (obviously not including the San Bernardino shooting, since all we have there is a general pledge of allegiance to ISIS), it has been revenge for some perceived crime committed against the Muslim world by a Western country. The stated motivation for 9/11 was retaliation for American support of Israel, the Iraq sanctions after the Gulf War, and deployment of American troops in Saudi Arabia. The 7/7 London bombings were motivated by the UK's participation in the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan The Boston marathon bombing was also motivated by the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Paris attacks were retaliation for France bombing ISIS, as well as supporting non-ISIS Syrian rebel groups for years (yes, ISIS's claim of responsibility mentioned that Paris was "a center of fornication and prostitution," but if that was their real grievance, they would have attacked Amsterdam). The Charlie Hebdo shooting and the attempted attack in Garland, Texas are exceptions, but even there the grievances were seen as Western culture insulting Islam, not the generally "sinful"/individualistic nature of Western culture (also, one of the Charlie Hedbo attackers did mention foreign policy grievances in an interview before his death). INH5 fucked around with this message at 19:50 on Dec 6, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 07:58
|
|
|
INH5 posted:Arranged marriages and honor killings are also very common among Hindus in India. On the topic of honour killings - Western countries have a long and continuing tradition of angry men killing women for [insert reason here]. Of course, when a white person does it, it's more about the feeling he has rather than what motivated him. A crime of passion rather than an honour killing. In English law, it used to be the case that you had a limited defence to murder called "provocation", which included infidelity as a trigger. It reduced the scope of your crime, potentially led to smaller sentences etc. That was revised by statute and the law specifically says that infidelity is excluded as a trigger from the current "loss of control" definition. Even so, courts have found that infidelity can lead to its use in defence (a matter of some controversy). This is England, 2015. It's deeply embedded in Western culture - dozens of movies cover this kind of abuse, usually with the protagonist being falsely convicted ('The Fugitive', 'Shawshank Redemption') or a woman suffering from the controlling interference of a man ('Sleeping with the Enemy').
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:These are not convincing examples from the perspective of religion as a source for conservatism, as you have been promoting. In order to rule out the alternative possibility, that conservatism is a source for religiosity, you would need to show universally that all religious folk were more conservative than atheists, or perhaps just secular humanists. The former is absolutely untrue- Jewish Americans are more liberal than self-identified atheist Americans, on average. I suspect that examining religious minorities in other countries will show similar complexity. Can I see some sources on this? I would like them to back up my own arguments.
|
|
#
?
Dec 6, 2015 22:43
|
|
|
INH5 posted:The Paris attacks were retaliation for France bombing ISIS, as well as supporting non-ISIS Syrian rebel groups for years (yes, ISIS's claim of responsibility mentioned that Paris was "a center of fornication and prostitution," but if that was their real grievance, they would have attacked Amsterdam). In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent Allah (ta'ala) said, They thought that their fortresses would protect them from Allah but Allah came upon them from where they had not expected, and He cast terror into their hearts so they destroyed their houses by their own hands and the hands of the believers. So take warning, O people of vision [Al-Hashr:2]. In a blessed battle whose causes of success were enabled by Allah, a group of believers from the soldiers of the Caliphate (may Allah strengthen and support it) set out targeting the capital of prostitution and vice, the lead carrier of the cross in Europe — Paris. This group of believers were youth who divorced the worldly life and advanced towards their enemy hoping to be killed for Allah's sake, doing so in support of His religion, His Prophet (blessing and peace be upon him), and His allies. They did so in spite of His enemies. Thus, they were truthful with Allah — we consider them so — and Allah granted victory upon their hands and cast terror into the hearts of the crusaders in their very own homeland. And so eight brothers equipped with explosive belts and assault rifles attacked precisely chosen targets in the center of the capital of France. These targets included the Stade de France stadium during a soccer match — between the teams of Germany and France, both of which are crusader nations — attended by the imbecile of France (Francois Hollande). The targets included the Bataclan theatre for exhibitions, where hundreds of pagans gathered for a concert of prostitution and vice. There were also simultaneous attacks on other targets in the tenth, eleventh, and eighteenth districts, and elsewhere. Paris was thereby shaken beneath the crusaders' feet, who were constricted by its streets. The result of the attacks was the deaths of no less than two hundred crusaders and the wounding of even more. All praise, grace, and favor belong to Allah. Allah blessed our brothers and granted them what they desired. They detonated their explosive belts in the masses of the disbelievers after finishing all their ammunition. We ask Allah to accept them amongst the martyrs and to allow us to follow them. Let France and all nations following its path know that they will continue to be at the top of the target list for the Islamic State and that the scent of death will not leave their nostrils as long as they partake in the crusader campaign, as long as they dare to curse our Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him), and as long as they boast about their war against Islam in France and their strikes against Muslims in the lands of the Caliphate with their jets, which were of no avail to them in the filthy streets and alleys of Paris. Indeed, this is just the beginning. It is also a warning for any who wish to take heed. Allah is the greatest. (And to Allah belongs all honor, and to His Messenger, and to the believers, but the hypocrites do not know) [Al-Munafiqun: 8].
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:41
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful, the Most Beneficent Well, it looks like the person you're quoting accurately summed up the reasons for that attack, which I've helpfully bolded for clarity.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:48
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Well, it looks like the person you're quoting accurately summed up the reasons for that attack, which I've helpfully bolded for clarity. lmao
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Good luck on your holy crusade against Islam.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Good luck on your holy crusade against Islam. It's not my holy crusade you need to be worried about. Then again you don't seem to be good at recognizing when people are on one.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
*rereads the statement, even the bolded part explicitly stating if you say Muhammed wrong we'll shoot you in the head* Yeah it's all about military action
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:54
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:It's not my holy crusade you need to be worried about. I find it far more plausible that people like you will lynch American Muslims than that American Muslims will start any sort of mass-murder campaign, because I have a soul, and know that belief in Islam doesn't destroy your brain. An Enormous Boner posted:*rereads the statement, even the bolded part explicitly stating if you say Muhammed wrong we'll shoot you in the head* Yeah it's all about military action Let's see- a lot of interchangeable gabble, and then specific grievances which are about French military intervention in Syria, in the context of framing Western behavior as being about exterminating Islam and Muslims. Westerners graciously declare that all Muslims are out to get them, because we are a degenerate and evil people.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:because I have a soul Citations please, it's this kind of shoddy research that caused religion
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:57
|
|
Rakosi posted:Citations please, it's this kind of shoddy research that caused religion You're not very good at reading. My supporting evidence was in the next clause. I have a soul because I don't arbitrarily declare certain people to be subhuman wretches. Those who do, lack a soul.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:I find it far more plausible that people like you will lynch American Muslims than that American Muslims will start any sort of mass-murder campaign, because I have a soul, and know that belief in Islam doesn't destroy your brain. What the hell is wrong with you?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:04
|
|
|
Well if only the Nazi party said "we are killing you because you are speaking against out ideals, our riech, and our campaign to cleanse Europe of the Jew" then that whole WWII debacle could have ended earlier with compromise. If Isis says we are doing X because of your Y beliefs, I think we can easily discount it do to the fact they are literally running sex slave markets and crucifying chidlren.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:07
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:What the hell is wrong with you? You're accusing Muslims of wanting to commit violence against people, and yet it's not OK for people to turn that around against you. That seems fairly absurd.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:08
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You're accusing Muslims of wanting to commit violence against people, and yet it's not OK for people to turn that around against you. That seems fairly absurd. I'm accusing the organization that planned and executed the attacks in France of wanting to commit violence against people, yes. I'm also saying it's largely because of their extreme religious beliefs, which they have explicitly and repeatedly explained.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:09
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:I'm accusing the organization that planned and executed the attacks in France of wanting to commit violence against people, yes. I'm also saying it's largely because of their extreme religious beliefs, which they have explicitly and repeatedly explained. No, you're not. You've been accusing Islam in general, throughout this thread. You're arguing that this is because of religion. Necessarily, this means that all Muslims are suspect. Meanwhile, your interpretation, where the French intervention in Syria is irrelevant for this Syria-based organization, which is itself incapable of propaganda (presumably because they're religious and thus stupid), is plain ridiculous. Now you're going to start screaming about how I'm defending ISIS, in all probability.
|
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:You're arguing that this is because of religion. Necessarily, this means that all Muslims are suspect. No it doesn't, only you are contending that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:14
|
|
|
"Either you're racist, or you have to admit the terrorists are right."
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:27
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:No, you're not. You've been accusing Islam in general, throughout this thread. You're arguing that this is because of religion. Necessarily, this means that all Muslims are suspect. We're talking about allusions made within a sub-section of a single sentence in ISIS's statement. It's very important, yes, but there's other stuff there and it's also significant. I mean there's stuff in the same sentence, even, that isn't just about France in Syria.
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:28
|
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:I'm accusing the organization that planned and executed the attacks in France of wanting to commit violence against people, yes. I'm also saying it's largely because of their extreme religious beliefs, which they have explicitly and repeatedly explained. it's wrong to plan and execute attacks against civilians. this is why we must bomb isis, from the air, like civilized people boner confessor fucked around with this message at 02:34 on Dec 7, 2015 |
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 17:00 |
|
|
What would it take to start an Islamic Enlightening? The Peace of Westphalia and the horror of religious wars, as well as the state taking power from the church started the European one, could similar circumstances exist in the Middle-East after ISIS?
|
|
#
?
Dec 7, 2015 02:32
|
|
