Islam, ISIS, and You: Where are all these so-called "moderate" Muslims?

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Islam, ISIS, and You: Where are all these so-called "moderate" Muslims?

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Narciss posted:

Hindus and Buddhists never overran a third of the known world in violent conquest after founding their religion. They may form violent sects and butcher Muslims in their own country, but I'm having trouble thinking of holy wars that took place on anywhere near the same scale as the Islamic conquests. The closest I can think of are the crusaders in the pagan slavic/baltic states.

Come out and say it: You hate brown people.

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ¿ Jul 5, 2015 18:55

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 17, 2024 07:55

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Ramsus posted:

Islam is THE WORST by far imo and considered to be by most reasonable people. It's hilarious that so many supposedly "progressive" people in this thread give the free pass to Islam and even Sharia law, or at the very least will continue to say "yeah but" when a fair point regarding Islam is made.

As Rudatron basically covered, there are PLENTY of Evangelical groups in the US, in large numbers, that would LOVE to implement religious law, and push legislation through in multiple states skirting closer and closer to that goal.

Its just more difficult to happen here due to the fact that we have a fairly stable government and justice system. But trust me, Islam is the worst right now....but many Christians would love to join them in repressive theocracy.

# ¿ Jul 13, 2015 02:28

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Ramsus posted:

Well I wouldn't go so far as to compare people that would like to ban gay marriage and abortion to places where they currently hack off limbs, murder homosexuals, and stone women to death for being raped.

No no no, I'd go that far. Between arguing that sex outside of marriage should be a punishable offense, and that women who have babies out of wedlock deserve public shaming, they want to get pretty damned close.

A couple evangelical groups have gone as far as to propose death sentences for being gay, including helping push legislation in Uganda that does as much.

They want to be ISIS. They'd love to have that power. They just want to be a Christian ISIS.

Peel posted:

The armies fighting ISIS and the refugees fleeing ISIS are both full of Muslims.

That's the fun part whenever threads like this come up: The number one religious group targeted and massacred by ISIS is Muslims.

# ¿ Jul 13, 2015 15:14

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

Firstly, I'm more focused on the naive leftists like yourself who attack the line of discussion from either the Trezzor position of just conflating it with racism or hyperbolic calls for savage imperialism, or your vague an irrational calls to squelch discussion because: 'you can't change anything as an outsider thus it shouldn't be discussed'

.....

Really though I feel as if your beef isn't with discussing things you lack agency over but with the fact that the item being criticized is Islam, else you would just go from d&d subject to subject regurgitating this same line of reasoning.

First off: Trezzor is a moron who regularly gets called out in these sort of threads, so I don't know if you want to be using him as an example.

Secondly: The problem at hand, especially in the US, is those willing to directly tackle Islam as a source of direct contention while at the same time holding up their religion (usually Fundamentalism Christianity or Extreme Right Wing Christianity) as the epitome of a 'Good Religion', then completely ignore than their particular variant of Christianity is just as deplorable as Fundamentalist Islam.

You have to give the Islamic Extremists and Fundies credit: They are actually willing to stand up for their disgusting beliefs, Fundamentalist Christians just foam at the mouth and rant and rave, although if given the same chance they'd be willing to do the exact same things.

# ¿ Jul 29, 2015 16:06

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Strudel Man posted:

http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/middle-east/2014/10/21/Video-shows-ISIS-stoning-woman-in-front-of-her-father.html

That's not the US, and hardcore Conservative Christians would LOVE to be able to do this. See Jeb Bush and his pushing laws that would ostracize unwed mothers.

Kinda like they did this poo poo to blacks not even 60 years ago, all while wearing the cross. We are well aware of the human rights violations of the Middle East, but then again these are religious extremists and fundamentalists you are pointing out, and in nearly every case regardless of religion, Fundamentalism leads to human rights violations.

# ¿ Jul 29, 2015 19:09

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

ToxicAcne posted:

Can someone give me a source on comparing Judeo-Christian ethics and morals to Islamic ones. As in what have Islamic theologians and Philosophers have said in comparison to Christian ones.

.... if you are going by their book, its mostly the same thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_and_Quranic_narratives

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=124494788

quote:

"Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible," Jenkins says.

Jenkins is a professor at Penn State University and author of two books dealing with the issue: the recently published Jesus Wars, and Dark Passages , which has not been published but is already drawing controversy.

Much to my surprise, the Islamic scriptures in the Quran were actually far less bloody and less violent than those in the Bible.
Philip Jenkins, author of 'Jesus Wars'
Violence in the Quran, he and others say, is largely a defense against attack.

"By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane," he says. "Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide."

It is called herem, and it means total annihilation. Consider the Book of 1 Samuel, when God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: "And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them," God says through the prophet Samuel. "But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."

When Saul failed to do that, God took away his kingdom.

"In other words," Jenkins says, "Saul has committed a dreadful sin by failing to complete genocide. And that passage echoes through Christian history. It is often used, for example, in American stories of the confrontation with Indians � not just is it legitimate to kill Indians, but you are violating God's law if you do not."

Jenkins notes that the history of Christianity is strewn with herem. During the Crusades in the Middle Ages, the Catholic popes declared the Muslims Amalekites. In the great religious wars in the 16th, 17th and 19th centuries, Protestants and Catholics each believed the other side were the Amalekites and should be utterly destroyed.

Much like many of the Biblical laws are taken out of context by Fundamentalist Christians in the US, the same is with Islamic laws by Fundamentalist Muslims:

quote:

That may be the popular notion of jihad, says Waleed El-Ansary, but it's the wrong one. El-Ansary, who teaches Islamic studies at the University of South Carolina, says the Quran explicitly condemns religious aggression and the killing of civilians. And it makes the distinction between jihad � legal warfare with the proper rules of engagement � and irjaf, or terrorism.

"All of those types of incidences � [Sept. 11], Maj. Nidal Hasan and so forth � those are all examples of irjaf, not jihad," he says. According to the Quran, he says, those who practice irjaf "are going to hell."

So what's going on here? After all, we all have images of Muslim radicals flying planes into buildings, shooting up soldiers at Fort Hood, trying to detonate a bomb on an airplane on Christmas Day. How to reconcile a peaceful Quran with these violent acts?

El-Ansary says that in the past 30 years, there's been a perfect storm that has created a violent strain of Islam. The first is political: frustration at Western intervention in the Muslim world. The second is intellectual: the rise of Wahhabi Islam, a more fundamentalist interpretation of Islam subscribed to by Osama bin Laden. El-Ansary says fundamentalists have distorted Islam for political purposes.

"Basically what they do is they take verses out of context and then use that to justify these egregious actions," he says.

El-Ansary says we are seeing more religious violence from Muslims now because the Islamic world is far more religious than is the West. Still, Jenkins says Judeo-Christian cultures shouldn't be smug. The Bible has plenty of violence.

"The scriptures are still there, dormant, but not dead," he says, "and they can be resurrected at any time. Witness the white supremacists who cite the murderous Phineas when calling for racial purity, or an anti-abortion activist when shooting a doctor who performs abortions.

In the end, the scholars can agree on one thing: The DNA of early Judaism, Christianity and Islam code for a lot of violence. Whether they can evolve out of it is another thing altogether.

# ¿ Jul 29, 2015 20:55

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Liberal_L33t posted:

I hate being pushed into the position of defending Christianity but even IF we are going to stretch the bounds of relevancy by comparing modern events to poo poo from a century ago, modern political Islam isn't comparable to political Christianity. "Moderate" Islamists like the Turkish AKP and Egyptian MB have ideas on the integration of church (mosque) and state that make Franco look like goddamn Jimmy Carter in comparison. In the modern world, I think it's pretty telling that in Nigeria, the poster child (alongside Uganda) for international Christian fundies whipping up harsh laws, the harshest penalties against homosexuality (or any other sexual offense) are to be found in the regions under Sharia law. Even if you insist on comparing it to racism, current Muslim nations where political Islam has been successful in its aims have legal systems which treat women, children, non-muslims and others worse than blacks were treated at the height of Jim Crow.

Don't compare the Republican party, noxious plutocrats and reactionaries though they are, to Islamists. The western right pushes policies with implicit religious justification which chip away at the economic rights of marginalized groups and facilitate excluding them from institutions. Comparing it to theocratic political parties and militias shredding two or three constitutions every year, continually assassinating perceived enemies across the world, passing explicitly religious laws and publicly executing people in accordance with said laws is just insulting. I don't care if you think you're being fair-minded, or pragmatic. Putting the western religious right and political Islam next to one another and claiming that they are the same in any meaningful way is just bullshit.

There are a few western religious movements which can be compared to mainstream conservative Islam in terms of malignancy and hostility to secular democracy. The Church of Latter Day Saints is probably the best example of an "Islamist-like" sect of Christianity whose aims go beyond sneaking in the odd religiously motivated law and into the realm of establishing a totalitarian religious community. In fact, the early Mormons were pretty much the ISIS of their day. But the non-Mormon Christian community and secular government took energetic action to stop them getting anywhere near the theocracy they wanted. Note that unlike ISIS, however, they didn't get a stream of cash and volunteers pouring in from across the globe.

See, here's the problem: You are comparing two different regions with two different approaches to political power and enacting religious laws.

If the Religious Right wanted to implement anything like the sort of laws they'd LOVE to enact, they'd have to do so in such a way that it would not get them called out on it, because we have a somewhat healthy justice system and a somewhat functional democracy where enacting laws to allow for the stoning of people would be frowned upon. Anytime they approach passing a religiously inspired law, they do so through multiple, long drawn out pieces of legislation that help hide the purpose and intent of the law. This is ongoing in the South as we type.

However, that has not stopped them from trying, and sometimes SUCCEEDING in passing laws oriented around their religious ideology, such as the recent spate of laws allowing for the prosecution of women who miscarry or Jeb Bush proposing laws that would allow unwed mothers to be ostracized.

quote:

One of the reasons more young women are giving birth out of wedlock and more young men are walking away from their paternal obligations is that there is no longer a stigma attached to this behavior, no reason to feel shame. Many of these young women and young men look around and see their friends engaged in the same irresponsible conduct. Their parents and neighbors have become ineffective at attaching some sense of ridicule to this behavior. There was a time when neighbors and communities would frown on out of wedlock births and when public condemnation was enough of a stimulus for one to be careful. -Jeb Bush

Don't pretend that, were they able to pass such an ordinance that allowed such community disdain towards unwed mothers, that they'd stop there.

The problem with the Middle East is more than religious extremists have the sort of power and backing needed to gain political power and traction, where the more moderate sects and people are shut out due to an inability to make any headway in the region. Violence motivates due to desperation and poverty, and in the Middle East that is available in an abundance that, even as bad off as the US is, is not available yet. Human rights are something heavily abused there due to this violence (also due to US and Russian meddling in Middle Eastern affairs that has decimated any semblance of fair and just political organization that might enact human rights laws).

You are kidding yourself if you don't think the Religious Right would LOVE to have some Christian style Sharia Law enacted. Its the same coin, different places.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Jul 29, 2015

# ¿ Jul 29, 2015 21:18

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

TheImmigrant posted:

I worry that you really believe that, that there is a Christian equivalent to Da'esh poised to emerge in Europe or North America.

Nah, they are not nearly that organized nor dedicated. Nor do we have the current situation in the region that would motivate such a group. We've pointed this out time and again: circumstances in the Middle East right now are perfect for growing Religious Extremist groups. Its different in the US, that doesn't mean should circumstances change it could not happen.

# ¿ Jul 30, 2015 14:03

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

V. Illych L. posted:

if we're talking just islam vs christianity in general it's germane imo, you don't have many IS types running around threatening to murder people in america

Different localities, different situations. If we had the sort of rampant poverty and constant civil war going on, I'd be willing to bet we'd have more of that.

# ¿ Jul 30, 2015 17:38

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

V. Illych L. posted:

yes, exactly - american muslims also tend conservative (or used to, anyway), but even the most unpleasant types aren't generally outright murderous

Pretty much. Even the more 'Fundamentalist' Muslims that emigrate to the US are usually fleeing sectarian violence and don't want to bring that over with them.

# ¿ Jul 30, 2015 18:26

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Narciss posted:

I'm sure your right in some cases, but it's hardly necessary to turn to the Hadiths to find quotes that would make your average liberal-minded person go "uhhhhh":

Bible says what?

# ¿ Aug 2, 2015 16:51

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Miltank posted:

The bible in Christianity and the Koran in Islam are completely different things, doctrinally speaking. The miracle of Christianity is the Christ figure described in the bible. The miracle of Islam is literally the Koran itself.

This is a big deal. You can't just ignore aspects of the Koran because the entire point of Islam is that god has given man his final, perfect and unimpeachable word.

Except for all the books in the Koran and Bible that match up, and the multiple figures (including Jesus) who also are in the Koran.

But considering your usual argument points in religious debate threads, I expect no less than "My religion is the only true religion." from you,

Miltank posted:

Those facts are irrelevant to my argument.

-correct forums poster miltank.

This is you in EVERY religious debate thread.

# ¿ Aug 3, 2015 19:20

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Miltank posted:

Im looking for a way to accept the Koran as an errant document and justify this errancy within the narrative of Islam. Unless you can link an essay by a theologian to that effect or are a muslim who can explain this to me I'm not really seeing how opinion polls are supposed to refute this argument.

E:^ holy poo poo that is a stupid post.

Its just as errant as your document. Get over it.

# ¿ Aug 3, 2015 19:25

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

TheImmigrant posted:

Because both are religions, but it's only kosher to criticize Christianity, because racism and colonialism. The best way to fight racism is to behave like the racist, but with a kosher target. Islam is sacred, because Headgear and colonialism. Christianity is evil, because the Republican Party, and like some poo poo that happened five hundred years ago. And the Crusades, always remember the Crusades.

Is that clear?

Its plenty okay to criticize Muslims, but considering most arguments presented by US groups criticizing Muslims stem from racism, and Islamaphobia is justified by groups who see Muslims as largely all terrorists based solely upon their religion and their race.

# ¿ Aug 3, 2015 23:33

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

TheImmigrant posted:

I'm not convinced that this justifies attempting to shout down any unflattering observations about a belief system.

Of course not!

But lest we forget: The number one victims of Muslim Extremists are Muslims. So why are White, Christian, Americans so heavily concerned about Muslims?

Even better, when they are groups run by dipshits like Pamela Geller whose whole purpose is to stir up racist ideals in the public. And groups like the Tea Party who think America needs to be a Christian nation and seriously propose breaking down the Church/State separation.

# ¿ Aug 3, 2015 23:59

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Mandy Thompson posted:

The Supreme Being does tell us what to do and we don't stick our fingers in our ears but we understand that while the Bible and presumably the Koran are to be taken seriously, it is not always literal. They were also written centuries ago for a different audience who lived in the bronze age in more brutal times and were not as culturally developed and needed things explained to them in a different way. We can all speak to God and form our own conclusions taking the Bible in to consideration. I don't know about the Koran but early Christians also cherry picked. There are whole books of the bible that were left aside as heresies for one reason or another and Revelation was almost one of them. Perhaps they were meant for us. It is up to all of us to seek God for ourselves.

Might as well speak to a wall for all the good it does. What an ineffective and useless supreme being.

# ¿ Aug 4, 2015 17:30

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Plastics posted:

Wow, change "powerful" to "atrocious" and this is right on the money!

Man, its almost like sexism is a common theme in most organized religions.

# ¿ Aug 8, 2015 23:47

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

ToxicAcne posted:

Is there any major religion that isn't misogynistic?

Y'know, not off the top of my head, no. I'm sure some are better than others...

# ¿ Aug 9, 2015 01:03

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Effectronica posted:

Okay, so religion is inherently fictional. I guess that means that it's actually right to kill people willy-nilly, because religions consider that immoral and religious ideas are fictional ones.

Without religious morality, where do we get morals from :qq:

Effectronica posted:

You don't need to have a specifically shari'a court to oversee a marriage in Islam, but marriage is part of shari'a and allowing Muslims to marry according to shari'a thus allows shari'a legitimacy, just like allowing for halal food to be prepared or for Muslims to define their inheritance according to fiqh. In order to reject shari'a as legitimate, you cannot allow Muslims to marry, eat, or inherit as they please.

This...has to be satire. Tell me this is satire.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 01:19

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Effectronica posted:

You seem to have a slight obsession with child molestation, given that you brought it up immediately, but I guess you're right, and you're being abusive to me, right now, and you should probably stop, from a moral perspective, which you may or may not have.

Holy poo poo, shutup fishmech.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 03:43

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

khwarezm posted:

Fishmech is nintendo kid.

Might as well be both of them at this point.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 03:48

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Effectronica posted:

It's an attempt at a slur that backfired.

Yeah, because accusing people of being pederasts because they used it as an example makes you look like a loving genius.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 03:54

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

Effectronica, SedanChair an others have pretty much defaulted to calling everyone who finds religious extremism actionable or preventable a racist who wants to purge everyone different.

This is the sort of debate that many on the left go full on Ben Affleck, not capable of hearing or reading anything but instead just assuming their opponent is advancing the beliefs in Mein Kampf.

Even the idea of restraining Saudi Money or removing religion status for extremist churches is akin to gas chambers to these people.

Their whole schtick is meant to shutdown discussion by peppering "raaaciissssssst" throughout their comments an claiming that the motivation of their opponents can't be from desire for 'secular pluralistic society' but 'white supremacy!'

.....yyyyeaaaaahhhh...

Because throwing around 'OMG THEY ARE BRINGING SHARIA LAW, drat DIRTY LYING ARABS!' is not a racist schtick pushed by the right.

Oh wait....

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 13:50

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Effectronica posted:

It's such a shame that while accusations against individuals are verboten, accusations against a large number of people are innocuous.

Because not all Muslims are secretly brimming with the desire to rape children, you racist rear end in a top hat. Conflating all Muslims with Al Qaeda or ISIS or extremists in general just makes you look bad, not them.

Accusations against a large number of people with no supporting evidence is called generalization. And its wrong.

Effectronica posted:

I did not intend to imply the poster Smudgie Buggler was a pedophile or child molester, in my earlier post.

"Now, watch my mental gymnastics as I accuse the entire Muslim world of being pedophiles."

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 14:04

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

With the exception of the "being out bred by mooslims" guy most people seem primarily concerned with preventing extremist versions of a religion from proliferating without the use of violence.
how does what your saying relate to what I said?

Considering most of the refugees coming over are moderates fleeing religious extremists, what is your point? To find extremism among the moderates and then label them wholesale?

The people arriving in Germany, Greece, and others consist of mostly the middle class of Syria, educated and for the most part moderate fleeing in the face of those who DO want Sharia law and extremism.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 15:00

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Effectronica posted:

Legitimizing shari'a civil arbitration would actually be better under your standards, however, because it would integrate it into existing courts rather than it existing as a truly parallel legal system. Or you could establish a police state just to ensure that anyone who uses semi-legal shari'a arbitration is caught and punished, or one just aimed at Muslims. Or you could let it continue to exist in a grey area and prosecute attempts to enforce judgments illegally.

What grey area? Regardless of 'Sharia marriage' or not, it falls under the legal precedent of 'Marriage' which is already covered and controlled. Pretending that there is some legitimacy to a religious court with no connection to the state court is just conjecture.

Basically, you are creating this weird scenario where you believe Muslims will create their own sub-government that does not answer to the state government, which really sounds like a tinfoil hat Right wing conspiracy we've all heard before....
If someone wants to get married, they have to get a license. Whether or not its a sharia marriage is really up to that person's religious leader and the individuals getting married, but their marriage is not legal without that license.

Most countries and states have laws against extralegal courts. Especially if said extralegal courts are trying to usurp laws against child marriage and multiple wives.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 17:12 on Sep 14, 2015

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 17:10

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arbitration

Arbitration =/= Marriage courts and licensing. Its also not extra-judicial and is overseen by the courts. Any sort of resolution decided in arbitration still has to be submitted and approved via a court clerk.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 18:32

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Narciss posted:

But this actually happens...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia_patrols

Your portrayal of it with "HURR DURR IM SO CRAZY" doesn't make it any less a danger.

And they were arrested. Guess what that means? ITS loving ILLEGAL.

Even better when Britain first showed up in armored cars and started handing out literature. Thanks for repeating a right wing tinfoil hat worry.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:04

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

wait what? an arbitration court is literally the definition of extrajudicial. it's overseen by the real courts in that the real courts have signed off on it, just like a sharia family law court. if you're going to run around with the goalposts on the exact jurisdiction of the extrajudicial courts vs the real ones i don't see why anyone should bother arguing with you. the statement you made about extrajudicial courts not being a thing is patently false, sorry dude

Let me know when a real court in a Western country signs off on a Sharia court. Thanks in advance.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:11

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Liberal_L33t posted:

The point is that it reflects very badly on the motives of those who push for the establishment of sharia as any form of "arbitration". There is very little evidence that pushes for a limited form of sharia that is subordinate to secular law are in good faith.

There's very little evidence that anybody is pushing for Sharia law. Its not going to happen, and as far as I know, no Western court is going to allow a Sharia court to arbitrate.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:19

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Malaysia

let's watch those goalposts fly

That's SouthEast Asia. That is also a country where Islam is the state religion. Thanks for playing!

EDIT: Indonesia is also a Southeast Asian country. Wow. So western.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Sep 14, 2015

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:51

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

Oh poo poo the goalposts were already moved before you asked the question. How about you address your original comment that extrajudicial courts were not a thing in most countries? That was completely, 100% bullshit?

You're right, my mistake.

I mean't Western countries where most of the people posting are arguing will be overtaken by Sharia. Indonesia and Malaysia are not what most of the people in the thread were talking about, and neither are noted for being particular great at human rights....

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:54

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

But it's not true in the US? And it's not true in Europe? Like I'm sorry you're this mad about the existence of arbitration courts, but uh, they're a real thing and have been for a long time

Please highlight where I denied the existence of arbitration courts.

My claim was that no court system in the West is going to allow a Sharia Religious Court do the arbitration. Arbitration also does not allow you to violate established laws like marriage laws and age of consent laws.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 19:57

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

icantfindaname posted:

I don't know, if there is demand among Muslims to have arbitration by Sharia Courts as an option, maybe they will. And Sharia elements in an arbitration system do not necessitate that full-scale Sharia Law be enforced. From the article about Malaysia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_Malaysia

So why don't you confront this fact? Are the brutish savages immigrating to Europe somehow even more conservative than Muslims in Malaysia, a country with Islam as its state religion? How exactly do you think that you're inevitably going to see state-sanctioned stoning and hand-cutting in Birmingham if Sharia arbitration of any sort is allowed there?

Malaysia is a Islamic country. Of course they have Sharia courts.

Now how does this apply to, say, the US, UK, and EU where the above people posting in this thread are scaremongering about?

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 20:07

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

Do you mean little people in this thread? Or in the west?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7TjzSSZUvg

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/dec/06/muslim-vigilantes-jailed-sharia-law-attacks-london

What they are doing is illegal. They'll get arrested if they do it, just like those five above. And yet, it still doesn't matter, because it was still a minority of people who did it, and most of the Muslim community frowns upon it.

The views of the minority does not essentially reflect the views of the majority. By your standard, should we then ban Christianity because a few Christians are members of the KKK or other Christian Extremist groups? I can go assault people all I want and claim to be part of the Atheist Militant movement, doesn't mean my views represent the majority of atheists nor that my actions should be used to represent them in their entirety.

CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Sep 14, 2015

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 20:26

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

How does that connect with anything that I have said? I would strongly support banning a separate Christian Legal system as I would any other minority religion variation, your comparison is hyperbolic and terrible.

"The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no powers to grant a divorce which is valid in English and Welsh law.[5][6] A talaq can be granted to recognise divorce.[5][6] A sharia marriage has no bearing on personal status under UK law.[7] The Muslim Arbitration Tribunal has no jurisdiction on criminal matters but can attempt reconciliation between spouses."

"An ongoing e-petition to the UK government to prohibit and criminalise sharia courts has received over 15,000 signatures. The government issued a response, stating that sharia rulings are only permitted if legal in their jurisdiction, and that attitudes contrary to UK law should be eradicated"

Ironically, we have the same thing already happen with Christians as well in the US/UK. So, its not special to Muslims, and its not isolated to Sharia. Go ask women trying to leave the Quiverfull movement what its like.

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 20:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 17, 2024 07:55

CommieGIR: Aug 22, 2006; The blue glow is a feature, not a bug; Pillbug

Sethex posted:

Given your clunky calls insinuating racism/genocide or simply misrepresenting everything you've ever quoted I'd say at this point you aren't even connected to what you're reading, I doubt you're even connected to reality enough to have an opinion.

I misrepresented your post, and for that I am sorry. After further review, your post did not mean what I thought it did :doh:

But I stand by what I said in response to others who are flying the 'OMG SHARIA' flag

# ¿ Sep 14, 2015 21:14

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Islam, ISIS, and You: Where are all these so-called "moderate" Muslims?