|
Mandy Thompson posted:the discussion can be more general. I posted US examples because they are in my backyard and I was thinking about them but Islamophobia anywhere is messed up Yeah, I think it's getting worse in Canada too and we don't have a lot of the specific aspects that Helsing pointed to as contributing to the current climate of Islamophobia in the US. Right now we have: 1) ISIS attacked a thing in Europe 2) Our new Prime Minister (who campaigned on helping refugees) wants to help refugees Thankfully, I don't think it's a majority opinion, but I'm guessing the election loss made the people who were already bigoted particularly angry and vocal about being racist. Even my parents are bitching a whole bunch about terrorists coming in by pretending to be refugees, and it's just such utter nonsense but I can't get them to see reason. I'm guessing the difference is I knew a lot of people from the Levant when I lived in Montreal, so I view them as normal, decent people instead of some sort of alien menace that hates freedom. Admittedly, I knew more Lebanese people than Syrians, but to be honest they seemed very culturally similar (more than they were with Persians or Gulf Arabs, let's say). Anyway, we've had a mosque set on fire, a few random assaults on women wearing hijab, and various other bullshit, and it's just very Not Good. I'm totally atheist and pretty vocal about it, but it's very wrong to take your disagreements with any religion out on the people who practice it as they wish to (unless they are doing something bad as a result, which the very, very great majority of Muslims are emphatically not).
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:23 |
|
|
SlipUp posted:I heard about the Colorado Springs shooting today. I haven't read or watched anything, but I find it disturbing no Christians have condemned the attack. Me too, and I don't mean this sarcastically in the least. We should very much see the Catholic Church, for example, condemning this action. We should see other pro-life organizations condemning this action. When something is done in your name, whether or not you're responsible, you've got to get out there and deal with it. I hate being accused of Islamophobia, because I hold all religious traditions to the same standard (and, yes, when atheists do insane thing, it's our responsibility to call that out very loudly as well). Considering context, it's clear to me that Islam is no worse than any other religion, it's just that the people who practice it have a much greater chance of being completely out of their loving minds at this particular point in history (note that, for many centuries, the opposite was true, vis a vis Christianity).
|
|
#
¿
Nov 28, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Well, they actually are. Yeah, I don't think you're getting the point. Spain is a very culturally pluralistic society. I don't think you can really ignore that, even if everyone from each autonomous community are officially Spanish citizens for the time being. All people from the US, or naturalized, are likewise US citizens even if they are culturally distinct.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 15:51
|
|
|
Tei posted:El Pais Vasco, Euskadi is not a group of "insular religious communities". What the hell is wrong with you guys? Where was it claimed they were? I'm just saying they're cultural distinct from Spanish people, who themselves are culturally distinct from Catalan people, etc. Having a nation-state composed of many different ethnicities or cultures is not unusual or wrong by any stretch of the imagination.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 16:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:A stunning output from Western Culture. We're clearly dealing with one of the intellectual titans of Western Culture here, sir.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
emoji posted:This criticism doesn't hold much water when you remember that many parts of the United States had extremely harsh sodomy laws merely a dozen years ago, which is definitely in the modern era. Also, anti-LGBT persecution in Africa is hardly limited to Muslim-majority countries. Ever heard of God Loves Uganda?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 29, 2015 23:38
|
|
|
Pussy Cartel posted:Every time conservatives and New Atheists bring up Islam not being a race, I'm reminded of how anti-Muslim activity always seems to get targeted at people who aren't Muslims at all, but are, coincidentally enough, brown-skinned. And as an atheist who criticizes many parts of Islam, this is really frustrating to me as well (also, the fact that criticism of Islam too often takes the form of "hatred toward Muslims" which is nonsense*). The idiots who think Sikhs are Muslims, or that all Muslims believe in violent jihad or in the imposition of severe corporal or capital punishments, and act out on it are terrible, not just because of their bigotry and ignorance, but also because they provide the cover of Islamophobia that many Muslims and non-Muslims alike use to avoid addressing actual, cogent criticism of Islamic religion and practice. * If you believe that Islam, either by scripture or as it is practiced, has many problematic elements, then you must regard the average Muslim as a victim of the bad parts of their religion, not as an enemy, in the absence of any other data.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 00:05
|
|
|
Helsing posted:I guess this would be a reasonable position if numerous prominent members of one of America's two major political parties and one of it's largest news organizations were not constantly declaring that the nation is at war with "radical Islam" and that the President is betraying the nation by not saying so. What's wrong with saying that we're at war with radical Islam? That's more or less true, even if "radical Islam" is a troublingly imprecise term. It's also true that the largest threat that radical Islam poses is towards Muslims, and "radical Islam" is a very small segment of total Islamic practice. Marijuana Nihilist posted:rememeber when dawkins said you should be wary of trusting a rape victim who had been drinking The fact that Dawkins has said some stupid things does not invalidate the totality of all things he's said.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2015 17:44
|
|
|
I think we should isolate Saudi Arabia from the rest of the world too, until they stop being less hosed in the head. It's abhorrent that the western world continues to regard them as a friend or partner in any way. We don't need to be at war with them yet, mind you, because we haven't even tried "not indulging their bullshit" first.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 01:04
|
|
|
So, the guy who has been identified as the shooter in San Bernadino has an Arab name (and as far as I can tell, was a self-identified Muslim). Of course, it appears he's just a nut like every other recent mass shooter in America (it's kind of weird that there's a whole cohort we can compare with in that sense...) but I imagine it will stoke the flames of Islamophobia even so. Honestly, it's just terrible -- first of all, that these crimes are going on, secondly that they are being used to demonize innocent people, and thirdly that the existence of such ignorant and ill-informed criticism will allow the Salafis and like-minded parties to deflect legitimate criticism by claiming it's Islamophobic, while at the very same time using such criticism as a tool to recruit and radicalize other Muslims to their bizarre, violent, warped interpretation of Islam. EDIT: Thank gently caress he wasn't a Syrian refugee or something 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so are some elements of the west. thankfully these elements are most likely to have 'hunting accidents' Both this and the post you quoted are very true.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 03:04
|
|
|
This makes nearly as much sense (and is as possible) as Qatar's promise to detect gay people and bar them from the country. Which is to say it makes no sense, and is also not possible.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Mr. Gibbycrumbles posted:Something to do with whether they float or sink in water, I forget which. No, we will outfit every border crossing with a duck and a set of scales.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:Ross Perot? The problem is that Trump appears to be far too competent, and also out of his freakin' mind.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2015 18:35
|
|
|
I agree that the uptick in racist rhetoric in both the US and Canada is worrying, and I'm afraid that the community may have gone a bit "boy who cried wolf" over supposed Islamophobia with things like the Charlie Hebdo cartoons. It's pretty clear that there is real, legitimate Islamophobia to deal with (drawing the prophet doesn't count, though) and it's sadly looking more and more likely that it will turn violent eventually.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2015 19:13
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:that's not a good point, as it relies on stereotyping and racial discrimination. this is like saying that antisemitism is driven by broad brimmed hats and big noses. sorry that your brother is stupid Also that, except for a specific subset of Muslim women (the ones who wear hijab), there's no such thing as "Islamic" clothing. I'm guessing the vast, vast majority of Muslims in the US dress in the exact same manner as anyone else.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 10, 2015 23:43
|
|
|
An Enormous Boner posted:Except for Islamic clothing, there is no Islamic clothing. You're right, there's obviously no racism against Muslim men nor against Muslim women who don't wear hijab. Trump's call was to ban all hijab-wearers only, right?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:well it would be nice if people would put forth some criticisms of islam rather than just generally ill founded bigotry I think people have! The problem is, if you criticize scripture, people will correctly point out that scripture is often irrelevant to practice and the vast majority of Muslims don't support things like lopping off hands and stoning people. If you criticize abhorrent cultural practices done in the name of Islam with no justification from the Quran or hadith, people will rightly point out that it has nothing to do with Islam. There's no criticism that can't be handwaved away, it seems. I completely agree that the current level of Islamophobia in North America and Europe is worrying, to say the least, but I think it's unfair to say that no one has offered substantive criticism of Islamic practices. Of course, if you're looking for a criticism which applies to all Muslims, you will be unlikely to find one because every person practices their religion differently and comes from a different cultural background.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 01:35
|
|
|
It would be really nice if criticisms of various elements of Islamic scripture or widespread practices weren't taken to the extreme where assholes paint "gently caress Muslims" all over a transit station. I don't think you can find a sane person who would disagree with that; even Hitchens or Dawkins.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 01:39
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:yes, yes, keep going... and then what? don't stop now. what comes after you realize everyone practices islam differently and that religions are open to interpretation? So, because religions are open to interpretation and everyone follows slightly different practices, there can be no criticism of concepts which are reasonably widespread in the Islamic community and have some degree of support from either the Quran or hadith? You know you're setting an unreasonable standard, right? However, it should be very clear that any criticism of Islam (or any religion) does not by any stretch of the imagination apply to every single person that practices that faith. I can criticize large sections of the Catholic church for protecting a bunch of childfuckers as a matter of policy; that doesn't mean I'm criticizing any person who identifies as Catholic for promoting child abuse, or even blaming every person in the church hierarchy. Likewise, my disagreements with certain parts of the Qu'ran and hadith, and the actions of certain Muslims, should not be taken as evidence that I hold those things against every Muslim. Only a legitimate crazy person would do that (like Donald Trump).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so what widespread concepts do you find troubling Gender inequality and segregation, anti-LGBT attitudes, and rather dim views toward religious pluralism all spring to mind. These are not exclusive to Islam nor are they shared by all Muslims but there's enough of a correlation that I feel some criticism is fair. Again, this is not a reason to assume all Muslims share these beliefs, but they are supported in the Quran and/or Hadith so I don't think it's fair to say they have nothing to do with Islam. Edit: and Judaism and Christianity both deserve these very same criticisms, and I've been as vocal as I can be about that as well! It's poo poo no matter whence it comes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:so your criticisms of islam are things that aren't specific to or mandated by islam That's ridiculous. It's no less valid to criticize Islamic stances on those things than it is to criticize Christian teachings on the same thing. Luckily, most followers of both faiths are moving away from the position on those issues that their respective leadership have encouraged historically speaking.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 05:19
|
|
|
Omi-Polari posted:If your argument is that "Islam is bad for LGBT" then you can find lots of examples from other religions that are not much different. I think that's Thug Drink's point. He's right. But I'd like to see the criticisms go further and be more specific. And we do this all the time with influential people on the Christian Right. Ted Cruz is a giant rear end in a top hat or Evangelical churches promote intolerance and discrimination. You'll find atheist criticism of Christianity that gets pretty militant, but even then you'll find a lot of atheists who say to cool it. Of course other religions are equally bad. Sometimes worse! That doesn't mean we can't or shouldn't criticise those attitudes no matter where they come from. I think we can criticise those particular elements of the Islamic community while still accepting Muslims in our society, welcoming refugees, and treating Muslims no different from anyone else. God only knows why Hasidic communities get a pass for the odious nonsense they do, but apparently holding lovely, rear end-backwards beliefs is not a deal-breaker...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 11, 2015 06:41
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:In that case, why mention religion at all? If you're just saying that anti-gay is bad and should be criticized, regardless of what religion the person is, then why even mention the religion at all? There's no reason to do so unless you're interested in singling out a specific religion. And why do that? By saying "Islamic homophobes are bad, as well as other homophobes" you are already treating Muslims differently. Because religion often informs people's attitudes toward homosexuality. I mentioned Muslim homophobes specifically because we are discussing the Muslim faith and Islamophobia here. If we were discussing Christianity or Haredi Judaism instead, I would be mentioning homophobes and sexists from those religions as well. We need to live in a world where religions are neither protected from criticism because they're "very important to people," but neither are religions singled out one more than the other for promoting bad ideas. That this is at all controversial confuses me. Surely if Islam were just a philosophy instead of a religion, we could criticize its negative elements, but by virtue of the fact it invokes God, it's protected from criticism? That makes no sense!
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Hitlers Gay Secret posted:It's mostly the fact that the people most vocal about their hatred of Islam seem to be the kind of people who want to commit mass genocide. I can kind of see this, but on the other hand, I'm right here saying that pretty much all religions (certainly all Abrahamic religions) have really lovely attitudes toward LGBT people and women in their scriptures, and often in their respective cultural practices. Yet it is my specific criticism of those elements in Islam, when we are discussing Islam specifically, which is taken as racist or somehow beyond the pale. That makes no sense. Bigotry against Muslim people is a major problem, and the sorts of people who are intensely concerned with banning Sharia Law in the US yet would gladly have their government run according to their interpretation of Christianity are loving terrible. These things are true. That doesn't mean we should automatically assume that any criticism of any element of Islam is somehow rooted in bigotry, or that criticism of Islam somehow justifies bigotry or hatred towards Muslims. I am no more saying that I dislike Muslims because I dislike certain elements of Islam than I am saying I hate poor people because I dislike poverty.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 19:58
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I'm sorry, let me rephrase. I don't think it's fair to say you don't like black culture just because some elements of it are problematic and harmful to the black community as much as anyone else, but of course it's fair to criticize the problematic elements of that culture (homophobia, often aided and abetted by religious beliefs, being one significant problematic element). That doesn't mean the entirety of black culture needs to be eliminated, just like Islam's problematic elements do not mean that Islam itself is completely bereft of merit. Just because something has one or two bad qualities, and I (or others) criticize those elements, it doesn't mean we are saying that thing is completely irredeemable in every way, it just means that it has some problematic elements.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Well sure, if your actual problem is homophobia and your critique is intended to advocate reform of the teachings of some Islamic sects and the legal systems of some Islamic countries that's not a problem, but some people use that criticism as an excuse for bigotry. Yes; some people do. What I'm saying is that I'm sick of people assuming that I am as well, when I am not. Ironically, it would be like me assuming that any given Muslim hates gay people. I think the fact that some people are disgusting bigots is holding back legitimate criticism of certain forms of Islam, and it's ultimately a very negative thing, most of all for the Muslims who suffer the most oppression by those specific forms of Islam (such as that which is promulgated by Saudi religious authorities).
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 21:51
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:I notice you didn't address my point about how gay rights was actually won in the west, but if our goal is LGBT rights shouldn't we be concerned with how that was actually accomplished and whether targeting people's religion is effective. Do you think it would have been more effective for LGBT rights to lead with "Christianity has bad qualities"? Not really, but where people's homophobia is informed by their understanding of the scriptures and practices of the religion they follow, you must eventually cross the bridge of "how do we get these people to stop believing in this one specific lovely part of their religion?" You can put it in a more diplomatic fashion as you like, but that's the nub of the problem.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That begs a very significant question. Is homophobia actually an element of Islamic culture, specifically? After all, there are plenty of non-homophobic Muslims. Maybe it's an element of Middle Eastern culture? Or maybe it's an element of Arab culture? Or maybe it's an element of Saudi culture? Or maybe it's got nothing to do with culture at all! Maybe it instead stems from fundamentalist ideologies which have been enforced upon those countries via armed conquest or revolution. To single out Islam out of all those potential sources as the one and only cultural factor, despite the large number of non-homophobic non-Saudi non-fundamentalist Muslims, seems intellectually lazy at best. But why is it such a bad thing for me to criticize problematic elements of a religion? Those non-homophobic Muslims you speak of are doing just that, in their actions, by acting contrary to what certain Islamic scholars say on the topic, as they should. Many Christians and non-Christians alike criticize the sects of Christianity which condemn homosexuality, as they should. There is, at the very least, scriptural ambiguity in all Abrahamic faiths as to whether homosexuality is permissible. Where people's homophobia is informed by their personal practice and understanding of their own religion, I see no reason why that's not open to criticism on the basis that it may offend someone. Likewise, claiming Daesh has nothing to do with Islam is foolish. They are clearly motivated by their own personal understanding of Islam. It's one that's roundly condemned by the vast, vast majority of Muslims around the world, and it does not mean that Islam itself is responsible for Daesh, or that every Muslim is somehow complicit in their crimes (far from it; Muslims are, by far, the majority of victims of their perverted practice of Islam as they understand it), but it does no good to say that these are separate issues. It would be stupid and bigoted for me to hold the Spanish Inquisition against every Catholic, but it's absurd to claim that the faith of Catholicism wasn't a major causal factor therein. Please read and comprehend: criticizing one element of a religion is not the same thing as criticizing the entirety of that religion. PT6A fucked around with this message at 22:27 on Dec 14, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Context is what should keep you from it. I would love to criticize Saudi Arabia's restrictions on women, but that's tactically and ethically inappropriate right now because it will just be lumped in with all the bigoted rhetoric. And that's unfortunate. That's a fair point; in the midst of very real and potentially violent Islamophobia, perhaps this is not the time to make criticisms, regardless of their validity. I can certainly agree with that.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:It is absurd to criticize an entire religion based on a single group's interpretation of that religion, because people can twist religion to fit just about any set of beliefs they please, and tend to alter the meaning of religious decrees freely in order to fit religious beliefs into their existing belief set. It's an utterly impossible standard. Wow, then it sure is a good thing that I made explicitly clear that my criticisms of one part of a religion don't involve criticizing that entire religion or criticizing everyone who follows it! Seriously, I've made that explicitly clear in writing multiple times, and you're still harping on about this. Are you literate?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:What "part" of Islam are you criticizing, then? I'm fairly sure the reason you're having a problem here is because you're using some wildly unconventional definition of the word "part", because as far as I know, a "part" is one part of a whole, directly and vitally connected to that whole to the point where criticism of the part also reflects poorly on the whole that the part is part of. That's why no one is understanding you - because criticizing "part" of Islam because of the Saudis' horrible beliefs makes about as much sense as criticizing "part" of evolution because of the Nazis' horrible beliefs. The theory of evolution does not tell people who believe in it how to behave, so your comparison makes absolutely no sense.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Plenty of people's understanding of the theory of evolution was that it does, in fact, tell you how to behave. Maybe your understanding of evolution is different, but you've already said that one person's understanding is enough to condemn the whole thing, even if it was an incorrect understanding. Religion tells you what you should and shouldn't do. A description of how a certain part of nature works does not make any claims as to how you should behave as a result, although of course people are free to use that as a basis while deciding for themselves how to act. I agree that we have a responsibility to address the evils of social Darwinism, even if it has no basis in the theory of evolution itself. The difference is that sexism and homophobic attitudes are pretty clearly expressed in the Quran, as they are in the Torah and the New Testament as well. You have to do some absolutely superb mental gymnastics to deny that. That doesn't mean that individual Muslims, Christians and Jews cannot form their own opinion on the subject, just that when those attitudes are contained in the founding document of your religion, perhaps it's valid to criticize that specific element. Again, any self-identified Muslim, Christian or Jew who accepts homosexuality is implicitly criticizing those elements of their own religion. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that! I don't know why you seem so dead-set on insisting that various religions don't have extremely lovely parts to them, considering either their scriptural foundations or their common practice in various regions of the world. What the gently caress do you have to gain by defending the idea that Islam is permanently blameless for everything ever? No philosophy is ever perfect or free from criticism; why should Islam or any other religion be different?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Well, yeah. Evolution says we have to be altruistic, so I think it's as good a moral guide as any religion. The theory of evolution is not prescriptive, nor is any other theory. By claiming it is, you're helping Main Paineframe make his idiotic point.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 02:25
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Oh, so that's your understanding of those things? Great, good for you! I have a different understanding of those things, though. And since you said that a concept can be criticized based on people's understanding of that concept, even if it's a flawed and incorrect understanding that most people don't share, the theory of evolution is horrible and evil because a bunch of people took it as guidance to do horrible things 80 years ago, even though you and most people totally disagree with their understandings! Wow! As it turns out, it's ncredibly easy to criticize anything on the basis of "someone once understood it to mean something bad, or did something bad because of their understanding of it, regardless of the correctness of that understanding", and nearly impossible to counter said criticism without abandoning that principle or declaring that it doesn't count for anything besides the thing you want to criticize! You seem to be missing the point: evolution does not tell anyone to do anything. No theory does. Yes, it's flawed inasmuch as the conclusions some people drew from it were awful. When theories are flawed, we change them and fix them. That flaw does not make evolution bad or wrong, no more than Islam's own flaws make Islam itself bad or wrong. You still haven't answered: why is it so important to you that Islam be absolutely flawless? That's a standard that literally nothing, ever, can satisfy because everything is flawed in some way. Nothing is perfect. Why should anyone feel bad because any specific thing is not perfect?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Obdicut posted:Islam doesn't have any flaws, because there is no such thing as "islam". ANy flaw you can point to will be present in some forms of Islam but not others. Of course! It should go without saying that I'm only criticizing the flaws if and when they are actually present. I'm not blaming LGBT-friendly Muslims for being homophobic. I'm not blaming Muslim feminists for being sexist. These things should go without saying. I think it's still fair to say, based on prevailing attitudes in Islamic jurisprudence and in many explicitly Muslim and/or Muslim-majority countries around the world, as well as the Quran and Hadith, Islam has a very nasty history of sexism and homophobia, a trait which it shares with Christianity and Judaism, both of which have been just as bad or worse on those accounts. EDIT: And again, I'm not saying that means that Islam is bad. Just that it has some very flawed elements, born largely of the sociopolitical context of 1500 years ago. I don't know why people are working so diligently to twist this into some kind of Islamophobia on my part. PT6A fucked around with this message at 17:19 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 17:17
|
|
|
On the other hand, there's no legal framework anywhere in the world that allows Christians who may want to stone people for being gay, to actually stone them for being gay. The same cannot be said of the Islamic world, sadly, even if that's not Islam's "fault."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 22:15
|
|
|
Ddraig posted:If the Westboro Baptist is entirely Baptist, then they believe in sola scriptura, which makes the case that the old covenant being overthrown by the new even stronger seeing as how they reject the reams of canonical law that try to prove the opposite. Yes, and just like Muslims, they would be wrong to do so. A Christian is someone who professes the Nicene Creed. A Muslim is someone who recites and believes in the Shahada. Sometimes, when you're a sane member of these religions, unfortunately your co-religionists do very insane, bad things in the name of that religion, that may or may not be justified by their interpretation of that religion and its scriptures. Too bad, so sad; deal with it. You don't get to decide that they are No True Christian/Muslim any more than they get to tell you that you are No True Christian/Muslim for following more liberal practices. EDIT: On the subject of refugees, it's the responsibility of every country in the world which is safe and able to do so to accept refugees, regardless of their religion. It sickens me that, after some of the crimes against humanity we've seen in the past, and those which are ongoing, there's any kind of debate about this. It doesn't matter if we caused the situation, or exacerbated the situation, or did nothing at all. To reject Syrian refugees because we're scared of their religion is the real Islamophobia that we have to be worried about. Some dude on the Internet saying it sure would be nice if the Qu'ran didn't say bad things about gay people doesn't really rate in comparison, IMO. PT6A fucked around with this message at 23:51 on Dec 15, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 15, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
Mandy Thompson posted:Hope Are you considering suing them, or is that something you reserve for women's shelters?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 01:23 |
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Historically stamping out a religion all together has never been accomplished without doing hate crimes, ever, so if you're looking for a solution to the religion problem so effective that we'll never need another solution after that one This is very true, and why even as a person who is steadfastly anti-religious I could never support an outright ban on religion. I think we need to work toward a society where it's not acceptable to express religious beliefs in the public sphere. By my reckoning, any sort of religious belief or spirituality is a deeply personal thing -- a relationship between you and your deity, if you will -- so I don't understand why it's something which needs to be publicized or made into law. We need strongly secular states which permit the free exercise of one's religious belief, but do not allow its influence into law or policy. It turns out, by no small coincidence, that this is not only best for non-believers like myself, but also for the faithful who don't toe the line of whoever happens to wield the most power at any given time. By all means: go to your church, mosque, synagogue or temple, and pray however you see fit, and conduct your life however you think is best, no matter why you feel that way. I just have an issue when anyone tries to force their views on other people, especially in a damaging fashion.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 16, 2015 07:13
|
|