Rant on Islam comments

[SpoonfulOSugar]

I snark on islamists and the traditions that I find offensive or problematic and I still get the same respons: I am racist.

And people try to trivialize what is happening because "Christianity is bad too". Or "I googled and found two articles about how racist Swedes are so shut up".

I went back and read through the entire thread. You made very good points about a multitude of sects on page 1 and got reasonable responses.

But more to the point, I read the rest of the thread and no one called you racist.

So, I'm guessing that this comes from other threads. Can you point me to a thread where you (personally) were called racist (or other similar terms) for a comment about the Muslim faith?

[violynn]

Right, I am sewing our KKK robes as we speak, you want me to garnish yours with a swastika piping? I did mine and the result is absolutely stunning, seditious and yet elegant!

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law

[ShepherdontheRock]

I have had horrible, horrible experiences with Christianity and Christians. Everything from newborn babies being hit to train them to Christians saying awful things to my kids, but if I started saying that all Christians were bad because of this I would be called out here. Islam has a hell of a lot of problems and the fundamental Muslims have managed to start countries, but it is foolish to act like Christianity is somehow "more evolved" just because Christian fundamentalist have not managed to start a country founded on their awful beliefs.

THIS THIS THIS.

But I'd also like to point out things like the Ugandan "Kill the Gays" thing. That was clearly influenced by fundie christianity, not fundie islam.

Yeah, christianity is more evolved, alright.

[2xx1xy1JD]

Of course not, that was pure cynicism of my part. I don't agree with the many of them don't agree etc. There are not that many and they don't stand up out of fear. Meanwhile from right to left, everybody agrees that multiculture society has failed big time. Essential failures as the billion and billions spent on integration projects are thrown in the drawers of the various government and university research institutes. I was peripherally involved in a study into the number and the effects of non-western immigrants in the social security system, the results were so disillusioning, they couldn't be published because we had to maintain the myth, that everything was fine! The muslim community could be offended and we didn't want that. I am convinced, also because I lived in islamic countries, my late husband was a diplomate, that islam is not compatible with western democracy. Denying the problems is ignorant, there are problems, big problems and to allow uncontrollable amounts of refugees/immigrants/fortune seekers is madness.They are not only Syrian refugees just 1/3 is, according to official data I read today. I think as a country we have to welcome refugees, I mean real refugees. But the current situation is absolutely uncontrollable, as I said before and nobody seems to mind, but the uprisings already started and being blind and deaf isn't going to help the situation one bit.

I can't comment on how multiculturalism how worked in the Netherlands, but it's been very successful in Canada.

[Clementine]

I can't comment on how multiculturalism how worked in the Netherlands, but it's been very successful in Canada.

I guess that members of the indigenous peoples in America would have a different opinion. They tend to always be forgotten in the debate about immigration and when USA and Canada are held up as examples of "successful immigration".

[Cleopatra7]

For the record, I consider myself to be pretty anti-theist, but at the same time, I have enough sense to know that the world isn't going to adopt my attitudes just because I want them to. As a humanist, I take the view that we should value people over religions and ideas. Consequently, if Muslims are being discriminated against for their religion in terms of jobs, housing, or education, I would 100 percent support them complaining about this. However, I don't think that Islamic ideas should be immune from criticism, whether it's the behavior of Muhammad, whether Muhammad was even a historical person, the treatment of LGBT people and women in Muslim communities, or the origins of the Quran. I also wish that the media would allow atheists and humanists from Muslim backgrounds to tell their own stories, rather than rely on the usual old white guy talking heads who don't have first hand experiences in those cultures, but somehow I doubt this will be happening anytime soon.

More importantly, there's really not that much that we can do that is going to change the attitudes of people with patriarchal fundamentalist beliefs, whether these people are Salafi Muslims in Pakistan or the Maxwells living in middle America. While the Maxwells could theoretically break free, go to community college, and integrate more into mainstream society, they would have to break away from the mental prison they currently find themselves in. It's true for Salafi Muslims as well. When it comes to, say, the plight of women in Saudi Arabia, I really don't think there is anything we as Westerners can do about it. I think our energies would be better spent dismantling patriarchal attitudes in our own countries, where we will have some hope of success. At some point, the women in these societies are just going to have to say enough is enough and start protesting, as Western women did starting in the nineteenth centuries. Women in India are starting to do this in response to the horrific rapes that have been occurring there, which gives me some optimism on that front.

And the truth of the matter is that societies can change very quickly if they need or want to. Just look at how much Japan and Germany have changed since World War II. Our grandparents considered Japan in particular to be irredeemably rotten, because of Pearl Harbor and the old racist trope of "Oriental cruelty." Now Japan's biggest exports are Hello Kitty and bootleg anime. It's been noted that Germany has more power through its position in the EU than Hitler ever could have hoped to achieve through military means. The difference, however, is that both Japan and Germany accepted that they were defeated and that they couldn't go back to their fascist behavior, whereas the only way I fear Islamists will be defeated is when the people living under these regimes just get fed up with them, which may not happen for decades or even centuries.

[latraviata]

I guess that members of the indigenous peoples in America would have a different opinion. They tend to always be forgotten in the debate about immigration and when USA and Canada are held up as examples of "successful immigration".

Apart from the 'indigenous peoples' USA and Canada are founded on immigration, immigration countries or continent as you will, Europe never was ...until now. Comparing USA and Canada to Europe is apples and oranges.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Apart from the 'indigenous peoples' USA and Canada are founded on immigration, immigration countries or continent as you will, Europe never was ...until now. Comparing USA and Canada to Europe is apples and oranges.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I should go back to announce to my Professors that Great Britain is still inhabited by Celts, in Lebanon still live the Fenici, while Latini, Sabini and Etruschi still live in Central Italy and I don't exist since I am of cimbric descent and you know the Cimbri never colonized the Alpine Valleys. We also only dreamed about the Longobardi, the Vandali, the Unni, the Franchi. Ancient Greece civilisation as we know it never was since the Dori never arrived nor defeated the previous inhabitants. We also are the product of many and many migrations, only our roots are some centuries older.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I should go back to announce to my Professors that Great Britain is still inhabited by Celts, in Lebanon still live the Fenici, while Latini, Sabini and Etruschi still live in Central Italy and I don't exist since I am of cimbric descent and you know the Cimbri never colonized the Alpine Valleys. We also only dreamed about the Longobardi, the Vandali, the Unni, the Franchi. Ancient Greece civilisation as we know it never was since the Dori never arrived nor defeated the previous inhabitants. We also are the product of many and many migrations, only our roots are some centuries older.

Thank you.

I'm not very good at ancient history, but I was seriously :think: about that position.

Plus, you know, that whole "just forget about the indigenous" is off in and of itself. If we forget the indigenous, every location is settled by immigrants.

Or maybe entire populations burst from Zeus's head?

I feel stuck, once again, in Upside Down World.

[latraviata]

Thank you.

I'm not very good at ancient history, but I was seriously :think: about that position.

Plus, you know, that whole "just forget about the indigenous" is off in and of itself. If we forget the indigenous, every location is settled by immigrants.

Or maybe entire populations burst from Zeus's head?

I feel stuck, once again, in Upside Down World.

Ancient history, you got that right. You think that is a fair comparison to present times? I think it is rather irrelevant to say the least.

[Clementine]

Thank you.

I'm not very good at ancient history, but I was seriously :think: about that position.

Plus, you know, that whole "just forget about the indigenous" is off in and of itself. If we forget the indigenous, every location is settled by immigrants.

Or maybe entire populations burst from Zeus's head?

I feel stuck, once again, in Upside Down World.

So just because it has happened in a lot of places makes it ok? It wasn't even that long ago that it happened in the US, a few generations ago. I can't believe that anybody can have the guts to defend how Europeans settled in North America or Australia and NZ.

Do you actually say that to the Native Americans? "We're sorry that we robbed you of your land, but you know, we're _all_ immigrants, your people didn't burst from Zeus's head".

Or Palestinians. "Stop complaining, this is how history has worked forever, just deal with it!". Or Kurds or Tibetans. "Every location is settled by immigrants".

[Whoosh]

So just because it has happened in a lot of places makes it ok? It wasn't even that long ago that it happened in the US, a few generations ago. I can't believe that anybody can have the guts to defend how Europeans settled in North America or Australia and NZ.

Do you actually say that to the Native Americans? "We're sorry that we robbed you of your land, but you know, we're _all_ immigrants, your people didn't burst from Zeus's head".

Or Palestinians. "Stop complaining, this is how history has worked forever, just deal with it!". Or Kurds or Tibetans. "Every location is settled by immigrants".

I think you might have missed the point. No one defended any such thing. It was simply pointed out that IT HAPPENED IN LOTS OF PLACES.

I am really learning a lot from some portions of this thread and I think we should all know some of the information being discussed here. I personally would love it if we could keep it civilish and on-trackish. Just my .02 (ETA - this last part is a general comment, not directed at anyone in particular).

[latraviata]

So just because it has happened in a lot of places makes it ok? It wasn't even that long ago that it happened in the US, a few generations ago. I can't believe that anybody can have the guts to defend how Europeans settled in North America or Australia and NZ.

Do you actually say that to the Native Americans? "We're sorry that we robbed you of your land, but you know, we're _all_ immigrants, your people didn't burst from Zeus's head".

Or Palestinians. "Stop complaining, this is how history has worked forever, just deal with it!". Or Kurds or Tibetans. "Every location is settled by immigrants".

I think dragging ancient history into the discussion as a fine example or comparison is more a display of her overwhelming knowledge than an argument.

But, It has the the semblance of an intelligent conversation. The Batavians descended the Rhine and then the misery began......Not to mention the Vikings.....

[laPapessaGiovanna]

Ancient history, you got that right. You think that is a fair comparison to present times? I think it is rather irrelevant to say the least.

You know that the past before becoming past was present. And you know that in some two hundreds years people will think about what we are living now as past. Populations always moved whenever they had a reason for it, they simply did more slowly in a world that was perceived a lot bigger than now.

[latraviata]

You know that the past before becoming past was present. And you know that in some two hundreds years people will think about what we are living now as past. Populations always moved whenever they had a reason for it, they simply did more slowly in a world that was perceived a lot bigger than now.

Are you still wearing a palla with fibula?? Or do you stick to the good old ricinium?

[FundieFarmer]

Ancient history, you got that right. You think that is a fair comparison to present times? I think it is rather irrelevant to say the least.

Comparing the past against present times is how this whole conversation started in the first place.

[latraviata]

Comparing the past against present times is how this whole conversation started in the first place.

The so called migrations of ancient Europe were mostly, if not all, invasions, perhaps a minor detail to some, but still.

[SpoonfulOSugar]

So is the argument that the current issues with immigration/asylees in Europe cannot be compared to current issues with immigration/asylees in the United States or Canada because the relative ages of the existing infrastructures is different?

That just makes no sense to me at all, but I'm willing to try to understand why this might be deemed true.

[laPapessaGiovanna]

I think dragging ancient history into the discussion as a fine example or comparison is more a display of her overwhelming knowledge than an argument.

But, It has the the semblance of an intelligent conversation. The Batavians descended the Rhine and then the misery began......Not to mention the Vikings.....

My dear you were the one that said Europe isn't a continent born out of immigration and I simply said that's not true, unfortunately to affirm this I had to show my unlimited ( :liar: :roll: ) knowledge of history.

However it doesn't matter because in two hundred years the supposed "invasion of Europe by Muslim refugees and migrants" will be an historical fact (if it happens) and in 500 years it will be ancient history and so it won't matter anymore by your standards.

Obviously I am joking. We clearly have problem otherwise we wouldn't be discussing. Denying it is not useful, but also exaggerating it serves none.

@latraviata and @PregnantPornStar and @Clementine what makes you think that the "Islamic Culture" is and will always be a major obstacle to integration of Muslims in our society, since Christian Culture, that over time demonstrated to be equally capable of ruthless atrocities, not only didn't manage to prevent the development of our society as it is at the present moment, but according to some even contributed to it?

[latraviata]

My dear you were the one that said Europe isn't a continent born out of immigration and I simply said that's not true, unfortunately to affirm this I had to show my unlimited ( :liar: :roll: ) knowledge of history.

However it doesn't matter because in two hundred years the supposed "invasion of Europe by Muslim refugees and migrants" will be an historical fact (if it happens) and in 500 years it will be ancient history and so it won't matter anymore by your standards.

Obviously I am joking. We clearly have problem otherwise we wouldn't be discussing. Denying it is not useful, but also exaggerating it serves none.

@latraviata and @PregnantPornStar and @Clementine what makes you think that the "Islamic Culture" is and will always be a major obstacle to integration of Muslims in our society since Christian Culture that over time demonstrated to be equally capable of ruthless atrocities not only didn't manage to prevent the development of our society as it is at the present moment but according to some even contributed to it?

First of all, 40 years of experience in the Netherlands and unlike Christianity (in all it's horror), it never went through a period of enlightenment. Criticising islam is impossible, even in the western world scholars are under pressure not to publish their findings and studies regarding a modern or reinterpreted islam. Some examples:

http://islamversuseurope.blogspot.nl/20 ... minal.html

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/2011/10 ... oesnt.html

http://www.jewishjournal.com/dennis_pra ... _forbidden

http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2007/11/c ... islam.html

http://www.redstate.com/2015/01/25/univ ... o-bonkers/

There has been a lot of publicity about a German professor at I believe the university of Heidelberg, who didn't get his studies published, so he decided to use a nom de plume, becuase of the death threads.

Many European universities get funded for their Islamic study faculties by UAE, SA, Kuweit and who pays, decides, the university of Leiden Netherlands (My Alma Mater) get funded by Quatar I believe. I know of Oxford, Cambridge and even in the USA, you can easily Google it.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Artic ... ghp68uqpBc

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... ching.html

So they have a firm grip on what is been taught.

This isn't exaggeration, these are facts.

The words of the PM of 'secular Turkey'

http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/dome ... 360374.asp

I am not even talking about the Koranic demand to take over a foreign country as soon as they are with enough to do so. While staying in the Orient I talked to many people who confirmed that, very friendly, but they predicted us a full take over and they will send as many people as possible, of at least Europe and these were conversations on a diplomatic level.

The islam hasn't changed since the 7th century.

[OkToBeTakei]

Somebody save me the phone wifi time and confirm as per usual the above is a cherry picked bunch of propaganda and right wing blogs? :)

The Orient :lol:

'The Islam' is that like 'the gay' ....... :lol:

[SpoonfulOSugar]

Somebody save me the phone wifi time and confirm as per usual the above is a cherry picked bunch of propaganda and right wing blogs? :)

The Orient :lol:

'The Islam' is that like 'the gay' ....... :lol:

Well, I was looking up the "Jewish Journal" but have gotten side-tracked.

Why would someone who is rigidly anti-theist use a faith-based source to prove a point? :think:

Seriously.

Edited to add: Okay - I looked at the links. The only one I'd lend any credence to is the Telegraph, and it's still clearly right-leaning.

[Curious]

I'm genuinely confused here, this is not snark, I'm trying to understand.

If the past is irrelevant to current situations, why do people keep bringing up that Islam is inherently bad because Mohammad married a child bride?

I don't understand why history can be used to bolster positions in one situation, but not the other.

Can someone explain to me why there is a difference?

Again, I'm NOT being snarky. I really am trying to understand.

On a completely different note, using antiquated language that is considered offense today, does not exactly scream enlightened.

Edit: can and cannot are not the same thing

[latraviata]

Well, I was looking up the "Jewish Journal" but have gotten side-tracked.

Why would someone who is rigidly anti-theist use a faith-based source to prove a point? :think:

Seriously.

Edited to add: Okay - I looked at the links. The only one I'd lend any credence to is the Telegraph, and it's still clearly right-leaning.

Who says I am an antitheist?

And when it is clearly right it can't be good. How familiar are you with the other links? Are you so well informed? You don't give me that impression.

[FundieFarmer]

I'm genuinely confused here, this is not snark, I'm trying to understand.

If the past is irrelevant to current situations, why do people keep bringing up that Islam is inherently bad because Mohammad married a child bride?

I don't understand why history can be used to bolster positions in one situation, but not the other.

Can someone explain to me why there is a difference?

Again, I'm NOT being snarky. I really am trying to understand.

On a completely different note, using antiquated language that is considered offense today, does not exactly scream enlightened.

Edit: can and cannot are not the same thing

Me too, please. This is the point I was trying to make upthread, but Curious stated it far better.