Liberals and Islam

#101
#101
Danl said:
I agree with you here when one is dealing with a person/poster for the first time. But after knowing someone for a while or after reading someone's posts for a while, some "assumptions" are almost always made about that (now, not so) new person. And that is appropriate, don't you think?
Click to expand...

I think so in general.

What I was responding to was the "the average American thinks" line of thinking or the "republicans are..." or "liberalism is a mental disease" type stuff we see all too often.

If we want to move towards understanding then we have to stop assigning all sorts of motives, characteristics, qualities to people simply because they belong to some group or state some political opinion.

I mean hell, isn't that what all the "ism" stuff is really about?

If we took the time to listen to someone (could be via posts as you suggest) then we would have evidence to judge. Otherwise it is "ism" ism to the extreme.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#102
#102
volinbham said:
I think so in general.

What I was responding to was the "the average American thinks" line of thinking or the "republicans are..." or "liberalism is a mental disease" type stuff we see all too often.

If we want to move towards understanding then we have to stop assigning all sorts of motives, characteristics, qualities to people simply because they belong to some group or state some political opinion.

I mean hell, isn't that what all the "ism" stuff is really about?

If we took the time to listen to someone (could be via posts as you suggest) then we would have evidence to judge. Otherwise it is "ism" ism to the extreme.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
#103
#103
volinbham said:
I think so in general.

What I was responding to was the "the average American thinks" line of thinking or the "republicans are..." or "liberalism is a mental disease" type stuff we see all too often.

If we want to move towards understanding then we have to stop assigning all sorts of motives, characteristics, qualities to people simply because they belong to some group or state some political opinion.

I mean hell, isn't that what all the "ism" stuff is really about?

If we took the time to listen to someone (could be via posts as you suggest) then we would have evidence to judge. Otherwise it is "ism" ism to the extreme.
Click to expand...

agree as well
 
#104
#104
volinbham said:
Not to rag on you but do you consider yourself to be a non-average American?
Click to expand...

I guess my fallacy here is that I have been raised in the south and still live in the south. After so many years.. you begin to understand what makes the average joe in your neighborhood tick.

Does that necessarily apply to the average American overall? I have to admit that I dont have the same type of understanding of all Americans as I do those in the southern states.. in general.

I guess to answer your question.. to the best of my estimations.. I am a non-average southern American
 
#105
#105
WooPigSooie said:
I guess my fallacy here is that I have been raised in the south and still live in the south. After so many years.. you begin to understand what makes the average joe in your neighborhood tick.

Does that necessarily apply to the average American overall? I have to admit that I dont have the same type of understanding of all Americans as I do those in the southern states.. in general.

I guess to answer your question.. to the best of my estimations.. I am a non-average southern American
Click to expand...

That's beautiful...

"You can't discuss Islam's underlying ideas because it's racist and runs the danger of stereotyping an entire group of people."

"Most people in the south are racist."

Kudos to you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 people
#106
#106
This conversation is all but useless, by the way, in our current economy of relative morality. It's a urinating contest for standardlessness to define a standard.

For instance, we have a bunch of atheists arguing about what constitutes 'the motherload' of bad ideas. Atheists are claiming one worldview's views as immoral because of its teachings about women's rights, homosexual rights, beheadings, forced capitulation, etc... with no ability whatsoever to show that women, homosexuals, or the average citizen has any inherent, intrinsic rights. Christians are worthy of mockery because we vote based on our moral and ethical convictions, thus atheists (who vote based on their moral and ethical convictions) apparently have better moral and ethical convictions. Did I mention they have no standard but their own opinion to judge ours against?

This is a beautiful example of the vacuous nature of atheistic moral philosophy.

Where does morality come from?

It's societal.

That society has different morals.

Yah. But obviously mine are better.

Edit:

Where does morality come from?

It's societal?

Our society has agreed on this morality since its inception.

But my opinion is better, so we need to change society.
Click to expand...

So, Islam is evil, but there's really nothing inherent in the universe to say it's evil. It's just one opinion among many and really, the only way we can enforce against it is "might makes right". Better hope that Islam isn't 'mightier". lol

Christianity is evil because Christians vote based on their moral/ethical opinions.

Atheists/Liberals are not evil, though they only have their opinions to use when voting.

Oh... And Christians are the only valid targets in America, because we have the most widespread opinions. And we can't stereotype Muslims, but we can stereotype white Southerners.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#108
#108
WooPigSooie said:
When one side of the debate is condemning an entire group of people that just so happen to be a minority in the western world and due to their traditional appearances (middle eastern, beards, etc..) they are easy to pick out.

I will argue all day long that the institution of religion in general is a bad idea in modern times.. but I'm not about to support an overwhelming majority that has their sights set on a conspicuous minority.

eastofsuez_jude.jpg
Click to expand...

See bolded above. Maher and Harris repeatedly said they were not doing what you suggest. They were correct in saying so but you, Afleck and others keep accusing them of doing this then attacking the practice.

Ironically you are doing exactly what Harris did when you say "the institution of religion in general is a bad idea". He was talking about some ideas within Islam being bad ideas. How is that different? Are you condemning anyone who is religious? (of course not).

Oh and nice touch throwing a Nazi reference in :crazy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#109
#109
For those that still want to argue the OP is incorrect, here is Exhibit A in all its glory on what we are talking about. It gets no more absurd than this:

The ultimate cowardice: British student union refuses to condemn ISIS

Hand-wringing delegates at the NUS blocked a vote to show solidarity with Iraqi Kurds and condemn Islamic State militants because they say it’s “Islamophobic”.

The bill called for the Union – which claims to represent UK students – to support unity between Muslims, condemn the bloody terror of ISIS (also known as the Islamic State), and support a boycott on people who fund the militants.

But the motion offended Black Students Officer Malia Bouattia, who said: “We recognise that condemnation of ISIS appears to have become a justification for war and blatant Islamaphobia.

“This rhetoric exacerbates the issue at hand and in essence is a further attack on those we aim to defend.”
Click to expand...

It’s truly bizarre that while many Muslims themselves are able to make the distinction between “ISIS” and “Islam,” and to disassociate themselves from the barbarity of the former, the British students are unable to do so. It is like saying one cannot condemn neo-Nazis because that is a blanket condemnation of Germans.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#112
#112
FLVOL_79 said:
Taliban storm Pakistan school; kill 126, mostly kids - CNN.com

I wonder what Ben Affleck has to say about this?....
Click to expand...

But they are persecuted!

Mohammed Khurrassani, the TTP spokesman, told CNN that the latest attack was revenge for the killing of hundreds of innocent tribesmen during repeated army operations in provinces including South Waziristan, North Waziristan and the Khyber Agency.
Click to expand...

So they go after kids. Can't take on the Army itself or hit a military target, have to kill children instead.
 
#114
#114
Grand Vol said:
But they are persecuted!



So they go after kids. Can't take on the Army itself or hit a military target, have to kill children instead.
Click to expand...

They are cowards and animals. Plain and simple.

But when we catch them we need to treat them per international treaties per some here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#115
#115
hog88 said:
They are cowards and animals. Plain and simple.

But when we catch them we need to treat them per international treaties per some here.
Click to expand...

I'd tend to think we won't get that chance. If we did capture them, I'd just as soon turn them over to Pakistan personally. Family is huge in that part of the world and I doubt they would get tickled with a feather duster by the Pakistani military after killing a bunch of kids.

Sometimes our "torture" isn't quite as bad as it seems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#116
#116
As I mentioned in another thread, I don't understand why some liberals defend Islam like they do.

Islam is diametrically opposed to liberal values like freedom of religion and movements such as feminism and same-sex marriage.

Islam still hasn't reached the stage where its views are shaped by the Enlightenment (which irrevocably altered Christendom) moreso than ancient historical values. When it attains that point, then Islam may be more tolerable. When women in Saudi Arabia have more freedoms, when acid is not thrown in the face of unveiled girls, when people are not murdered in "honor killings," when deconverts from Islam are not jailed or executed, when homosexuals are not forced into sex changes, and when little girls who simply want an education are not shot in the head...MAYBE THEN Islam will be tolerable.

Some "liberals" bash Christianity for offenses far in the past, yet much worse atrocities are still done today by devoted followers of Islam.

The average Muslim is not a bad person, but they still believe in a religious ideology that seeks to dominate the world while squelching out the rights of those who disagree.
 
#117
#117
JoeKyleVol said:
As I mentioned in another thread, I don't understand why some liberals defend Islam like they do.

Islam is diametrically opposed to liberal values like freedom of religion and movements such as feminism and same-sex marriage.

Islam still hasn't reached the stage where its views are shaped by the Enlightenment (which irrevocably altered Christendom) moreso than ancient historical values. When it attains that point, then Islam may be more tolerable. When women in Saudi Arabia have more freedoms, when acid is not thrown in the face of unveiled girls, when people are not murdered in "honor killings," when deconverts from Islam are not jailed or executed, when homosexuals are not forced into sex changes, and when little girls who simply want an education are not shot in the head...MAYBE THEN Islam will be tolerable.

Some "liberals" bash Christianity for offenses far in the past, yet much worse atrocities are still done today by devoted followers of Islam.

The average Muslim is not a bad person, but they still believe in a religious ideology that seeks to dominate the world while squelching out the rights of those who disagree.
Click to expand...

Liberals hate Christians. The enemy of my enemy is my friend. I hate Florida. I would pull for the Taliban over the Gators. That simple.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top