User Controls
National Anti-Muslim Day (US)
-
2017-06-07 at 10:04 PM UTCOn June 10th there are a number of Anti-Muslim/Sharia protests planned. Let's be sure to turn out in force and make this into a new tradition.
http://imagine2050.newcomm.org/2017/05/22/anti-muslim-march-against-sharia-planned/ -
2017-06-07 at 11:07 PM UTCfuck sandniggers.
gas the bastards -
2017-06-07 at 11:29 PM UTCI am not sure how I feel about this.
On one hand, I don't see this as being any different than anti-communist rallies in the united states, or any other political rally or protest rally.
On the other hand, this is a bit of a special case and singling out Muslims with no recognition for the difference between moderates and radicals could aid in the radicalisation of the moderates.
I'm all for the right to do it, but I don't think it's a good idea. -
2017-06-07 at 11:31 PM UTCwe tried doign this b4
-
2017-06-07 at 11:55 PM UTC
Originally posted by BOSS I am not sure how I feel about this.
On one hand, I don't see this as being any different than anti-communist rallies in the united states, or any other political rally or protest rally.
On the other hand, this is a bit of a special case and singling out Muslims with no recognition for the difference between moderates and radicals could aid in the radicalisation of the moderates.
I'm all for the right to do it, but I don't think it's a good idea.
there are no moderate mudslimes.
send them all to the ovens -
2017-06-08 at 2:31 AM UTC
Originally posted by BOSS I am not sure how I feel about this.
On one hand, I don't see this as being any different than anti-communist rallies in the united states, or any other political rally or protest rally.
On the other hand, this is a bit of a special case and singling out Muslims with no recognition for the difference between moderates and radicals could aid in the radicalisation of the moderates.
I'm all for the right to do it, but I don't think it's a good idea.
Have you read the Quran? It is not a moderate book. Muslims who don't support jihad and Sharia law are like Christians who support homosexuality, jedis who eat pork, and Buddhists who advocate for war. -
2017-06-08 at 2:34 AM UTCNIGGA ISLAM IS DA ONLY RELIGION WE GOT MY NIGGA DONT U SAY SHIT ABOUT ISLAM DONT U EVER COME 2 MY HOOD UR WHITE BOI AZZ WILL BE LEFT 4 DEAD
-
2017-06-08 at 2:39 AM UTCiyts called st georges day but they not even tell u wen it is but on end of ramadam its eid am gonna fuck shit up idk how yet but theres bare festivals 4 all pakis any ideas holla @ me
-
2017-06-08 at 2:44 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Have you read the Quran? It is not a moderate book. Muslims who don't support jihad and Sharia law are like Christians who support homosexuality, jedis who eat pork, and Buddhists who advocate for war.
And those people exist. The ultimate goal should be to move them towards secularism, not make them turtle back towards extremism and religiosity. The same as it is with "secular jedi" people, who are culturally jedi but have no religious obligations to Judaism. If you're going to force them to choose between abandoning their Islamic heritage and identifying eevn more with it and standing in solidarity because they're under fire as a whole, what do you expect them to pick?
When you use the word "Muslim" in the modern context, you're not referring to only the most strict adherents, the same way when you say "black" you don't only mean gangster rap listening hood thugs rolling around in their El Caminos.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2017-06-08 at 2:49 AM UTCdid u watch my video or not idoit
-
2017-06-08 at 2:52 AM UTC
Originally posted by BOSS And those people exist. The ultimate goal should be to move them towards secularism, not make them turtle back towards extremism and religiosity. The same as it is with "secular jedi" people, who are culturally jedi but have no religious obligations to Judaism. If you're going to force them to choose between abandoning their Islamic heritage and identifying eevn more with it and standing in solidarity because they're under fire as a whole, what do you expect them to pick?
When you use the word "Muslim" in the modern context, you're not referring to only the most strict adherents, the same way when you say "black" you don't only mean gangster rap listening hood thugs rolling around in their El Caminos.
Alright, fair enough. I don't necessarily agree with moving everyone to secularism. I have no problem with whatever people choose to do spiritually, so long as they don't intentionally harm those around them.
No one is against 'moderate Muslims'. The problem is that Islam itself is a violent, destructive religion, that when taken seriously results in nothing good. If moderate Muslims want to stay moderate, they should honestly just create a new religion because Islam does not support their beliefs.
The rallies taking place on the 10th are specifically targeting Sharia Law. So, I suppose I misspoke when I said it was a march against Muslims. The organizers are protesting honor killings, FGM, jihad, and all the other nasty stuff found in the Quran that has been made into a legal code. It is an attack on the ideology, not the adherents. -
2017-06-08 at 3:07 AM UTC
-
2017-06-08 at 4:38 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo Alright, fair enough. I don't necessarily agree with moving everyone to secularism. I have no problem with whatever people choose to do spiritually, so long as they don't intentionally harm those around them.
No one is against 'moderate Muslims'. The problem is that Islam itself is a violent, destructive religion, that when taken seriously results in nothing good. If moderate Muslims want to stay moderate, they should honestly just create a new religion because Islam does not support their beliefs.
The rallies taking place on the 10th are specifically targeting Sharia Law. So, I suppose I misspoke when I said it was a march against Muslims. The organizers are protesting honor killings, FGM, jihad, and all the other nasty stuff found in the Quran that has been made into a legal code. It is an attack on the ideology, not the adherents.
To your first point, secularism does not mean atheism. It means to separate your religious beliefs from your other world views. In essence, the same way that a "Christian" might spiritually or religiously be Christian but does not let that supersede their sense of humanity and so on. It is in everyone's best interests of Muslims stop viewing everything through the lens of Islam versus the rest of the world.
To your second and third points, Islam, as a doctrine in its purest form, is no more or less violent or destructive than Christianity or Judaism in terms of their doctrines. But when we say "Christianity" for example, nobody ever takes that to mean the literal words in the new and old testament. It's the same way with Islam. It's not just whatever is written in their books at this point, it is a pan-cultural identity. As such, there is no one "Islam" outside of what is literally in the Coran, which is of course interpreted in many different way.
For example, there is nothing in the Muslim doctrine about FGM. But some Muslim countries practice it, not because it is a feature of Islam but whatever interpretation of the base materials that they call Islam. The moderate Muslim is just as much a "Muslim" in terms of these considerations as the most extreme Muslim. Same with honour killings; as far as I'm aware, there is no mainstream Muslim text that orders such a thing. Yet you associate it with Islam. Why is that? And how does that do justice to a Muslim who does not bekieve in either of those things, but still feels like they are under criticism when someone claims these are Muslim things? -
2017-06-08 at 4:45 AM UTC
Originally posted by Kolokol-1 Agreed
I don't know how to include the boxed text, but the issue of Islamic extremism is more complicated than the unifying factor of Islam, so it is a stretch to say that Islam as a religion is the causal reason behind their disproportionate contribution to the count of terrorists in the world, rather than being a simple correlative factor.
For example the current state of the Middle East can be directly tied to western intervention in the region, ranging back from the use of the British mandate of Palestine to create the state of Israel, to the deposition of Mossadegh in Iraq by US and British forces, to the invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam Hussein, which left the power vacuum that allowed Daesh to come into existence.
It is more complicated than singling out one doctrine. -
2017-06-08 at 4:49 AM UTC
Originally posted by BOSS To your second and third points, Islam, as a doctrine in its purest form, is no more or less violent or destructive than Christianity or Judaism in terms of their doctrines. But when we say "Christianity" for example, nobody ever takes that to mean the literal words in the new and old testament. It's the same way with Islam. It's not just whatever is written in their books at this point, it is a pan-cultural identity. As such, there is no one "Islam" outside of what is literally in the Coran, which is of course interpreted in many different way.
I disagree. Religions are meant to be taken seriously (by their followers anyway). Again, have you read the Quran? The Old Testament verses in the Bible that mention violence are heavily restrained by historical context. This is not true in the Quran, where the verses are not only unrestrained, but direct commands.
Originally posted by BOSS For example, there is nothing in the Muslim doctrine about FGM. But some Muslim countries practice it, not because it is a feature of Islam but whatever interpretation of the base materials that they call Islam. The moderate Muslim is just as much a "Muslim" in terms of these considerations as the most extreme Muslim. Same with honour killings; as far as I'm aware, there is no mainstream Muslim text that orders such a thing. Yet you associate it with Islam. Why is that? And how does that do justice to a Muslim who does not bekieve in either of those things, but still feels like they are under criticism when someone claims these are Muslim things?
Ok. You're right. There's nothing specifically about FGM in the Quran, so let's back up. Executing homosexuals and infidels, and waging jihad is most definitely in the Quran. Additionally, Muslims are told to follow in the footsteps of Muhammed, who is anything but a good role model. Have you read any of the Sunnahs? He's a downright madman. -
2017-06-08 at 4:54 AM UTC
Originally posted by BOSS For example the current state of the Middle East can be directly tied to western intervention in the region, ranging back from the use of the British mandate of Palestine to create the state of Israel, to the deposition of Mossadegh in Iraq by US and British forces, to the invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam Hussein, which left the power vacuum that allowed Daesh to come into existence.
It is more complicated than singling out one doctrine.
No, it cannot. Muslims have been raping and murdering people since Islam began. This is not new behavior. -
2017-06-08 at 5:08 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo I disagree. Again, have you read the Quran? The Old Testament verses in the Bible that mention violence are heavily restrained by historical context. This is not true in the Quran, where the verses are not only unrestrained, but direct commands.
Ok. You're right. There's nothing specifically about FGM in the Quran, so let's back up. Executing homosexuals and infidels, and waging jihad is most definitely in the Quran. Additionally, Muslims are told to follow in the footsteps of Muhammed, who is anything but a good role model. Have you read any of the Sunnahs? He's a downright madman.
I've studied it independently, yes, as part of a number of comparative religion courses. But I am beginning to doubt that you have, or are judging it by the same standards as the Bible. Each verse from the Coran has a very specific historical context as well.
For example, the infamous "slay them wherever you find them" sauret relates specifically to a conflict wherein a rival tribe of the Muslims that had signed a peace treaty with them, tried to wage a proxy war on them through one of their allied tribes, and supplied that rival tribe. And moreover, this verse is usually cherrypicked without even direct context:
https://quran.com/2/189-199
"Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors."
"And kill them wherever you overtake them and expel them from wherever they have expelled you, and fitnah is worse than killing. And do not fight them at al-Masjid al- Haram until they fight you there. But if they fight you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers."
"And if they cease, then indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."
"Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] worship is [acknowledged to be] for Allah . But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors."
This is just one example, but as you see, there is plenty of context that is always left out of these discussions, which might paint the religion in a very different light Ultimately what Islam is, is what you want it to be. This is the case for the interpretation of any text like this.
As for your second point, of course some of those things are in the Coran. But again, if a moderate Muslim wants, they can explain it away with historical context or direct context in the text, or something similar, just as a Christian can. I think you are being unbalanced and uncharitable in your view, and constructing your reasoning around your presupposed conclusion. I hope that does not sound offensive or confrontational.
As for the hedit, I believe even Muslims don't agree on what is even real. I believe Shiytes and Saunis both have completely different hedit books.
Islam is no more or less malleable than any other religion. -
2017-06-08 at 5:14 AM UTC
Originally posted by Dargo No, it cannot. Muslims have been raping and murdering people since Islam began. This is not new behavior.
The same could be said for Christianity. Interestingly Islam is about 600 years younger than Christianity. Do you remember when the Reformation happened? ~500-600 years ago as I recall. I'd give them a little time. And you are ignoring the nuance in every individual situation for a very broad view.
Ignore all discussion of religion for a second; is it likely that Daesh would exist if Saddam Hussein had never been deposed for bogus reasons? -
2017-06-08 at 5:18 AM UTCBOSS is a dumbass. Muhamadism is the cult of a warlord pedophile narcissist. So what does that breed? Warlord pedophile narcissists. Have you ever looked at a muslim country? Have you ever noticed the fact that they just sell automatic weapons at the bazzars or that the women are kept in a burlap sack?
Moderate islam is just taqquia until they gain a majority. Look at England. The moderate muslim mayor of London basically said "yeah, muslims are gonna be killin, best not agitate them". Do i even need to bring up rotherham or the myrad other incidents where muslims methodically carried out rapes against literally thousands of young girls?
Islam is a garbage doctrine. The christians dont have a chapter of the new testament that focuses on how to wage war. The muslims do though. Huh really makes ya think. -
2017-06-08 at 5:25 AM UTCGonna do anti-Muslim may as well do anti-organized religion. Whether or not some holy books have more or less references to violence is moot in the overall picture. Not dissimilar to supporting Ted Bundy and running an anti-Vlad the Impaler campaign because he was far worse.
