homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools
Thread closed  Thread closed


Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home

This thread has been moved to Limbo.    
 - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   »   » Oblivion   » Purgatory: Is There Anything Which We Can Or Should Do About Islamism? (Page 2)

 
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Is There Anything Which We Can Or Should Do About Islamism?
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
the Bible mandates death for witches, astrologers, homosexuals, and children who disobey their parents. Your point? OliviaG

More specifically, the Jewish law does. I doubt that you can cite any such mandate in the N.T.
The best people to interpret the Jewish law are the Jews. They do so with guidance from the Babylonian Talmud, an ancient open book, which in many cases makes radical-sounding strictures practical. If the Jews have not in fact executed witches, astrologers, etc. for a long time, and especially if the Talmud does not actually prescribe that penalty, we have good reason for confidence that the stricture is in abeyance.

However, honor killings in Islamic communities, even in Europe, are hardly unknown, meted out by their own families, especially to young women who appear too enamored of infidel ways.

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
I see your honour killings and raise you the Fundamentalist LDS - trafficking girls as young as twelve across the US/Canada border for "celestial marriage". Furthermore, many Muslim clerics assert that honour killings are not based on the Koran or Islam. All those awful things that are supposedly "Islamist" have a strong cultural component and have been / are practiced by all religions. For some perspective, we should remember that non-Muslims can murder their children as well. Should Andrea Yates' killing of her children be considered a "Christian" filicide?

From where I'm looking, it's all a matter of degree: women are oppressed by pretty much *all* religions and it's pretty hard to disentangle religious misogyny from patriarchy in the broader culture. Furthermore, our modern culture doesn't owe its liberties directly to Christianity anyway. Christianity may have paved the way to the Enlightenment, but we owe our rights and freedoms to dissenters, deists, agnostics and atheists as well. OliviaG

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
balaam

Making an ass of myself
# 4543

 - Posted      Profile for balaam   Author's homepage   Email balaam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
@ Balaam - I assume you think then that all would-be Islamist terrorists are under lock and key, yes? Fine, if you're right, nothing to worry about then.

It's hard to take this reply seriously, but I'll try.

It isn't about Islam it's about terrorism period.

In my first post on this forum I said
quote:
Until we can sort out those in our own society that would resort to violent means
Notice the word Until.

No we have not got all the terrorists in this country, Islamist or otherwise in gaol or under house arrest. But some are, which goes to show that Special Branch and MI5 are doing their job.

More people died in the UK as a result of the Norhern Irish troubles than died in the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon. Unless the provos and the UDF were Islamists I can't see your point. In fact the reason we have such strong anti-terror laws in the UK has more to do with the Irish Troubles than it does Islamic terrorists.

52 people died in the 7/7 attacks on London. 77 people were killed by Anders breivik last year in Norway. Was Breivik an Islamist? Nope he's anti-Islam.

But the alarmists are baying against Islam, equating terror with radial Islam. But it does not add up. In the USA only 6% of terror attacks were by Islamic exremists. In Europe it is even less.

So lets keep it in perspective, Islam is not as big a problem as people make it out to be.

--------------------
Last ever sig ...

blog

Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250

 - Posted      Profile for irish_lord99     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
So what should our attitude be toward “bad” Islam [snip]?

Same as it ought to be towards 'bad' Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and all the other ism's?

The question really is, why the focus on Islam?

--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
The question really is, why the focus on Islam?

The opening of a newspaper article I read this morning said: "When a Muslim man beats his wife, why does the broader community focus on his religion rather than on the crime?"

And it also had a quote that "As soon as we use a preface like Muslim or Afghan, suddenly the issue becomes about culture, not domestic violence."

You'd never, ever have a report that highlighted the fact that a white Anglo-Celtic man of vaguely Christian background beat his wife. You'd just have a 'man' beating his wife.

[ 17. April 2012, 02:51: Message edited by: orfeo ]

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
So what should our attitude be toward “bad” Islam [snip]?

Same as it ought to be towards 'bad' Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, Hinduism, and all the other ism's?

...

Our 'War on Terror' has, in the Muslim World, become 'War on Islam'.

Much public opinion in the Western World seems to be similar to what helped, in earlier times, to launch the Crusades.

I think we need a modern day St Francis of Assisi to metaphorically 'visit the Sultan'.

Who knows? There could be an 'Outbreak of Peace'.

Wouldn't that be luverly?

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025

 - Posted      Profile for gorpo   Email gorpo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Crœsos:
Fred Clark of Slacktivist made the argument (his site is currently down or I'd provide a link) that one of the reasons we see religious extremism prosper in certain regions is a consequence of lack of legal protections for religious minorities. When the state can establish an "official" religion it means that, unless the state picks your religion, your 'right' to worship only exists at the suffrance of the state.

China has no official religion. Nor does Syria or North Korea.

On the other hand England, Scotland, Denmark, Norway and Costa Rica do.

So whatever makes a government intolerant of religion it doesn't seem to be having one of their won.

England, Denmark and Norway have official churches for the same purpouse they have royal families. Just for the sake of keeping an old tradition.

I thought the church of Scotland was not stablished anymore, correct me if I´m wrong.

Anyway, the amount of freedom in these countries are in no way in the same league as in ANY country where muslims constitute at least 50%+ of the population. Even countries who have secular governments, like Turkey or Indonesia. When people talk about religious "freedom" in Indonesia, for example, it´s about being able to choose among a list of 5 or 6 religions, and if you are muslim, stick to it until you di. So far from what we consider "relgious freedom" in the west...

Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025

 - Posted      Profile for gorpo   Email gorpo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
[qb] The question really is, why the focus on Islam?

The opening of a newspaper article I read this morning said: "When a Muslim man beats his wife, why does the broader community focus on his religion rather than on the crime?"
It must have something to do with the fact his religion teaches it´s ok to beat his wife. Not a particular sect of his religion, or a particular fundamentalist interpretation of it... but the mere reading of their sacred text. So it´s ok to express an opinion that it´s not only about "bad islam", but islam itself being bad. Surely, that´s not a very politically correct thing to say, but if we live in democratic and free societies, people should be able to express that.

If it is okay for people like Richard Dawkins to claim that christianity itself is bad (and not only the "bad christianity"), why is it an ultimate insult for someone to pursuit an opinion that Islam itself is bad?

I don´t share the same opinion as Richard Dawkins about christianity, but I´ll always defend the right of people like him to express their opinions. Therefore, muslims, if they seek to live in western countries, should accept criticism towards their religion, just like any other religions are subject to criticism.

Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
balaam

Making an ass of myself
# 4543

 - Posted      Profile for balaam   Author's homepage   Email balaam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
I thought the church of Scotland was not stablished anymore, correct me if I´m wrong.

I'm afraid it is. The odd thing being that HM Queen Elizabeth (II in England) stops being an Anglican and becomes a Presbyterian as soon as she steps North of the border, becoming Anglican again on her return. Odd world, isn't it?

--------------------
Last ever sig ...

blog

Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
the Bible mandates death for witches, astrologers, homosexuals, and children who disobey their parents. Your point? OliviaG

More specifically, the Jewish law does. I doubt that you can cite any such mandate in the N.T.
Hey Olivia. You forgot adultery by stoning. [Big Grin]

quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
the Bible mandates death for witches, astrologers, homosexuals, and children who disobey their parents. Your point? OliviaG

More specifically, the Jewish law does. I doubt that you can cite any such mandate in the N.T.
How bout that pesky Matthew line that says not one jot of the law will pass away.

Or all those other NT passages that say certain characters were righteous before the law.

Say Elisabeth and Zechariah?


5 In the days of King Herod of Judea, there was a priest named Zechariah, who belonged to the priestly order of Abijah. His wife was a descendant of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth. 6Both of them were righteous before God, living blamelessly according to all the commandments and regulations of the Lord.

quote:
Originally posted by Alogon:

The best people to interpret the Jewish law are the Jews. They do so with guidance from the Babylonian Talmud, an ancient open book, which in many cases makes radical-sounding strictures practical. If the Jews have not in fact executed witches, astrologers, etc. for a long time, and especially if the Talmud does not actually prescribe that penalty, we have good reason for confidence that the stricture is in abeyance.

However, honor killings in Islamic communities, even in Europe, are hardly unknown, meted out by their own families, especially to young women who appear too enamored of infidel ways.

But those Muslims that do not prescribe these penalties are not in abeyance like their Jewish counterparts?
Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
No. I'm saying is there a qualitative difference between abusing someone's human rights for a purpose (for example, giving a minority group fewer rights than majority group because it enriches the majority economically) and abusing someone's human rights for ideological reasons (giving a minority group fewer rights than majority because the majority believe that the minority are inherently less entitled to those rights for whatever reason)?

Or should we be concerned *only* about the end result - that someone's human rights are taken away?

I think it's a relevant question because if human rights abuses stem from or are exacerbated by a root cause, tackling that cause may lessen the abuse. But if the abuse stems from an ideology, then that seems less likely to happen.

A good question, even if I can't quite get my head around it.

Taken to a logical extreme anything that infringes on another might be taken as abuse?

I suppose it's best to take it on a case by case scenario. But the labeling of abuse will certainly depend on ideology.

We might think wearing a hijab is an abuse - but many women in the Muslim world would not.

I guess I draw the line in terms of danger to physical health and wellbeing.

If someone's life is at risk - my warning bells would be going off.

--------------------
a theological scrapbook

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
...It must have something to do with the fact his religion teaches it´s ok to beat his wife. Not a particular sect of his religion, or a particular fundamentalist interpretation of it... but the mere reading of their sacred text...

Would you have a Quranic reference for this gorpo?

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
balaam

Making an ass of myself
# 4543

 - Posted      Profile for balaam   Author's homepage   Email balaam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
It must have something to do with the fact his religion teaches it´s ok to beat his wife. Not a particular sect of his religion, or a particular fundamentalist interpretation of it... but the mere reading of their sacred text. So it´s ok to express an opinion that it´s not only about "bad islam", but islam itself being bad. Surely, that´s not a very politically correct thing to say, but if we live in democratic and free societies, people should be able to express that.

They should be able to express that. And we should be able to express how wrong it is. Because the same could be said of Christianity and Judaism. A wife is a man's property do do as he likes with. It is (to use your phrase) a mere reading of their sacred text.

I'm going off on a tangent now - how to write a conspiracy theory.

Take some true facts that you know are true which support your theory, talk about them exclusively whilst not mentioning other equally true facts you know about that do not support your theory. So depending on your point of view it is possible to make an argument that Islam or Christianity are warlike religions simply by quoting verses from the Bible or Quran. But it's equally possible to show they are peace loving by quoting different texts from the same book. It depends on how you use the text.

quote:
If it is okay for people like Richard Dawkins to claim that christianity itself is bad (and not only the "bad christianity"), why is it an ultimate insult for someone to pursuit an opinion that Islam itself is bad?
It isn't OK. There's little difference in what Dawkins is doing in terms of making a conspiracy theory than other people such as Dan Brown. The difference being that Brown admits his is fiction. Woolly reasoning like this is not becoming for someone of Dawkin's intellect.

Sure he can express it, but he should expect it to be opposed. Anyway, this thread isn't about Dawkins.

--------------------
Last ever sig ...

blog

Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
...

I'm going off on a tangent now - how to write a conspiracy theory.

Take some true facts that you know are true which support your theory, talk about them exclusively whilst not mentioning other equally true facts you know about that do not support your theory. So depending on your point of view it is possible to make an argument that Islam or Christianity are warlike religions simply by quoting verses from the Bible or Quran. But it's equally possible to show they are peace loving by quoting different texts from the same book. It depends on how you use the text.

...

Indeed, Balaam.

The problem with this thread is that there are indeed such half-baked conspiracy theories on the subject under discussion floating around in the media and everywhere else.

Whilst everyone is entitled to his/her opinion there is nothing to guarantee that all opinions are equally valid.

BTW gorpo I'd still appreciate the Quranic reference.
[Devil]

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
The better question would be:

What should we do about human rights abuses?

It would not necessarily be a better question, just a different one, and one which you are free to post to start a new thread if you so wish.

If someone started a discussion on human rights in Burma, we would tend to roll our eyes if anyone were to object to it on the grounds that it was somehow invalid because it didn’t mention human rights in Zimbabwe.

This thread is on the specific question of Islamism, of which Islamist violations of human rights are a major component.

It is a relevant issue on which to focus for at least three reasons.

First, because of the high profile of Islam (the world’s second biggest religion) in current events – Iraq, Afghanistan, and the ongoing unrest in North Africa and the Middle East (especially Syria) to name just a few.

Second, because of the immensely complex challenges of deciding whether certain actions of which we disapprove which carried out by Muslims are integral to Islam or textually unjustifiable Islamist accretions; of differentiating amongst the different expressions of Islam, which vary enormously between, say, Saudi Arabia and the Comoros on the one hand, and Indonesia and Turkey on the other; and of countering generalizations about Muslims, a majority of whom, especially in the West, are moderates who are not interested in Islamist extremism, whether their religion can be shown to require it or not.

Thirdly, like it or not, globally a disproportionate number of human rights abuses are carried out under Islam, relative to the number perpetrated in the name of any other single religion/worldview/ ideology, with the possible exception of communism.


quote:
But you're not really interested in the truth are you?
Sorry Evensong, but you've got me a trifle bemused here.

In context, it appears that you imagine that I am either unaware of the truth that there are other sources of human rights abuse, or that if I am, I am unwilling to recognise them.

In fact, I referred to them in the OP.

Kindly elaborate.

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post 
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

[ 17. April 2012, 05:30: Message edited by: Kaplan Corday ]

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250

 - Posted      Profile for irish_lord99     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

I would have hoped we'd have learned better by now. [Disappointed]

I think evensong is right, if we can figure out a way to deal properly with human rights violations in general, across the board, from all religions, and regardless of who's carrying them out (or how much oil the 'poor and oppressed' are sitting on); then you've got an answer to your question.

Not too long ago, you could have substitued the word 'communist' for every instance of "Muslim" or "Islamist" in this thread and had pretty much the same disscussion.

--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
[qb] The question really is, why the focus on Islam?

The opening of a newspaper article I read this morning said: "When a Muslim man beats his wife, why does the broader community focus on his religion rather than on the crime?"
It must have something to do with the fact his religion teaches it´s ok to beat his wife. Not a particular sect of his religion, or a particular fundamentalist interpretation of it... but the mere reading of their sacred text.
I've read variations of this chestnut so many times on the Ship, I shouldn't be surprised any more. But over and over again this picture is painted of all the bad things THEIR book says, while tacitly ignoring all the things in OUR book that could be read in a very, very bad light.

Guess what, gorpo. The Bible is full of horrendous things if you read it with no eye for context. Take the log out of your own eye before carrying on too much about the speck in the eye of that Muslim over there. Any Christian man who wants to justify beating his wife could find a battery (pun intended) of Bible verses to back up his authority to do so. Doesn't mean he'd be right, but he could do it.

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
... Thirdly, like it or not, globally a disproportionate number of human rights abuses are carried out under Islam, relative to the number perpetrated in the name of any other single religion/worldview/ ideology, with the possible exception of communism.
...

Got any numbers, calculations or references for the "disproportionate number"?

How do you decide whether a country's religion or economic system or whatever is the causal factor for those abuses? What makes you so sure that e.g. Saudi Arabia is oppressive only because it is Wahhabi and not because it is also a monarchy / plutocracy? Or because except for oil money, it is woefully economically undeveloped? Or for cultural reasons that may even predate Islam? OliviaG

--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"

Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
malik3000
Shipmate
# 11437

 - Posted      Profile for malik3000   Author's homepage   Email malik3000   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Is the Western European Enlightenment (capital E) the standard to which all ought to aspire?

--------------------
God = love.
Otherwise, things are not just black or white.

Posts: 3149 | From: North America | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

What was the story about the three wishes?

I think you were clean bowled a long time ago.

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Niteowl

Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841

 - Posted      Profile for Niteowl   Email Niteowl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

I would have hoped we'd have learned better by now. [Disappointed]

I think evensong is right, if we can figure out a way to deal properly with human rights violations in general, across the board, from all religions, and regardless of who's carrying them out (or how much oil the 'poor and oppressed' are sitting on); then you've got an answer to your question.

Not too long ago, you could have substitued the word 'communist' for every instance of "Muslim" or "Islamist" in this thread and had pretty much the same disscussion.

We always have to have a "them" to hate. Now it's Muslims. It is a small percentage of Muslims who have hijacked their religion. With well over a billion Muslims in the world we'd be chest high in blood if the religion were as evil/violent as many claim them to be. To be honest, many OT Jewish laws and penalties are the same as the Koran. Many rabid Islamophobes love to cherry pick the Koran as much as some rabid atheists love to do with the Bible. I have to agree with Evensong and others - concentrate on human rights violations no matter who does it and ignore the tendency to hate "them" whoever the group de jour is.

--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare

Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Alwyn
Shipmate
# 4380

 - Posted      Profile for Alwyn     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
... We get upset about reports of Christians or other non-Muslims being killed ...

Yes; I also get upset about reports of Muslims being killed. Don't you?

--------------------
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

Posts: 849 | From: UK | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
[Overused]

I translate 'human rights violations' into 'offer them a decent life safe from murder; rape; torture and the rule of the kleptocracy'.

This is not a 'religious' debate: it's about real suffering people whose situation has usually been made worse by our intervention.

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
Niteowl

Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841

 - Posted      Profile for Niteowl   Email Niteowl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

Let's see, we should prop up and support those who torture, rape and slaughter because they are "bulwarks" against people we are claiming torture, rape and slaughter. Is that about right? Unbelievable.

--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare

Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Hawk

Semi-social raptor
# 14289

 - Posted      Profile for Hawk   Author's homepage   Email Hawk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
ISTM that you are arguing for intervening in other countries before sorting out our own. Christians have been persecuted in China for decades, possibly centuries; Are you going to let them suffer because China isn't Islamic?

I love it when peple make that argument, that just because we're interested in one problem, that necessarily means we can't possibly be interested in any other problem! I'm sure there's a technical name for that logical fallacy. I don't know it so I'll just go [Roll Eyes]

--------------------
“We are to find God in what we know, not in what we don't know." Dietrich Bonhoeffer

See my blog for 'interesting' thoughts

Posts: 1739 | From: Oxford, UK | Registered: Nov 2008  |  IP: Logged
Matt Black

Shipmate
# 2210

 - Posted      Profile for Matt Black   Email Matt Black   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
@ Balaam - I assume you think then that all would-be Islamist terrorists are under lock and key, yes? Fine, if you're right, nothing to worry about then.

It's hard to take this reply seriously, but I'll try.

It isn't about Islam it's about terrorism period.

In my first post on this forum I said
quote:
Until we can sort out those in our own society that would resort to violent means
Notice the word Until.

No we have not got all the terrorists in this country, Islamist or otherwise in gaol or under house arrest. But some are, which goes to show that Special Branch and MI5 are doing their job.

More people died in the UK as a result of the Norhern Irish troubles than died in the 9/11 attacks on New York and the Pentagon. Unless the provos and the UDF were Islamists I can't see your point. In fact the reason we have such strong anti-terror laws in the UK has more to do with the Irish Troubles than it does Islamic terrorists.

52 people died in the 7/7 attacks on London. 77 people were killed by Anders breivik last year in Norway. Was Breivik an Islamist? Nope he's anti-Islam.

But the alarmists are baying against Islam, equating terror with radial Islam. But it does not add up. In the USA only 6% of terror attacks were by Islamic exremists. In Europe it is even less.

So lets keep it in perspective, Islam is not as big a problem as people make it out to be.

First off, the Northern Irish terrorism problem was largely then, this is now. Unless of course you want to cite stats about the number of deaths caused by Fenians and anarchists in the late 1800s...

Secondly, your statement is akin to saying 'unless and until we eliminate murder, let's not bother about rape'; to my mind, violence abroad should be no less of a concern to us as Christians than violence 'at home'.

--------------------
"Protestant and Reformed, according to the Tradition of the ancient Catholic Church" - + John Cosin (1594-1672)

Posts: 14304 | From: Hampshire, UK | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713

 - Posted      Profile for Sioni Sais   Email Sioni Sais   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Hawk:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
ISTM that you are arguing for intervening in other countries before sorting out our own. Christians have been persecuted in China for decades, possibly centuries; Are you going to let them suffer because China isn't Islamic?

I love it when peple make that argument, that just because we're interested in one problem, that necessarily means we can't possibly be interested in any other problem! I'm sure there's a technical name for that logical fallacy. I don't know it so I'll just go [Roll Eyes]
You don't know the name because there isn't one. The Islamophobes are ideologically choosy about those they wish to take violent action against. It defines Islamophobia.

--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"

(Paul Sinha, BBC)

Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
dv
Shipmate
# 15714

 - Posted      Profile for dv     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Is There Anything Which We Can Or Should Do About Islamism?

Pray.

Evangelize.

Posts: 70 | From: Lancs UK | Registered: Jun 2010  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

Let's see, we should prop up and support those who torture, rape and slaughter because they are "bulwarks" against people we are claiming torture, rape and slaughter. Is that about right? Unbelievable.
You're right, it is strange, but I've put it up as a hypothetical which is actually not so hypothetical, because at the time of the Iraq War some of its opponents claimed that it was counter-productive to get rid of a secularist such as Saddam Hussein.

(I opposed the war too, but for different reasons).

Actually, the classic case of realpolitik in modern history was the western democracies' support of Stalin against Hitler - now there's a case of "torture rape and slaughter" against "torture rape and salughter".

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
orfeo

Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878

 - Posted      Profile for orfeo   Author's homepage   Email orfeo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
[You're right, it is strange, but I've put it up as a hypothetical which is actually not so hypothetical, because at the time of the Iraq War some of its opponents claimed that it was counter-productive to get rid of a secularist such as Saddam Hussein.

Frankly, it seems to me that the history of the West's engagement with a chunk of central Asia is several decades of lurching from one wrong horse to the next. I mean, Saddam Hussein is to a large extent a mess of our own making because there was such a massive anti-Iran focus after the Iranian revolution. And half the mess in Afghanistan is a result of people who were backed with enthusiasm when they were fighting against the Soviet Union.

Which one of your options was "back the hell out of it for a change"?...

--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.

Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged
Niteowl

Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841

 - Posted      Profile for Niteowl   Email Niteowl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
[You're right, it is strange, but I've put it up as a hypothetical which is actually not so hypothetical, because at the time of the Iraq War some of its opponents claimed that it was counter-productive to get rid of a secularist such as Saddam Hussein.

Frankly, it seems to me that the history of the West's engagement with a chunk of central Asia is several decades of lurching from one wrong horse to the next. I mean, Saddam Hussein is to a large extent a mess of our own making because there was such a massive anti-Iran focus after the Iranian revolution. And half the mess in Afghanistan is a result of people who were backed with enthusiasm when they were fighting against the Soviet Union.

Which one of your options was "back the hell out of it for a change"?...

Not to mention the current mess in Iran is a result of our overthrowing a democratically elected leader there and installing a brutal dictator. Our policies have bitten us in the ass time and again and we never learn. I predict the fiascos of how we conducted the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will bite us just as hard somewhere down the road.

--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare

Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967

 - Posted      Profile for SvitlanaV2   Email SvitlanaV2   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
quote:
Originally posted by irish_lord99:
The question really is, why the focus on Islam?

The opening of a newspaper article I read this morning said: "When a Muslim man beats his wife, why does the broader community focus on his religion rather than on the crime?"

And it also had a quote that "As soon as we use a preface like Muslim or Afghan, suddenly the issue becomes about culture, not domestic violence."

You'd never, ever have a report that highlighted the fact that a white Anglo-Celtic man of vaguely Christian background beat his wife. You'd just have a 'man' beating his wife.

If the Anglo-Celtic man in question was a churchgoer or church leader, you can be sure that the UK media would mention it. If the person concerned was 'merely' a cultural Christian, then nothing would be said, because there would be nothing to say; unless there's a reason to believe otherwise, every Anglo-Celtic British person is assumed to be culturally Christian, regardless of actual belief or behaviour.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012  |  IP: Logged
balaam

Making an ass of myself
# 4543

 - Posted      Profile for balaam   Author's homepage   Email balaam   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
quote:
Originally posted by Balaam:
In Europe it is even less.

First off, the Northern Irish terrorism problem was largely then, this is now. Unless of course you want to cite stats about the number of deaths caused by Fenians and anarchists in the late 1800s...
Did you check out the links I provided? I've included one in the quote above, the one that shows that according to Europol only 0.4% of terrorist attacks are by Islamic militants. Scroll down in that page to the tables. 2006 (the last year for which UK attacks were available by type) there were 0 terrorist attacks in the UK by Islamic extremists and 4 by separatist organisation. The Northern Irish terror problem is a lot less than it was. But it hasn't gone away and is still a greater security threat than Islamic terrorism.


quote:
Secondly, your statement is akin to saying 'unless and until we eliminate murder, let's not bother about rape'; to my mind, violence abroad should be no less of a concern to us as Christians than violence 'at home'.
No.

It isn't about Islam it is about terrorism. By putting terrorists into categories of islamic and other you are the one saying 'unless and until we eliminate murder, let's not bother about rape.'

And as for violence abroad, look at the two links again - one is from the USA. is the USA not abroad? And the other link from Europol. Is Europol a British institution? Do not acuse me of not looking at the international picture if you can't be bothered to even scan the liks I provided.

Keeping it current and international, if that's what you want, the latest Europol conference on organised crime and terrorism, from June last year, is published online. Large pdf file. The section on terrorism runs from page 16 to page 20.

From the introduction:
quote:
Europol has reported concern about the rise in anti-immigration and anti-Muslim rhetoric
From the Terrorism section:
quote:
The changing dynamics in our societies, together
with technological advances, may encourage isolated,
disaffected individuals to turn into violent
extremists and even, in extreme cases, to become
‘lone wolf’ terrorists.

That was a conference that ended on July 1 2011. On 22 July 2011 Anders Behrin murdered 77 people.

Loooks like Europol are right to me.

--------------------
Last ever sig ...

blog

Posts: 9049 | From: Hen Ogledd | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Erroneous Monk
Shipmate
# 10858

 - Posted      Profile for Erroneous Monk   Email Erroneous Monk   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
No. I'm saying is there a qualitative difference between abusing someone's human rights for a purpose (for example, giving a minority group fewer rights than majority group because it enriches the majority economically) and abusing someone's human rights for ideological reasons (giving a minority group fewer rights than majority because the majority believe that the minority are inherently less entitled to those rights for whatever reason)?

Or should we be concerned *only* about the end result - that someone's human rights are taken away?

I think it's a relevant question because if human rights abuses stem from or are exacerbated by a root cause, tackling that cause may lessen the abuse. But if the abuse stems from an ideology, then that seems less likely to happen.

A good question, even if I can't quite get my head around it.

Taken to a logical extreme anything that infringes on another might be taken as abuse?

I suppose it's best to take it on a case by case scenario. But the labeling of abuse will certainly depend on ideology.

We might think wearing a hijab is an abuse - but many women in the Muslim world would not.

I guess I draw the line in terms of danger to physical health and wellbeing.

If someone's life is at risk - my warning bells would be going off.

I'm not explaining myself very well. However, there have been two posts upthread which address this, and might clarify. One is a direct response from OliviaG which says:

quote:
If making money is more important than respecting human rights, that's already an ideology in itself
and one from Alogon which says:

quote:
Because Islamism, if not Islam, is an ideology to which millions subscribe all over the world. When an abuser of human rights appeals to it, we have a problem that does not apply to those who abuse them for self-aggrandizement.
So one view, Alogon's, is that it is more of a problem to abuse human rights in a way which might "catch on" e.g. because the abuses are seen as sanctioned by a faith that millions subscribe to.

The other view, OliviaG's, is that self-aggrandizement is in itself a faith that millions subscribe to and therefore human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of Islamism are no more of a problem than human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of advancing the abuser's personal agenda.

And then I'm still undecided...

--------------------
And I shot a man in Tesco, just to watch him die.

Posts: 2950 | From: I cannot tell you, for you are not a friar | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
irish_lord99
Shipmate
# 16250

 - Posted      Profile for irish_lord99     Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
As someone who has lived in a Muslim country for the past five years, I can attest to the fact that (in Turkey, at least) there is a much higher rate of domestic abuse than in the US. A woman I know that runs youth camps says that over 95% of the girls that she has worked with have seen abuse in some form or another.

I'm not sure if that's a 'Muslim' problem or not, but I've heard enough news out of neighboring countries like Iran, Iraq, etc. to know that the problem is widespread throughout the Muslim world.

So how should we deal with this?

I'm currently back stateside for 6 months, in New England to be exact. Last night an elderly woman was stabbed to death in a home invasion incident for no apparent reason. People are getting killed over packs of cigarettes and pairs of sneakers. Murder seams to be epidemic here (especially compared to Turkey). There seem to be so many people who have no problem taking another human life.

I'm not sure if that's a 'Christian' problem or not, but it seems to be a problem in a lot of Christian countries.

What do you expect the Muslims ought to do to help us sort out our problems?

And look at Israel! I don't know if the horrible human rights violations of their apartheid regime are a 'Jewish' problem or not, but it's certainly a problem!

What do you think the neighboring Muslim counties ought to do to help them sort their shit out? Which one of the above 10 options ought they Muslims enact to get Israel to stop abusing Palestinians (not to mention restricting the travel rights of some Europeans [Roll Eyes] )?

When we've figured that out, let us go and do likewise. [Votive]

--------------------
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics." - Mark Twain

Posts: 1169 | From: Maine, US | Registered: Feb 2011  |  IP: Logged
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
The other view, OliviaG's, is that self-aggrandizement is in itself a faith that millions subscribe to and therefore human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of Islamism are no more of a problem than human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of advancing the abuser's personal agenda.

And then I'm still undecided...

I'm trying to see where she made that claim. If I had noticed earlier, then I would have repled.

There are a few things that those abusing for self-aggrandizement, being mere amateurs, will not do, e.g. suicide bombing. That's the difference. OliviaG might point out, if she thinks it would help her, that they, too, are self-aggrandizing in the sense of taking someone up on an offer of an instantaneous heavenly reward surrounded by nubile virgins. But to sell or buy such a promise requires a religion, doesn't it?

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Evensong:
The better question would be:

What should we do about human rights abuses?

It would not necessarily be a better question, just a different one

That's my point. It is not a different question.

Are "Islamist" abuses really that different from those in Burma or China or North Korea?

Slightly different ideologies perhaps - same result. Humans suffer.

But seeing as you're all gung ho about stopping abuses in the Middle east all I can say is go for it. Excellent.

We did fuck all while a million odd Rwandans died in flat out genocide.

Time to say something right?

Oh no wait....the Rwandans are Christians..... that doesn't work.

[Roll Eyes]

quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

That's what caused all the trouble in the first place. Why do you think Islam has become more militant recently?

And Saudi Arabia is the most extreme in its particular sect of Islam yet is the closest western ally in the middle east.

So how does that work?

The chaplain to the Archbishop of the Middle East recently came to visit us and said no one there wants "advice" from the US. The US have a bad reputation.

I can only assume it's because of their terrible foreign policy that seeks only to protect its economic interests.

Edited to include a [Overused] to irish_lord

[ 17. April 2012, 15:07: Message edited by: Evensong ]

--------------------
a theological scrapbook

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881

 - Posted      Profile for Soror Magna   Email Soror Magna   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Erroneous Monk:
... The other view, OliviaG's, is that self-aggrandizement is in itself a faith that millions subscribe to and therefore human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of Islamism are no more of a problem than human rights abuses perpetrated in the name of advancing the abuser's personal agenda. ...

Not even close. I'm saying it is pointless to exclusively blame "Islamism" for human rights abuses when there are demonstrably many other factors - patriarchal, cultural, economic, whatever - that also provide rationalizations for human rights abuses. I think it is utterly counterproductive to tell people their religion sucks (even if you think it does). I think it is ridiculous to claim that Christianity is so much better when Western societies are freer because they have gradually become less Christian. Or to keep playing the "well, we don't do that any more" card (see above). Or to proof-text from scriptures of other faiths while "interpreting" the Bible. Or to continue to overlook the extermination of Indigenous peoples around the world by Christian colonization. And in my own neck of the woods, it's overwhelmingly Christians who are campaigning to roll our freedoms back and return us to medieval ignorance. OliviaG
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
OliviaG, where's the Koran New Covenant abrogation ?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368

 - Posted      Profile for Martin60   Email Martin60   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Oooh. Or rather OOh-ooh-OOh-ooh-ooh NightOwl2 wit-to-who. If we'd let Stalin take out Mossadeq and the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, would that have been better ?

--------------------
Love wins

Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549

 - Posted      Profile for Dafyd   Email Dafyd   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
Taking moral responsibility for stopping other people's moral failings is a position fraught with dangers of self-righteousness and demonisation.
For us, framing 'Islamism' as a problem that we may be called upon to do something about looks something like an attempt to feel self-righteous about oneself. It's pretty clear that Islamism isn't one of our moral failings (nobody on this thread is a Muslim): it's something that those other people over there do.

Also, claiming that all 'bad Islam' is a manifestation of a single problem is a bit like saying that child abuse in the Roman Catholic church in Ireland, Christians killing Muslims in Nigeria and pentecostals killing children as a byproduct of exorcisms in the UK are all part of a single 'bad Christianity'.

Christians in the West may sometimes feel that they are a minority against whom the majority is prejudiced. Muslims in the West genuinely are a minority against whom the majority is prejudiced. Framing Islam as a problem, even if we qualify that procedure by saying it's only 'bad' Islam that's a problem, only contributes to that persecution. And it's actually counterproductive: it feeds an 'us and them' attitude on both sides that results in hostility on both sides.

Also, framing Islamism as a problem that not enough was being done about was exactly what motivated Anders Breivik to kill seventy or so children.

--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams

Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
Niteowl

Hopeless Insomniac
# 15841

 - Posted      Profile for Niteowl   Email Niteowl   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Martin PC not & Ship's Biohazard:
Oooh. Or rather OOh-ooh-OOh-ooh-ooh NightOwl2 wit-to-who. If we'd let Stalin take out Mossadeq and the Persian Gulf and Indian Ocean, would that have been better ?

Preventing someone else from mass slaughter and genocide is far different from removing a valid government from power and installing someone who tortures, rapes and slaughters their own people. Also note, we didn't try to remove Stalin from power so there must have been something in it for us.

--------------------
"love all, trust few, do wrong to no one"
Wm. Shakespeare

Posts: 2437 | From: U.S. | Registered: Aug 2010  |  IP: Logged
Sir Pellinore
Quester Emeritus
# 12163

 - Posted      Profile for Sir Pellinore   Email Sir Pellinore   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
quote:
Originally posted by Kaplan Corday:
A tenth choice which I could have included:

10. Prop up leaders who are or were repellent in themselves, but function(ed) as a bulwark against the greater evil of Islamist extremism, eg Hussein, Gaddafi, Mubarak, Assad.

Let's see, we should prop up and support those who torture, rape and slaughter because they are "bulwarks" against people we are claiming torture, rape and slaughter. Is that about right? Unbelievable.
You're right, it is strange, but I've put it up as a hypothetical which is actually not so hypothetical, because at the time of the Iraq War some of its opponents claimed that it was counter-productive to get rid of a secularist such as Saddam Hussein.

(I opposed the war too, but for different reasons).

Actually, the classic case of realpolitik in modern history was the western democracies' support of Stalin against Hitler - now there's a case of "torture rape and slaughter" against "torture rape and salughter".

Sadly, Kaplan Corday, I think it's the way you framed your first post which led to grave misunderstanding and internal agony for some of us.

As someone who does know something about both Islam and the Middle East, I regret the fact that Radical Whig, a former British naval intelligence officer and now academic in that area, with on-the-ground experience in Iraq, appears to have left the boards because he added real depth of knowledge to these discussions.

You see, in matters like this, I think we need to 'see ourselves as others see us'. In that regard, I think we all need much, much more real information about what is happening at all the little Ground Zeros we are creating.

Sadly, our response to 9/11 has been grossly, insanely disproportionate and inappropriate.

As I said previously, I think George W Bush's 'War on Terror' as it grew out of all proportion, became what the entire Muslim World - not just the crazed loonies such as bin Laden, labelled 'Islamicists' for our convenience - saw and see as 'The War on Islam'. That is something we, in the West, now have to live with.

Amongst consequences are the deaths and permanent disablement of so many of our own service personnel; devastation of Iraq and Afghanistan with the loss and disablement of so many locals; the vast reduction of the ancient Christian communities of Iraq etc.

Women's rights in places such as Afghanistan are as bad as they were under the Taliban. Read Malali Joya's book if you don't believe me. This actually makes the 'beating women in Islam' issue pale in comparison, which is bad. Rape, torture, abduction etc. are all horror stuff.

The catalogue of horrors continues. When will it ever cease?
[Eek!]

--------------------
Well...

Posts: 5108 | From: The Deep North, Oz | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025

 - Posted      Profile for gorpo   Email gorpo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Pellinore (ret'd):
quote:
Originally posted by gorpo:
...It must have something to do with the fact his religion teaches it´s ok to beat his wife. Not a particular sect of his religion, or a particular fundamentalist interpretation of it... but the mere reading of their sacred text...

Would you have a Quranic reference for this gorpo?
I have a portuguese version of the Kuran, so i just had to google for the english verse:
Quran 4:34 - Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more (strength) than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard. As to those women on whose part ye fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (Next), refuse to share their beds, (And last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them Means (of annoyance): For Allah is Most High, great (above you all). Quran 4:34

Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025

 - Posted      Profile for gorpo   Email gorpo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by malik3000:
Is the Western European Enlightenment (capital E) the standard to which all ought to aspire?

Most people I know wouldn´t be trading here for Sudan or Saudi Arabia. You don´t see guethos of european immigrants in muslim countries.
Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post 
I agree with your misgivings about the military interventions, Sir P.

The truth remains, however, that even if 9/11 and the Iraq and Afghanistan invasions had never taken place, we would still be faced with an Islam which for fourteen centuries has contained elements of misogyny, intolerance, despotism and conquest.

The facts that other religions and ideologies have been as bad or worse, and that not all Muslims and not all varieties of Islam are the same, do not mean that we can pretend that Islam does not exist as an identifiable entity to which we cannot help but respond in some way and at some level.

Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
Kaplan Corday
Shipmate
# 16119

 - Posted      Profile for Kaplan Corday         Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Dafyd:

Also, claiming that all 'bad Islam' is a manifestation of a single problem is a bit like saying that child abuse in the Roman Catholic church in Ireland, Christians killing Muslims in Nigeria and pentecostals killing children as a byproduct of exorcisms in the UK are all part of a single 'bad Christianity'.

Actually, it is a very apt analogy.

For centuries now we have been wrestling with the issue of whether, and to what extent, abuses associated with Christianity are inevitable outcomes of Christianity, or aberrations and anomalies.

If anybody pontificated that it was inappropriate to bring up in a discussion of Christianity the Crusades, the Inquisition, Roman or Genevan theocracy, paedophile priests, Rwandan Christians slaughtering each other, the Balkan Orthodox slaughtering Balkan Muslims, or whatever, on the grounds that Christianity is a variegated religion, and that such a discussion would run the risk of hurting Christians' feelings or making non-Christians think badly of them, we would regard them as stark raving obscurantist bonkers.

quote:
Also, framing Islamism as a problem that not enough was being done about was exactly what motivated Anders Breivik to kill seventy or so children.

I have been watching the clock waiting to see how long it would take for someone to exploit this.
Posts: 3355 | Registered: Jan 2011  |  IP: Logged
gorpo
Shipmate
# 17025

 - Posted      Profile for gorpo   Email gorpo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by OliviaG:
I think it is ridiculous to claim that Christianity is so much better when Western societies are freer because they have gradually become less Christian.

Or have they become less Christian because they are freer? The Bible doesn´t endorse any earthly punishments on those who leave faith. It quotes Jesus sayng his kingdom is not from this world... so separation between religion and state are in the Christian DNA. Of course, nations in history have failed to practice it. The same can´t be said about Islam. Jesus says pray for your enemies; do not resist an evil person, when he slaps you turn the other face. Is there an equivalent for these teachings in the Kuran?

I know that cherry picking texts won´t prove anything. I suppose everyone here has read the Bible, and most have read the Kuran also. Jesus and Muhammed had radically different opinions on how to deal with "non-believers".

Posts: 247 | From: Brazil | Registered: Apr 2012  |  IP: Logged
Evensong
Shipmate
# 14696

 - Posted      Profile for Evensong   Author's homepage   Email Evensong   Send new private message       Edit/delete post 
quote:
Originally posted by Niteowl2:
Preventing someone else from mass slaughter and genocide is far different from removing a valid government from power and installing someone who tortures, rapes and slaughters their own people.

<tangent to display ignorance>

Who was installed by the west contra democracy in Iran?

Posts: 9481 | From: Australia | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  4  5  6 
 
Post new thread  
Thread closed  Thread closed
Open thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools