Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What is "Islamaphobia"?

Options
13

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Only to you, I hope. And mistakenly, in any case.

    ...............

    I stated that the death penalty in such cases was rare in the extreme, to which you replied "What you mean is that an official death sentence is rare. But look at what happens when extremists like those in Bangladesh start killing people......".


  • Options
    #63
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Nodin wrote: »
    They are extremely conservative, yes. We do not demonise whole peoples on such grounds, however.
    But we can critise the beliefs in the way we are critical of Nazi beliefs say?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #64
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    silverharp wrote: »
    But we can critise the beliefs in the way we are critical of Nazi beliefs say?

    Of course.


  • Options
    #65
    galljga1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,938 ✭✭✭galljga1


    silverharp wrote: »
    CCppsDmW0AECOHk.jpg

    Is islamophobia the fear of getting your head hacked off?


  • Options
    #66
    old_aussie
    Registered Users Posts: 3,410 ✭✭✭old_aussie


    robindch wrote: »
    Personally, I'd defined "Islamophobe" as "Somebody who understands the islamic religion sufficiently well to be frightened of its aims and its means of achieving them".

    Took the words out of my mouth.

    We've all seen what islam has done to the places where it's the dominant religion and influence in government.

    Just look at the middle east and north africa, never ending tribal violence.

    Then there's this large group of muslims that say they are the good muslims and the carry-on in the middle east is by the bad people who are not true muslims, and these good muslims expect me to believe this, just because there is a lot of them saying it.

    Just because a lot of people say something doesn't make it right.

    Just because a lot of people said the world is flat, didn't make it right.

    Seen what islam does to places it's entrenched in and that scares me and I have a fear of that coming to where I live and that's my iislamaphobis.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Nodin wrote: »
    Of course.

    But then in the public realm of ideas etc a card carrying Muslim is in the same position as a card carrying Nazi. The card carrying member of either organisation will either need to state that they don't believe part of their organisations goals or that they want to reform the organisation from within.
    And if we are talking about countries and governments an Islamic state should be critised in the way that we would be critical of North Korea or any other dictatorships that are knocking about for any behaviour that falls below certain lines that we deem to be unacceptable.

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #68
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    I stated that the death penalty in such cases was rare in the extreme, to which you replied "What you mean is that an official death sentence is rare. But look at what happens when extremists like those in Bangladesh start killing people......".

    Yes. And?

    Are you disputing the factual accuracy of what I said?
    Or just putting your own spin of what I said?


  • Options
    #69
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    old_aussie wrote: »
    Took the words out of my mouth.

    We've all seen what islam has done to the places where it's the dominant religion and influence in government.

    Just look at the middle east and north africa, never ending tribal violence.

    ...............

    Yeah, how unique.


  • Options
    #70
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    silverharp wrote: »
    But then in the public realm of ideas etc a card carrying Muslim is in the same position as a card carrying Nazi. The card carrying member of either organisation will either need to state that they don't believe part of their organisations goals or that they want to reform the organisation from within.
    And if we are talking about countries and governments an Islamic state should be critised in the way that we would be critical of North Korea or any other dictatorships that are knocking about for any behaviour that falls below certain lines that we deem to be unacceptable.

    Nope. An extremist might be classed as such, but to point at one out of over a billion people and shout the Jihadi equivalent of "Achtung" in the expectation that they'll jump to attention is stereotyping of the worst kind.


  • Options
    #71
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Yes. And?

    Are you disputing the factual accuracy of what I said?
    Or just putting your own spin of what I said?

    I'm re-stating what I pointed out here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95465218&postcount=54


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    I'm re-stating what I pointed out here
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=95465218&postcount=54

    That was a lie then, and it's a lie now.

    On the actual point : do you accept that extremists who killed bloggers because they had "offended Islam" are able to operate almost with impunity in Bangladesh (having access to information that identifies these people, publishing a list of their targets, carrying out the killings in broad daylight, and promising to continue executing the people on their list)?

    And is there any reason to disbelieve the BBC correspondent who explains this impunity with the fact that the Bangldeshi government doesn't dare act too harshly against the extremists because they are acting accordingly to what is written in Islamic texts, and the government is afraid of being accused in its turn of being anti-Islamic.

    Is any of that untrue ?


  • Options
    #73
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Nodin wrote: »
    They are extremely conservative, yes. We do not demonise whole peoples on such grounds, however.

    Sorry, but ISIS and their buddies Al-Queda, Hamas etc are not just conservative, they follow a religious doctrine that makes them martyrs, carry out unspeakable atrocities and wage war against non-believers. All of this in an effort to spread their ideology even more. Its like saying the Nazi's were just 'conservative' and not actually examine their under lying doctrine which is the root cause of their em... conservatism.


  • Options
    #74
    silverharp
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭silverharp


    Nodin wrote: »
    Nope. An extremist might be classed as such, but to point at one out of over a billion people and shout the Jihadi equivalent of "Achtung" in the expectation that they'll jump to attention is stereotyping of the worst kind.

    But what will the majority of Muslims stand to attention for? Punishing apostates? Restricting free speech below levels we consider tolerable? Attitudes to gay people? Attitudes to women ?

    A person is responsible for what they believe? Or not?

    A belief in gender identity involves a level of faith as there is nothing tangible to prove its existence which, as something divorced from the physical body, is similar to the idea of a soul. - Colette Colfer



  • Options
    #75
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    That was a lie then, and it's a lie now.


    ........No, its an entirely accurate observation.


    volchitsa wrote: »
    And is there any reason to disbelieve the BBC correspondent who explains this impunity with the fact that the Bangldeshi government doesn't dare act too harshly against the extremists because they are acting accordingly to what is written in Islamic texts, and the government is afraid of being accused in its turn of being anti-Islamic.

    Is any of that untrue ?

    Doubtless there is fear of giving fuel to extremists being balanced against getting rid of them.


  • Options
    #76
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    silverharp wrote: »
    But what will the majority of Muslims stand to attention for? Punishing apostates? Restricting free speech below levels we consider tolerable? Attitudes to gay people? Attitudes to women ?

    Hard to answer that one. However it would be safe to say that 8 days time a good many mass going catholics will vote for gay marriage. To tar all catholics with the anti-gay marriage brush would thus be wrong. I suggest the same of Islam and muslims in a broader sense.


  • Options
    #77
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    ........No, its an entirely accurate observation.

    Doubtless there is fear of giving fuel to extremists being balanced against getting rid of them.

    How would one give fuel to extremists by condemning their actions and making a serious effort to bring them to justice?

    Or to put it another way, if multiple murders in broad daylight against a particular target group of non criminals do not require determined action to stop them, what would require it?


  • Options
    #78
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    Hard to answer that one. However it would be safe to say that 8 days time a good many mass going catholics will vote for gay marriage. To tar all catholics with the anti-gay marriage brush would thus be wrong. I suggest the same of Islam and muslims in a broader sense.

    No-one is tarring all Muslims with the accusation of being violent themselves, but there is a problem with refusal to condemn violence just because the Quran justifies it.

    If Catholics in Dublin were targeting gay rights bloggers and murdering them one after the other in the street, do you honestly think it wouldn't be major news? And that Irish Catholicism wouldn't be accused of causing such violence?

    And if similar murders had occurred in Holland, France and various other countries, all in the name of Catholicism, and significant numbers of non violent, "normal" Catholics worldwide were regularly expressing at least passive support for these murders, Do really think there wouldn't be an outcry against Catholicism?


  • Options
    #79
    jackofalltrades
    Registered Users Posts: 3,235 ✭✭✭jackofalltrades


    Nodin wrote: »
    Hard to answer that one. However it would be safe to say that 8 days time a good many mass going catholics will vote for gay marriage. To tar all catholics with the anti-gay marriage brush would thus be wrong. I suggest the same of Islam and Muslims in a broader sense.
    You're incorrectly treating an ideology the same way as you would treat a people.

    Islam is homophobic, Muslims on the other hand can choose where they subscribe to this homophobia.


  • Options
    #80
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    How would one give fuel to extremists by condemning their actions and making a serious effort to bring them to justice?

    Or to put it another way, if multiple murders in broad daylight against a particular target group of non criminals do not require determined action to stop them, what would require it?

    I'd imagine it does require determined action, but in a way that doesn't increase their support.
    Volchista wrote:
    No-one is tarring all Muslims with the accusation of being violent themselves,
    but there is a problem with refusal to condemn violence just because the
    Quran justifies it.

    ....and when examples of muslim condemnation are brought up, they're dismissed as being too few or insincere. And there's a tendency to ignore the fact that many muslims in these countries are intimidated by extremists and afraid to speak up.


  • Options
    #81
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    I'd imagine it does require determined action, but in a way that doesn't increase their support.
    See this is the nub of the problem. How is it even imaginable that people who establish a hit list of non violent bloggers that they then begin to hack to ethnic one after the other in broad daylight could possibly trigger increased support among the populations just because normal levels of condemnation are used against them? No-one is saying (well I'm not) that the Bangladeshi government should torture them or anything. Just that they should actively try to identify them and bring them to justice, and that verbal condemnation of these actions shouldnt even require particular care in how it's expressed.

    By saying there is a risk that normal measures of Justice might increase the population's support for these murderers, you are the one saying that ordinary Muslims condone violence carried out against writers in the name of Islam.

    So apparently you accept there is a problem - you just basically condone it too.

    ....and when examples of muslim condemnation are brought up, they're dismissed as being too few or insincere. And there's a tendency to ignore the fact that many muslims in these countries are intimidated by extremists and afraid to speak up.
    Well obviously people are afraid - after all, it says in the Quran that apostates should be murdered, and when "apostates" are murdered, their own government is too afraid of the population's reaction to criticism of what it says in Islam to protect them.

    Bit of a vicious circle there, isn't there? We're back to the fact that what it says in the Quran is a problem, because people are afraid to speak out and say it's wrong. No-one is afraid to say they don't believe in the bible. So Islam is a problem for personal freedom in a way that Christianity no longer is, and and hasn't been for centuries.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #82
    130Kph
    Closed Accounts Posts: 625 ✭✭✭130Kph


    We're seeing alot of the usual bleedin obvious stuff from Islamic apologists:

    "you can't paint all of Sharia as nasty based on a few nasty bits".
    "its some muslims, not all muslims"

    So let me get this straight:
    "you mean all muslims aren't violent".
    "You mean all of Sharia isn't awful"

    Goes way over my head. I just don't get it :rolleyes:

    An ex-muslim across the water lamented ruefully that you literally have to a write a 72 page preamble* everytime you make a critical comment about Islam (sometimes even Islamists) clarifying 10 or 15 of these basic building blocks (* slight exaggeration).

    Its still not enough. The usual misrepresentations are made by the apologists until they tire at some point, when the discussion finally gets down to the nub of the issue.

    Some powerful arguments made here Volchitsa.


  • Options
    #83
    Michael OBrien
    Registered Users Posts: 533 ✭✭✭Michael OBrien


    volchitsa wrote: »
    So apparently you accept there is a problem - you just basically condone it too.
    I believe Nodin told me he never read the quran or hadiths, so he is running off personal experience (he met a muslim) and somewhat misplaced empathy.
    volchitsa wrote: »
    Well obviously people are afraid - after all, it says in the Quran that apostates should be murdered, and when "apostates" are murdered, their own government is too afraid of the population's reaction to criticism of what it says in Islam to protect them.
    To be fair, the hadiths state that for purely apostasy however the quran states it if the apostate is viewed as causing 'mischief' in an Islamic country, which can mean he talked negatively about any part of Islam or mentioned to people he was an apostate. The punishment can be death, torture, imprisonment or dismemberment, or a combination of them.
    The quran does state very very clearly how much apostates are to be hated and how much they are to be punished in the afterlife and that apostasy is one of the worst crimes ever, which is why the hadiths have authority in the first place.
    volchitsa wrote: »
    Bit of a vicious circle there, isn't there? We're back to the fact that what it says in the Quran is a problem, because people are afraid to speak out and say it's wrong. No-one is afraid to say they don't believe in the bible. So Islam is a problem for personal freedom in a way that Christianity no longer is, and and hasn't been for centuries.
    Damn straight.
    Its like when apologists claim Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a liar about how violent Islam is, when at the same time, she needs bodyguards 24/7 and every video she appears in has muslims promising hate, death and or rape in the comments sections.


  • Options
    #84
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    See this is the nub of the problem. How is it even imaginable that people who establish a hit list of non violent bloggers that they then begin to hack to ethnic one after the other in broad daylight could possibly trigger increased support among the populations just because normal levels of condemnation are used against them? .

    It's called "propaganda".
    volchitsa wrote: »
    So apparently you accept there is a problem - you just basically condone it too..

    The old 'You don't agree therefore you support Osama Bin Laden'.


  • Options
    #85
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    It's called "propaganda".
    Sorry, what is? Condemning a brutal murder carried out against a non violent person in broad daylight is propaganda? Really?
    Nodin wrote: »
    The old 'You don't agree therefore you support Osama Bin Laden'.
    Who mentioned Osama Bin Laden? You appear unwilling to engage with the question about what could make significant numbers of people think it might be ok to murder people in the street for blogging, and this is your reply?

    Try actually answering the question instead.


  • Options
    #86
    bnt
    Registered Users Posts: 12,959 ✭✭✭✭bnt


    130Kph wrote: »
    We're seeing alot of the usual bleedin obvious stuff from Islamic apologists:
    ...
    My natural response to them would be something like "if Islam doesn't represent your views, then leave it". You wouldn't remain a member of an organisation (e.g. a political party) whose fundamental views contradicted yours, so why should religion be any different? Why don't we see more people leaving Islam, then?

    My view is that we don't really "get" the levels of totalitarian indoctrination that Muslims undergo, through their childhood and formative years. I'm not claiming I really get it myself. We're used to the idea of "freedom of conscience", the liberty to change one's public affiliations to match one's internal thoughts, but that doesn't exist in Islam, which really is presented as the only correct and legitimate option. Everything other than Islam is explicitly condemned, not just as different, but as wrong and inferior; your family will disown you, you will be shamed in your community, and (in some cases) face threats to life and limb, as we have seen (for the umpteenth time) this week.

    But, hey, there is no coercion in Islam, remember? Anyone who raises concerns about Islam is dismissed as an irrational "Islamophobe", because their concerns can't be rational, since only Islam is valid - right? :rolleyes:

    From out there on the moon, international politics look so petty. You want to grab a politician by the scruff of the neck and drag him a quarter of a million miles out and say, ‘Look at that, you son of a bitch’.

    — Edgar Mitchell, Apollo 14 Astronaut



  • Options
    #87
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Sorry, what is? Condemning a brutal murder carried out against a non violent person in broad daylight is propaganda? Really?
    .

    A rather obtuse reading of what I stated.
    volchitsa wrote: »
    Who mentioned Osama Bin Laden? .

    It's a well known meme. You said I condoned the killing because I didn't agree with you.


  • Options
    #88
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    A rather obtuse reading of what I stated.

    It's a well known meme. You said I condoned the killing because I didn't agree with you.

    Except that's not what I said. You condoned the absence of any real effort by the Bangladeshi government to take a stand against these murderers, because you claimed that if they did so this could increase support for the killers.

    I don't think the Bangladeshi government wants these killings to happen, and I don't think they support Bin Laden. But I do think they are afraid to do what is needed to protect peaceful bloggers from violent extremists.

    The members of that government are all based in Bangladesh, naturally, and have real reason to be afraid for their own lives. But what's your excuse?


  • Options
    #89
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    volchitsa wrote: »
    Except that's not what I said. ...................

    Looks like it to me.
    "So apparently you accept there is a problem - you just basically condone it too.."


  • Options
    #90
    volchitsa
    Registered Users Posts: 7,016 ✭✭✭volchitsa


    Nodin wrote: »
    Looks like it to me.
    "So apparently you accept there is a problem - you just basically condone it too.."

    We're at cross purposes I think.

    Do you agree that there is an urgent problem when a democratic, secular government daren't condemn people for publishing a death list of writers they disapprove of and then going in to kill these writers one by one?

    What actions do you think that government could or should take against them, if any?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #91
    jank
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 13,018 ✭✭✭✭jank


    Your wasting your time arguing the case here volchista, as the poster in question is known for spinning like a Russian ballerina, giving glib one line responses and deflecting like a seasoned politician. When it comes to this point, which it has now, I generally regard the debate won.


Advertisement