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
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

LGBT and Islam

1246710

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,565 ✭✭✭K.Flyer


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Islam is not a person though. The chairperson of the Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council and Chief Imam of the Islamic Centre of Ireland is, however, and he has condemned extremism and advocated removing citizenship from returning ISIS fighters. It doesn't get much coverage though. That's pretty much top level in Ireland for Muslims.

    This is not a discussion about extremism, but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.
    The Islamic centre in Clonskeagh, whose chief imam won't speak english after over twenty years in the country, was totally against same sex marriage.
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?

    451714.png


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    This is not a discussion about extremism,


    Take it up with the guy I was replying to.

    K.Flyer wrote: »
    but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.


    We know where it sits. Same place it sits in Catholicism. The religion condemns it, followers make up their own minds.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,669 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    MrFresh wrote: »
    You can disagree with the tenants of a religion without despising all persons who are a member of that religion.

    There's few on this forum who could do with taking that on board, in their book anyone who is Catholic is basically a paedo supporter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Islam is not a person though. The chairperson of the Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council and Chief Imam of the Islamic Centre of Ireland is, however, and he has condemned extremism and advocated removing citizenship from returning ISIS fighters. It doesn't get much coverage though. That's pretty much top level in Ireland for Muslims.

    He is also from a very tiny sect of Islam, that most Muslims view as heretics.

    I seriously believe his life would be at risk in Clonskeagh Mosque.

    He has gotten a kicking there before.

    He is internationally known and probably the main go to Imam for RTE.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    This is not a discussion about extremism, but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.
    The Islamic centre in Clonskeagh, whose chief imam won't speak english after over twenty years in the country, was totally against same sex marriage.
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?

    451714.png

    He believes that killing gays is correct. That he is again same sex marriage is neither here nor there in context.

    His son was speaking at Rallies in Egypt while those he was backing were throwing gays off roofs around the city.

    He ended up on the Late late show ffs.

    These aren't fringe cranks.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,077 ✭✭✭percy212


    I think I will give him a buzz and let him know Mohammed was a ******. Hello FATWA!!
    Danzy wrote: »
    He believes that killing gays is correct. That he is again same sex marriage is neither here nor there in context.

    His son was speaking at Rallies in Egypt while those he was backing were throwing gays off roofs around the city.

    He ended up on the Late late show ffs.

    These aren't fringe cranks.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 33,630 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    This is not a discussion about extremism, but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.
    The Islamic centre in Clonskeagh, whose chief imam won't speak english after over twenty years in the country, was totally against same sex marriage.
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?

    We can and do totally mention catholicism in the same way, but AGAIN - the banner says "Islamophobia" NOT "Islam".

    There's kind of a slight difference.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 16,013 ✭✭✭✭James Brown


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    This is not a discussion about extremism, but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.
    The Islamic centre in Clonskeagh, whose chief imam won't speak english after over twenty years in the country, was totally against same sex marriage.
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?

    451714.png

    I don't think anyone is bashing the Catholic church for being catholic. They've a lot of influence and should have absolutely no say in how the country is run.
    I think that would be the same towards Muslims are any other religion. Catholics get more press because there's more of them and they've more influence I would have thought.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?


    Because people in the West generally aren’t as familiar with Islam as they are with Christianity, or in an Irish context, people aren’t as exposed to Islam as they are to Catholicism. That’s precisely why Islam isn’t mentioned in the same way as Catholicism. Why would it be? They aren’t as equally influential in Western society or in Irish society as each other. Dara O’ Brian explains it well at four minutes into this video -





    It’s precisely why an Islamic version of Father Ted for example just wouldn’t work, because an Irish audience simply can’t relate to it, and wouldn’t get the humour, because they have limited experience of Islam. Some people are of the impression that Islam is primarily concerned with paedophilia, jihads and homosexuality, and they ignore the vast cultural impact of Islam in the societies where Islam is the predominant religion.

    The thing is, people are perfectly entitled to care about one thing and not something else, that is entirely their prerogative. This idea that because a person cares about one thing or objects to one thing, that they should care about someone or something or object to something else, is the stuff of nonsense. People care about what they care about, or object to what they object to, they aren’t obligated to care for everyone or everything equally, nor are they obligated to object to everyone or everything equally. Why should they? I wouldn’t be able to take someone seriously who claims to care about everyone and everything equally, because it just isn’t humanly possible. It doesn’t take long to find out where their biases, prejudices and bigotry are though based upon their beliefs about themselves and other people, and what they believe separates them from other people,


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,669 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    Because people in the West generally aren’t as familiar with Islam as they are with Christianity, or in an Irish context, people aren’t as exposed to Islam as they are to Catholicism. That’s precisely why Islam isn’t mentioned in the same way as Catholicism. Why would it be? They aren’t as equally influential in Western society or in Irish society as each other. Dara O’ Brian explains it well at four minutes into this video -





    It’s precisely why an Islamic version of Father Ted for example just wouldn’t work, because an Irish audience simply can’t relate to it, and wouldn’t get the humour, because they have limited experience of Islam. Some people are of the impression that Islam is primarily concerned with paedophilia, jihads and homosexuality, and they ignore the vast cultural impact of Islam in the societies where Islam is the predominant religion.

    The thing is, people are perfectly entitled to care about one thing and not something else, that is entirely their prerogative. This idea that because a person cares about one thing or objects to one thing, that they should care about someone or something or object to something else, is the stuff of nonsense. People care about what they care about, or object to what they object to, they aren’t obligated to care for everyone or everything equally, nor are they obligated to object to everyone or everything equally. Why should they? I wouldn’t be able to take someone seriously who claims to care about everyone and everything equally, because it just isn’t humanly possible. It doesn’t take long to find out where their biases, prejudices and bigotry are though based upon their beliefs about themselves and other people, and what they believe separates them from other people,


    Or maybe it's because you could end up dead for making fun of Islam, they don't like people taking the piss out of oul Mohammad


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Or maybe it's because you could end up dead for making fun of Islam, they don't like people taking the piss out of oul Mohammad


    People take the piss out of Mohammad all the time. Nobody died. It’s fine. There are more people who claim they can’t take the piss out of Mohammed than there were ever people who died for taking the piss out of Mohammed. It’s a claim that just doesn’t stand up to any sort of examination.

    There’s plenty of humour in Islam, but much of it gets lost in translation, because of the cultural differences between societies. It’d be the same if people tried to make jokes about Zoroastrianism (I can barely even fcuking spell it :pac:) - people who are unfamiliar with the religion and culture just wouldn’t get the humour!


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    People take the piss out of Mohammad all the time. Nobody died. It’s fine. There are more people who claim they can’t take the piss out of Mohammed than there were ever people who died for taking the piss out of Mohammed. It’s a claim that just doesn’t stand up to any sort of examination.

    That's a ridiculous statement. Would you be more comfortable taking the piss out of Mohamed in a full mosque on your own or taking the piss out of Jesus in a full church on your own?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    Lehiff wrote: »
    Why is the solidarity not reciprocated by the Islamic world though?
    Its simply a matter of altitude.
    LGBTI+ activists march at street level in support of Islam.
    Islamic activists march LGBTI+ people off the top of high buildings onto the street below.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,669 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    People take the piss out of Mohammad all the time. Nobody died. It’s fine. There are more people who claim they can’t take the piss out of Mohammed than there were ever people who died for taking the piss out of Mohammed. It’s a claim that just doesn’t stand up to any sort of examination.

    There’s plenty of humour in Islam, but much of it gets lost in translation, because of the cultural differences between societies. It’d be the same if people tried to make jokes about Zoroastrianism (I can barely even fcuking spell it :pac:) - people who are unfamiliar with the religion and culture just wouldn’t get the humour!

    Come off it people are more cautious about it considering what happened in France with the cartoons, I'm not saying people still don't make jokes about the religion but I haven't seen anyone killed lately for drawing cartoons about the Pope.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    recedite wrote: »
    Its simply a matter of altitude.
    LGBTI+ activists march at street level in support of Islam.


    they don't.

    recedite wrote: »
    Islamic activists march LGBTI+ people off the top of high buildings onto the street below.


    Jokes been done a couple times already.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    Come off it people are more cautious about it considering what happened in France with the cartoons, I'm not saying people still don't make jokes about the religion but I haven't seen anyone killed lately for drawing cartoons about the Pope.


    There's nothing in the Bible restricting that though is there? So why would you?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,669 ✭✭✭✭Galwayguy35


    MrFresh wrote: »
    There's nothing in the Bible restricting that though is there? So why would you?

    What are you talking about?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    Gay people of Ireland. We are not your enemy. Islam is.
    Leave us alone and have a go at them instead.
    Thank you.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    MrFresh wrote: »
    There's nothing in the Bible restricting that though is there? So why would you?

    ****ing A, that is some line to take.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,580 ✭✭✭jmreire


    People take the piss out of Mohammad all the time. Nobody died. It’s fine. There are more people who claim they can’t take the piss out of Mohammed than there were ever people who died for taking the piss out of Mohammed. It’s a claim that just doesn’t stand up to any sort of examination.

    There’s plenty of humour in Islam, but much of it gets lost in translation, because of the cultural differences between societies. It’d be the same if people tried to make jokes about Zoroastrianism (I can barely even fcuking spell it :pac:) - people who are unfamiliar with the religion and culture just wouldn’t get the humour!
    Try making jokes about Mohammad or Islam in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi etc. and come back and tell us how you get on.... here and now in Ireland, and other Country's where Muslim's are in the minority, you probably would be OK ( but even so, that's not 100% guaranteed, you could be unfortunate enough to meet an easily offended fundamentalist ) I have heard many Muslim jokes ( they even have the Islamic version of "Paddy the Irishman, Paddy the Scot, and of course the butt of the jokes... Paddy the Brit.And they have the "Blonde" jokes too. Muslims in general have a very well developed sense of humour. They have their own " Did you hear the one about..." But I have never heard of any jokes involving Mohammad, from any Muslim anywhere.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    What are you talking about?


    The negative reaction to depictions of Mohammed is not about offence, it's about it being prohibited. There is no such prohibition on depictions of the pope so why would there be a similar reaction?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MrFresh wrote:
    The negative reaction to depictions of Mohammed is not about offence, it's about it being prohibited. There is no such prohibition on depictions of the pope so why would there be a similar reaction?

    Ffs


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    That's a ridiculous statement. Would you be more comfortable taking the piss out of Mohamed in a full mosque on your own or taking the piss out of Jesus in a full church on your own?


    Apart from the fact that I’ve never felt comfortable taking the piss out of religion anyway (I mean, I’m in no position to point fingers seeing as Christians have been bumping off heretics for centuries ever since that Western looking Jewish guy was put to death for claiming to be the son of God), there are so many possible ways either scenario could go! I just don’t know unless I was ever in that situation, but honestly, I think I’d have to come up with some new material because how many times can you really make tasteless jokes about paedophilia in either context?

    I just don’t generally find jokes about child molestation all that funny. There was that one joke about why Michael Jackson stuffs cheese down his pants, because kids would do anything for Dairylea, but I was about 12 the first time I heard it and thought it was hilarious, because I could relate to it then. Hearing it for the ten thousandth time 30 years later, it just isn’t the same. It’s old and stale and just not funny. It’s the same with jokes about Mohammed or Catholic priests - it’s not funny any more, it’s just old. Time for some new material.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    jmreire wrote: »
    Try making jokes about Mohammad or Islam in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi etc. and come back and tell us how you get on.... here and now in Ireland, and other Country's where Muslim's are in the minority, you probably would be OK ( but even so, that's not 100% guaranteed, you could be unfortunate enough to meet an easily offended fundamentalist ) I have heard many Muslim jokes ( they even have the Islamic version of "Paddy the Irishman, Paddy the Scot, and of course the butt of the jokes... Paddy the Brit.And they have the "Blonde" jokes too. Muslims in general have a very well developed sense of humour. They have their own " Did you hear the one about..." But I have never heard of any jokes involving Mohammad, from any Muslim anywhere.

    People print pictures of Jesus on t-shirts and coffee mugs.

    One guy drew a picture of Mohammad and the place got shot up. People died. There was mass demonstrations around the Muslim world. Images of the artist were burnt on the streets.

    Jaw dropping to think there are people in the world who can't see the difference.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    jmreire wrote: »
    Try making jokes about Mohammad or Islam in Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi etc. and come back and tell us how you get on.... here and now in Ireland, and other Country's where Muslim's are in the minority, you probably would be OK ( but even so, that's not 100% guaranteed, you could be unfortunate enough to meet an easily offended fundamentalist ) I have heard many Muslim jokes ( they even have the Islamic version of "Paddy the Irishman, Paddy the Scot, and of course the butt of the jokes... Paddy the Brit.And they have the "Blonde" jokes too. Muslims in general have a very well developed sense of humour. They have their own " Did you hear the one about..." But I have never heard of any jokes involving Mohammad, from any Muslim anywhere.


    What’s this nonsense with “try making jokes in a completely different context”. Why would I? It’s stupid. Even I wouldn’t get the joke, it’s that stupid. I make a joke of something if I see the humour in it, whether it be in Ballybrack or Baghdad, it’s all the fcuking one as far as humour and context goes. Making jokes out of context that nobody finds funny just isn’t funny. What’s the point? “Look at me, I’m an edgelord”, like, seriously, what’s the point?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    What’s this nonsense with “try making jokes in a completely different context”. Why would I? It’s stupid. Even I wouldn’t get the joke, it’s that stupid. I make a joke of something if I see the humour in it, whether it be in Ballybrack or Baghdad, it’s all the fcuking one as far as humour and context goes. Making jokes out of context that nobody finds funny just isn’t funny. What’s the point? “Look at me, I’m an edgelord”, like, seriously, what’s the point?

    That was a bit of a non answer. A bit of a hissy fit thrown in for padding.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    It’s precisely why an Islamic version of Father Ted for example just wouldn’t work, because an Irish audience simply can’t relate to it, and wouldn’t get the humour, because they have limited experience of Islam. Some people are of the impression that Islam is primarily concerned with paedophilia, jihads and homosexuality, and they ignore the vast cultural impact of Islam in the societies where Islam is the predominant religion.

    Even better still make an Islamic version of Father Ted and show it in Saudi Arabia, Eygpt, Iran, Pakistan, Bahrain, Indonesia or any other Islam invested hellhole and see how far you would get it would never get to pass and in the highly unlikely it somehow got on air it would almost certainly end in beheadings. I'm sure the silent majority of sane minded people would probably relate and find it funny but not the government and certainly not the Islamic fundamentalists.

    People need to understand that Islam is not a religion it's an ideology and a way of life similar to fascism or communism. It may be portrayed as a religion but if you look into it more Sharia law doesn't just govern religious it governs forgein policy, economic policy etc. and seeks to rule under an Islamic Caliphate ie. a country governed under entirely under Sharia law.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭recedite


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Islam is not a person though. The chairperson of the Irish Muslim Peace and Integration Council and Chief Imam of the Islamic Centre of Ireland is, however, and he has condemned extremism and advocated removing citizenship from returning ISIS fighters. It doesn't get much coverage though. That's pretty much top level in Ireland for Muslims.
    Danzy wrote: »
    He is also from a very tiny sect of Islam, that most Muslims view as heretics.

    I seriously believe his life would be at risk in Clonskeagh Mosque.

    He has gotten a kicking there before.

    He is internationally known and probably the main go to Imam for RTE.
    Danzy is quite correct here, and Mr. Fresh has been taken for a ride by RTE and the liberal media.
    Al Quadri runs a small mosque somewhere near Blanchardstown. He is very good at inventing grandiose titles for his little committees.
    Clonskeagh is the real centre of power.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Come off it people are more cautious about it considering what happened in France with the cartoons, I'm not saying people still don't make jokes about the religion but I haven't seen anyone killed lately for drawing cartoons about the Pope.


    It’s true that nobody was killed lately for drawing cartoons about the Pope, it’s also true to point out that people were being killed in our own country and are still being killed in our own country because they slighted some fcukwit fundamentalists.

    What happened in Paris is hardly a great example of anything, particularly not the nuanced perspectives of 1.8bn adherents of Islam. To even suggest as much would be stupidity on a monumental scale not even worth entertaining.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    K.Flyer wrote: »
    This is not a discussion about extremism, but about where LGBT sits, or doesn't, within Islam.
    The Islamic centre in Clonskeagh, whose chief imam won't speak english after over twenty years in the country, was totally against same sex marriage.
    People are happy and quick to bash Catholicism, and often rightly so, but don't mention islam the same way.
    Why not?

    451714.png

    A strange one considering democracy is considered haram under Sharia Law


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Blueshoe wrote: »
    That was a bit of a non answer. A bit of a hissy fit thrown in for padding.


    How can I answer a question with any sort of qualifications when I have no experience upon which to base that answer? There was no hissy fit, it was simply pointing out the useless premise of the question.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭jackboy


    MrFresh wrote: »
    The negative reaction to depictions of Mohammed is not about offence, it's about it being prohibited. There is no such prohibition on depictions of the pope so why would there be a similar reaction?

    You cannot believe that rationale.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    Even better still make an Islamic version of Father Ted and show it in Saudi Arabia, Eygpt, Iran, Pakistan, Bahrain, Indonesia or any other Islam invested hellhole and see how far you would get it would never get to pass and in the highly unlikely it somehow got on air it would almost certainly end in beheadings. I'm sure the silent majority of sane minded people would probably relate and find it funny but not the government and certainly not the Islamic fundamentalists.


    So you admit you don’t know that it’s been done, yet somehow you know it would end in beheadings... somehow :rolleyes:

    People need to understand that Islam is not a religion it's an ideology and a way of life similar to fascism or communism. It may be portrayed as a religion but if you look into it more Sharia law doesn't just govern religious it governs forgein policy, economic policy etc. and seeks to rule under an Islamic Caliphate ie. a country governed under entirely under Sharia law.


    Ehh, the same is true of Catholicism and Canon Law.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,964 ✭✭✭Blueshoe


    How can I answer a question with any sort of qualifications when I have no experience upon which to base that answer? There was no hissy fit, it was simply pointing out the useless premise of the question.

    You have politician traits.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    So you admit you don’t know that it’s been done, yet somehow you know it would end in beheadings... somehow :rolleyes:





    Ehh, the same is true of Catholicism and Canon Law.

    It has been done at the mildest level and people have died for it, legally backed.

    That you pretend it wouldn't is mad.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,580 ✭✭✭jmreire


    How can I answer a question with any sort of qualifications when I have no experience upon which to base that answer? There was no hissy fit, it was simply pointing out the useless premise of the question.

    My post was not a question, Jack. It was a statement in reply to you :

    "" People take the piss out of Mohammad all the time. Nobody died. It’s fine. There are more people who claim they can’t take the piss out of Mohammed than there were ever people who died for taking the piss out of Mohammed. It’s a claim that just doesn’t stand up to any sort of examination.""

    You can make jokes and cartoons about any subject under the Sun without fear of reprisal Jack, but not Mohammad or Islam, And people are being killed all round the world for the crime of "Insulting Islam "just because you personally have not heard of it, does not mean that it is not happening. Do a little bit of research on the subject, and you will see what I mean.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,420 ✭✭✭MrFresh


    jackboy wrote: »
    You cannot believe that rationale.


    Can you point out its flaw? If something is prohibited by one religion but not by another then you could hardly expect members of the latter to be upset by the prohibition being breached. I'm not going to be upset if I find out there is pork in my meal but a Jewish person likely will be. That doesn't make me more reasonable than him, he just believes in something different.


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    What? You can hardly expect the lads NOT to kill people because their religion doesn't allow someone drawing their buddy?


  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    MrFresh wrote:
    Can you point out its flaw?

    I'm not going to be upset if I find out there is pork in my meal but a Jewish person likely will be. That doesn't make me more reasonable than him, he just believes in something different.

    So would that justify him killing someone?

    Mental gymnastics


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,580 ✭✭✭jmreire


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Can you point out its flaw? If something is prohibited by one religion but not by another then you could hardly expect members of the latter to be upset by the prohibition being breached. I'm not going to be upset if I find out there is pork in my meal but a Jewish person likely will be. That doesn't make me more reasonable than him, he just believes in something different.

    yes that's very true MrFresh, and in most cases it work's very well for the majority of people, but lets assume for arguments sake a slightly different scenario, The Jew ( strict Hasidic ) feels that you have mortally insulted him, by the very act of eating pork in his presence, and he takes out his sword ( insert weapon of choice here ) and cuts your head off??? And that's where the problem begins...when you must not do certain things because some one else is offended by them, to the point he feels justified in killing you.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,511 ✭✭✭Sweetemotion


    It's simply turkeys voting for Christmas.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    Lots of rationale for killing Jews, women, gays in Islam, do you consider that acceptable as well Mr Fresh.

    Actually don't bother answering, I'm too tired to entertain prevarication.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,125 ✭✭✭✭Danzy


    So would that justify him killing someone?

    Mental gymnastics

    Let's not get Mr Fresh started on Jews.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,664 ✭✭✭jackboy


    MrFresh wrote: »
    Can you point out its flaw? If something is prohibited by one religion but not by another then you could hardly expect members of the latter to be upset by the prohibition being breached. I'm not going to be upset if I find out there is pork in my meal but a Jewish person likely will be. That doesn't make me more reasonable than him, he just believes in something different.

    There is a big difference between ‘being upset’ and ultra violence.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    jmreire wrote: »
    My post was not a question, Jack. It was a statement in reply to you :

    You can make jokes and cartoons about any subject under the Sun without fear of reprisal Jack, but not Mohammad or Islam, And people are being killed all round the world for the crime of "Insulting Islam "just because you personally have not heard of it, does not mean that it is not happening. Do a little bit of research on the subject, and you will see what I mean.


    I’ve done my research on the subject and that’s why I never denied that it happened. I said something along the lines of more people have claimed they can’t make jokes about Mohammed than people who have actually died for making jokes about Mohammed.

    Remember Salman Rushdie? He makes jokes about his own fatwa -


    Rushdie has reported that he still receives a "sort of Valentine's card" from Iran each year on 14 February letting him know the country has not forgotten the vow to kill him and has jokingly referred it as "my unfunny Valentine" in a reference to the song "My Funny Valentine". He said, "It's reached the point where it's a piece of rhetoric rather than a real threat." Despite the threats on Rushdie personally, he said that his family has never been threatened, and that his mother, who lived in Pakistan during the later years of her life, even received outpourings of support. Rushdie himself has been prevented from entering Pakistan, however.

    ...

    Rushdie came from a liberal Muslim family although he now identifies as an atheist. In a 2006 interview with PBS, Rushdie called himself a "hardline atheist".

    In 1989, in an interview following the fatwa, Rushdie said that he was in a sense a lapsed Muslim, though "shaped by Muslim culture more than any other", and a student of Islam. In another interview the same year, he said, "My point of view is that of a secular human being. I do not believe in supernatural entities, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu."

    In 1990, in the "hope that it would reduce the threat of Muslims acting on the fatwa to kill him," he issued a statement claiming he had renewed his Muslim faith, had repudiated the attacks on Islam made by characters in his novel and was committed to working for better understanding of the religion across the world. However, Rushdie later said that he was only "pretending".



    You think there aren’t many Muslims like Rushdie who wouldn’t get a kick out of satire at Mohammed or Islam’s expense? They’d positively relish in it, because in spite of Western portrayals of Muslims as backwards suicide bombers primed to go off at the slightest provocation, they’re generally not all that different from their Western progressive counterparts who are primed to go off at the slightest provocation :D


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,580 ✭✭✭jmreire


    I don't think anyone is bashing the Catholic church for being catholic. They've a lot of influence and should have absolutely no say in how the country is run.
    I think that would be the same towards Muslims are any other religion. Catholics get more press because there's more of them and they've more influence I would have thought.

    The difference is Matt, in Muslim Country's, they are run completely according to Islamic / Sharia Law, and all decisions are made strictly in accordance with Islamic Law and the Koran. There are no secular or as we would call them, democratic choices in those Country's, look at Iran as an example.
    In Ireland from the foundation of the state, and up to recent times, the Catholic Church wielded massive influence. That no longer applies here anymore. We are truly a secular state now. And at the present time, anyone and everyone who want's to can indulge in a bit of Catholic Bashing, with out fear of retaliation.
    Muslims do not have the option of openly criticizing their religious leaders. So in that sense, we have moved on as a Nation.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    jmreire wrote: »
    The difference is Matt, in Muslim Country's, they are run completely according to Islamic / Sharia Law, and all decisions are made strictly in accordance with Islamic Law and the Koran. There are no secular or as we would call them, democratic choices in those Country's, look at Iran as an example.
    In Ireland from the foundation of the state, and up to recent times, the Catholic Church wielded massive influence. That no longer applies here anymore. We are truly a secular state now. And at the present time, anyone and everyone who want's to can indulge in a bit of Catholic Bashing, with out fear of retaliation.
    Muslims do not have the option of openly criticizing their religious leaders. So in that sense, we have moved on as a Nation.


    We’re not y’know, but that aside, the “Catholic bashing” (Jesus even that “bashing” phrase is stupid, can we not just say criticism?) just got old, and stale. People just didn’t give a damn any more, and frankly I’m not sure that many ever did. People tended to portray themselves as devout when it suited their purposes as opposed to any genuine adherence to their religious beliefs, so while I agree with you in some sense that yes, we have moved on as a nation, I’m just not sure there was ever that much to move on from in the first place as far as some people’s portrayal of Irish society is concerned.

    Nowadays we appear to have a different set of sacred cows, or cultural values that some people appear to be attempting to put beyond criticism. I still wouldn’t say they can’t be criticised, and I personally wouldn’t have any fear of criticising ideas I find fault with, but some people will still claim that they can’t say anything “for fear of” something or other. It’s as though they feel they should be able to criticise something and for there to be no consequences for doing so. I’d think that sort of person was a coward, that they didn’t have the conviction of their beliefs enough to think they were worth dying for, but that’s just me. Nobody died, but apparently a barrage of criticism on social media is the same thing now :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,907 ✭✭✭Stephen15


    I’ve done my research on the subject and that’s why I never denied that it happened. I said something along the lines of more people have claimed they can’t make jokes about Mohammed than people who have actually died for making jokes about Mohammed.

    Remember Salman Rushdie? He makes jokes about his own fatwa -


    Rushdie has reported that he still receives a "sort of Valentine's card" from Iran each year on 14 February letting him know the country has not forgotten the vow to kill him and has jokingly referred it as "my unfunny Valentine" in a reference to the song "My Funny Valentine". He said, "It's reached the point where it's a piece of rhetoric rather than a real threat." Despite the threats on Rushdie personally, he said that his family has never been threatened, and that his mother, who lived in Pakistan during the later years of her life, even received outpourings of support. Rushdie himself has been prevented from entering Pakistan, however.

    ...

    Rushdie came from a liberal Muslim family although he now identifies as an atheist. In a 2006 interview with PBS, Rushdie called himself a "hardline atheist".

    In 1989, in an interview following the fatwa, Rushdie said that he was in a sense a lapsed Muslim, though "shaped by Muslim culture more than any other", and a student of Islam. In another interview the same year, he said, "My point of view is that of a secular human being. I do not believe in supernatural entities, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu."

    In 1990, in the "hope that it would reduce the threat of Muslims acting on the fatwa to kill him," he issued a statement claiming he had renewed his Muslim faith, had repudiated the attacks on Islam made by characters in his novel and was committed to working for better understanding of the religion across the world. However, Rushdie later said that he was only "pretending".



    You think there aren’t many Muslims like Rushdie who wouldn’t get a kick out of satire at Mohammed or Islam’s expense? They’d positively relish in it, because in spite of Western portrayals of Muslims as backwards suicide bombers primed to go off at the slightest provocation, they’re generally not all that different from their Western progressive counterparts who are primed to go off at the slightest provocation :D

    I think your forgetting that Salman Rusdie is living under constant threats from Islamic fundamentalists due to to his views. The fact that the likes of Geert Wilders and Salman Rusdie need 24/7 armed protection shows how progressive Islam is.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,580 ✭✭✭jmreire


    I’ve done my research on the subject and that’s why I never denied that it happened. I said something along the lines of more people have claimed they can’t make jokes about Mohammed than people who have actually died for making jokes about Mohammed.

    Remember Salman Rushdie? He makes jokes about his own fatwa -


    Rushdie has reported that he still receives a "sort of Valentine's card" from Iran each year on 14 February letting him know the country has not forgotten the vow to kill him and has jokingly referred it as "my unfunny Valentine" in a reference to the song "My Funny Valentine". He said, "It's reached the point where it's a piece of rhetoric rather than a real threat." Despite the threats on Rushdie personally, he said that his family has never been threatened, and that his mother, who lived in Pakistan during the later years of her life, even received outpourings of support. Rushdie himself has been prevented from entering Pakistan, however.

    ...

    Rushdie came from a liberal Muslim family although he now identifies as an atheist. In a 2006 interview with PBS, Rushdie called himself a "hardline atheist".

    In 1989, in an interview following the fatwa, Rushdie said that he was in a sense a lapsed Muslim, though "shaped by Muslim culture more than any other", and a student of Islam. In another interview the same year, he said, "My point of view is that of a secular human being. I do not believe in supernatural entities, whether Christian, Jewish, Muslim or Hindu."

    In 1990, in the "hope that it would reduce the threat of Muslims acting on the fatwa to kill him," he issued a statement claiming he had renewed his Muslim faith, had repudiated the attacks on Islam made by characters in his novel and was committed to working for better understanding of the religion across the world. However, Rushdie later said that he was only "pretending".



    You think there aren’t many Muslims like Rushdie who wouldn’t get a kick out of satire at Mohammed or Islam’s expense? They’d positively relish in it, because in spite of Western portrayals of Muslims as backwards suicide bombers primed to go off at the slightest provocation, they’re generally not all that different from their Western progressive counterparts who are primed to go off at the slightest provocation :D
    After Ayatollah Khomeini issued the fatwa on Salman, he was put under 24/7 armed guard. He lived under the shadow of this protection for many years, and it was during this time he mentioned as a joke the card reminding him of the Fatwa calling for his death. But for sure, inwardly he was not laughing at it... and rightly so. The fatwa was issued in Iran, but had world wide validity.... meaning that each and every Muslim in the world was obligated to kill him if they could. This eventually led to him publicly stating that he was again embracing Islam, and was again a practicing Muslim, after denying it for years. He did this out of fear,,,,,grinding him down, year after year. Not funny. He is now in America, and while I don't know for sure, I would imagine that he has personal protection there too. Sorry to disagree with you, but the perceived Muslim suicide bombers that you mention, primed to go off at the slightest provocation, are running on a much shorter fuse than their western counter parts.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,203 ✭✭✭✭One eyed Jack


    Stephen15 wrote: »
    I think your forgetting that Salman Rusdie is living under constant threats from Islamic fundamentalists due to to his views. The fact that the likes of Geert Wilders and Salman Rusdie need 24/7 armed protection shows how progressive Islam is.


    I’m not forgetting it at all, but if Salman Rushdie doesn’t take it seriously, I’m not going to lose any sleep over it either. I’ll worry about things that have at least a reasonable chance of occurring, as opposed to thinking the sky is falling. By that rationale, I wouldn’t ever want to visit the US either where I’m far more likely to be shot than I am in a bar in Baghdad.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement