LGBT and Islam

theological · 11-06-2019 5:56pm

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

Or you could accept the fact that people aren't drones who slavishly comply with each and every detail in their holy book of choice, a feat which would be impossible in any case.

I've seen the cherrypicking and the "any criticism of Islam" is hate speech nonsense before. No thanks.

Conservative Christians and Muslims will have more Scriptural views on matters than those who are more liberal or non-practising.

Therefore they are more likely to be at disagreement with secular standards. That's simply a reality. There's another question about how we navigate that obvious fact.

The stuff about being drones or whatever else. This is how you might see being either a conservative Christian or Muslim, but I don't think they particularly care if you think that they are being a drone because they consider their walk to be enjoying fellowship with God.

Sonics2k wrote: »

I absolutely stand for his right to free speech. I do not stand for free hate speech.

I don't care if they're Christian, Muslim, white, black, gay or straight.

But you already know this, you attempted a strawman and it was awful.

Free speech is not "free" if you can't say offensive things.

The problem with "hate speech" laws is that they are entirely arbitrary. There is no clear definition as to what constitutes "hate speech". It's much better to allow people to say what they want and have society moderate it. If we simply restrict speech with no form of counterargument we simply give credence to the notion that offensive ideas have no response and cannot be argued against.

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I think that Islam is a very dangerous idea for those from the LGBT community or feminists to align themselves with.

Yes, we should all be against discrimination however how much power do we want to give religious ideas, any religious ideas. We should be promoting the secular society and people should be keeping religion to themselves. I am very uncomfortable with the protests at the moment in the UK against teaching kids to be tolerant.

I think we all need to be very careful who we align with.

You say that religious people should keep it to themselves. Why do you think that's a realistic prospect if they genuinely believe the world needs to hear about their faith? Do you think they are genuinely going to put what "secular society" wants above their God? That's obviously not in their interests from their perspective.

Also tolerance means something different today to what it meant historically. Historically tolerance means you've got your opinion, I've got mine, that's OK. Now tolerance means you must agree with my position or else. That's actually not very tolerant.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 6:04pm

We can never equate all Islam with extremism. It doesn’t hold up to any scrutiny.
People extending olive branches like the LGBT in the OP Marching against islamaphohia is as important as small a gesture as it is as the Muslims here breaking their Ramadan fast to break bread with the LGBT community in mosques here in Dublin when the Florida shooting happened at that gay club.

It’s the small actions like these by good people regardless of faith or sexuality that build bridges and dissolves prejudices and preconceived notions and ignorance.

We live in an era of misleading outrage headlines which leads to extremes.
Fact is the almost entire majority of people exist in the middle and are decent. Again. Regardless of creed or sexuality.

K.Flyer · 11-06-2019 6:09pm

freshpopcorn wrote: »

I've seen those Protests in Birmingham on the news/etc.
Some of the protesters don't even have kids in the school or relatives.
It's hilarious watching some of the videos.
They said ''A Gay'' in a certain tone.
They protesters clearly don't want for kids to learn about different types of families.

Here is a typical anti LGBT muslim outside that school,.
I wonder what people's thoughts are on him saying that god "...created woman for man's pleasure".

https://news.sky.com/video/god-created-women-for-mens-pleasure-11722583

Gimme A Pound · 11-06-2019 6:09pm

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

I think that Islam is a very dangerous idea for those from the LGBT community or feminists to align themselves with.

Yes, we should all be against discrimination however how much power do we want to give religious ideas, any religious ideas. We should be promoting the secular society and people should be keeping religion to themselves. I am very uncomfortable with the protests at the moment in the UK against teaching kids to be tolerant.

I think we all need to be very careful who we align with.

Very much agreed.

And yeah I know there are plenty of muslims who are good, peaceful people (obviously - shouldn't need to be said) and really don't deserve what gets levelled at all muslims but it's a faith that staunchly condemns homosexuality. Christian fundamentalism does too, but that doesn't get defended by the LGBTQ community - and the punishments are much more severe from the former. It's not "Love the sinner" (Christianity), it's "kill the sinner".

I do think it's to tick a liberal box. A need to be seen as a certain way.

Like being in favour of the choice to have late-term abortions - but appalled by any lack of kindness when it suits.

Like being bizarrely and pigheadedly defensive of travellers despite the appalling record of ill treatment of women within that community.

Defending anti social scumbags as the misunderstood "working class" (when they don't work).

Enraged about child abuse by clergy, quiet about the sex abuse rings in England.

Losing their sh1t over the vaguest slight against women here; quiet about The Handmaid's Tale esque (and worse) horrors against women around the world.

Pacifist, yet pro violence against Trump supporters.

But elements on the right are as bad:

Utter woman haters pretending to care about women's rights in muslim communities, ditto when it comes to gay and trans folk.

Pretending to be outraged by abortion extremely early on when nothing has even formed - yet not a sh1t given about kids in Syria.

"If you can't afford children, don't have them" yet pretending to be anti abortion.

Pretending to care about about the disabled in when it comes to abortion but otherwise poking fun at them, calling them retards etc.

Pretending to care about the homeless, etc.

Cognitive dissonance in order to tick certain boxes is a common thing among those a good deal to the left or right.

freshpopcorn · 11-06-2019 6:27pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Here is a typical anti LGBT muslim outside that school,.
I wonder what people's thoughts are on him saying that god "...created woman for man's pleasure".

https://news.sky.com/video/god-created-women-for-mens-pleasure-11722583

All the video's a similar to this. I think they had to ban an uncle of one of the kids from using his mega phone outside the school.

Franz Von Peppercorn II · 11-06-2019 6:36pm

Billy Mays wrote: »

That Michael Savage?

Crazy as a box of frogs.

mcmoustache · 11-06-2019 6:36pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Here is a typical anti LGBT muslim outside that school,.
I wonder what people's thoughts are on him saying that god "...created woman for man's pleasure".

https://news.sky.com/video/god-created-women-for-mens-pleasure-11722583

He's a cnut and his religion is cnutish but that doesn't mean that he every muslim is a cnut.

ancapailldorcha · 11-06-2019 6:42pm

mcmoustache wrote: »

He's a cnut and his religion is cnutish but that doesn't mean that he every muslim is a cnut.

It's a shame that purveyors of anti-intellectual filth like Alex Jones and Ben Shapiro have eroded debating standards to such a level that basic clarification like this is necessary in the midst of all the strawmen.

Gimme A Pound · 11-06-2019 6:56pm

Ah I dunno about Ben Shapiro. A person can be staunchly conservative yet still intelligent and capable of making good points.

But Alex Jones... another example of the cognitive dissonance: knowing he's talking utter lunacy yet pretending he's a reasonable person talking total sense (just because he's on the right). And he's clearly mentally ill, but his crowd won't poke fun at him (mental illness is usually their go-to to describe people they don't like).

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-06-2019 6:57pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Here is a typical anti LGBT muslim outside that school,.
I wonder what people's thoughts are on him saying that god "...created woman for man's pleasure".

https://news.sky.com/video/god-created-women-for-mens-pleasure-11722583

Hiw do you know he is "typical" of the protesters there? Have they all been interviewed?

Does his having those beliefs mean we should think that all muslims hold the same beliefs?

ancapailldorcha · 11-06-2019 7:05pm

Leslie Most Flesh wrote: »

Ah I dunno about Ben Shapiro. A person can be staunchly conservative yet still intelligent and capable of making good points.

But Alex Jones... another example of the cognitive dissonance: knowing he's talking utter lunacy yet pretending he's a reasonable person talking total sense (just because he's on the right). And he's clearly mentally ill, but his crowd won't poke fun at him (mental illness is usually their go-to to describe people they don't like).

I've watched a few Shapiro videos and the only thing that sets him apart is the tricks he uses in debates. He's clearly intelligent but his recent interview fiasco with Andrew Neil just exposed him as someone who debates for sport instead of for making a reasoned case.

K.Flyer · 11-06-2019 7:14pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Hiw do you know he is "typical" of the protesters there? Have they all been interviewed?

Given the amount of news coverage / video and the number of interviews I would feel safe to say yes he is typical. As for the rest of them, they are protesting along with him, so you can draw your own conclusions.

Does his having those beliefs mean we should think that all muslims hold the same beliefs?

No, as I said in an earlier post, it was nice to see a couple of young muslim girls, wearing their hijabs, enjoying the stars from RuPaul's Drag Race show Werk the World at the Bord Gais theatre recently.
But I also pointed out that the mosque in Clonskeagh used their website to direct followers to vote No in the same sex marriage referendum.

El_Duderino 09 · 11-06-2019 7:15pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

I think in my experience people are often interested in ring fencing minorities for protection merely for BEING minorities. But criticism of their ideas as a minority are fair game.

My own motto is "Respect people, never ideas". But often people can not tell the difference. Either by attacking the minority instead of their ideas or.... in the other direction.... mistaking protection of minorities as a ring fence protection of their ideas.

Here in Ireland Muslims are a minority. I would want to ring fence them for protection for THAT reason.

However their ideas.... Islam itself..... is to me one of the more dangerous and damaging and awful religions making it's way into our culture and I think it is fair game for robust attack and criticism.

This is exactly it. Islam is a dangerous ideology and if it's followers take it seriously, it would probably be worse than Christianity (and Christianity prescribes death for gays too). But in Ireland the catholics are the problem. They have historical influence. As much as some people would like to imagine the Muslims are a big problem, they really aren't in Ireland. Luckily for us the catholics don't tend to take the their religion seriously. If they did, we would be much less progressive than we are now.

Second, the issue of discrimination. If I heard someone call all Catholic paedophiles, I'd challenge them. Or if they proposed treating Catholics badly, id challenge them. Likewise I'd challenge someone calling all Muslims terrorists. That doesn't mean I like either Catholicism or Islam.

Danzy · 11-06-2019 7:22pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Given the amount of news coverage / video and the number of interviews I would feel safe to say yes he is typical. As for the rest of them, they are protesting along with him, so you can draw your own conclusions.

No, as I said in an earlier post, it was nice to see a couple of young muslim girls, wearing their hijabs, enjoying the stars from RuPaul's Drag Race show Werk the World at the Bord Gais theatre recently.
But I also pointed out that the mosque in Clonskeagh used their website to direct followers to vote No in the same sex marriage referendum.

Clonskeagh is deeply intolerant and hard line.

The head of its Fatwa council has said that putting gays to death is "to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements".

He isn't viewed as contentious.

Gimme A Pound · 11-06-2019 7:26pm

https://www.amazon.com/Liberalism-Mental-Disorder-Savage-Solutions-ebook/dp/B006IED8RO

This thing of dismissing points of view that you don't like as mental illness - a fairly irrational approach in and of itself. Pretty sure only psychiatrists can diagnose mental disorders. By his criteria the same assessment could be made regarding some far right views.

Two sides of the same coin - with a lot more in common than they'd dream of admitting.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 7:27pm

I’d love to know why a certain cohort of ordinary people (usually Male) are so threatened and made feel insecure by women, gays, Muslims or anything that isn’t them or doesny look or behave like them.

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-06-2019 7:42pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

Given the amount of news coverage / video and the number of interviews I would feel safe to say yes he is typical. As for the rest of them, they are protesting along with him, so you can draw your own conclusions.

No, as I said in an earlier post, it was nice to see a couple of young muslim girls, wearing their hijabs, enjoying the stars from RuPaul's Drag Race show Werk the World at the Bord Gais theatre recently.
But I also pointed out that the mosque in Clonskeagh used their website to direct followers to vote No in the same sex marriage referendum.

So you presume to know the monds of all of the protesters because of that mans opinion? There were some pretty out there prople during the ssm, abortion, divorce referenda so should we presume that the few who said or did disgraceful things represent everyone who was at those protests?

The roman catholic church has on may occasions directed their followers to vote no on subjects such as SSM, contraception, divorce etc. So what?

K.Flyer · 11-06-2019 7:49pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

The roman catholic church has on may occasions directed their followers to vote no on subjects such as SSM, contraception, divorce etc. So what?

That's right, and I don't agree with their views either..

Timberrrrrrrr · 11-06-2019 7:52pm

K.Flyer wrote: »

That's right, and I don't agree with their views either..

I guess we both agree that the leaders of religions are idiotic fvckwits so and they should shut up about these issues.

suicide_circus · 11-06-2019 7:57pm

Shapiro makes some good well agued points on a variety of topics, he's not a moron, but i couldn't listen to him after it became clear he is incapable of distinguishing between reasonable criticism of Israeli government settlement policy and antisemitism. his intelligence didnt stretch that far.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 7:58pm

Page one in the after hours forum is quite alarming as are the number of replies these threads get. I don’t hear or see these conversations anywhere else in real life. Muslims! ISIS! Trans! Gays! Oh my. Really rather telling.

Richard Hillman · 11-06-2019 8:17pm

The Islamic communities are almost of Katie Taylor proportion in being an expert in keeping their non pc religious views to themselves. They know which side their bread is buttered

11-06-2019 8:29pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote:

Page one in the after hours forum is quite alarming as are the number of replies these threads get. I donâ€™t hear or see these conversations anywhere else in real life. Muslims! ISIS! Trans! Gays! Oh my. Really rather telling.

It is. People are afraid to speak about these things "in real life" as they would be wrongfully branded as some kind of "phobe" for not embracing something they may have a legitimate issue with.

It is telling. Debate is not welcome. Agree with the minority or else you are privileged.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 8:36pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

It is. People are afraid to speak about these things "in real life" as they would be wrongfully branded as some kind of "phobe" for not embracing something they may have a legitimate issue with.

It is telling. Debate is not welcome. Agree with the minority or else you are privileged.

I don’t think that’s it.
Nobody here posting threads such as these, is being harrassed by Muslims trans or gay people in the workplace or the street. These confrontations simply don’t happen.
If they were I’d say absolutely have that conversation and we should all be involved.

It’s always from this safe anonymous remove and speaks to a broader insecurity and ignorance and fear on the part of anyone posting it or supporting it.
It’s a shame the internet is some people’s only place to vent or even have contact with others (such as it is) and understandable people become isolated and hardened in their views.

But has starting threads and rowing on the Internet ever changed anyone’s mind either way? It really hasn’t.

These folks don’t want ‘debate’ as you say, especially in real life. They wouldn’t have the balls simply cos they don’t have the balls to be ______ (fill in the phobia here) in real life.

11-06-2019 8:49pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote:

I donâ€™t think thatâ€™s it. Nobody here posting threads such as these, is being harrassed by Muslims trans or gay people in the workplace or the street. These confrontations simply donâ€™t happen. If they were Iâ€™d say absolutely have that conversation and we should all be involved.

So we need to wait until we ARE harassed until we can vocalise a concern about something we can see about to occur?

The ridiculous rise of *insert latest wave* feminists alongside the "oh look at the poor oppressed white male" phenomenon that seems to be perpetuated by the media give people from all backgrounds and beliefs to have to use the internet as if you said it in real life, you could (and most probably would) be in danger of losing your job such is the progressive way.

11-06-2019 8:50pm

Stop moaning ffs wrote:

These folks donâ€™t want â€˜debateâ€™ as you say, especially in real life. They wouldnâ€™t have the balls simply cos they donâ€™t have the balls to be ______ (fill in the phobia here) in real life.

I'd have the balls. But the fact that you said that implied that only men can debate. That makes you a sexist.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 8:55pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

So we need to wait until we ARE harassed until we can vocalise a concern about something we can see about to occur?

The ridiculous rise of *insert latest wave* feminists alongside the "oh look at the poor oppressed white male" phenomenon that seems to be perpetuated by the media give people from all backgrounds and beliefs to have to use the internet as if you said it in real life, you could (and most probably would) be in danger of losing your job such is the progressive way.

There’s absolutely a link to women being fed up and the rise of feminism and the result being a rise is ‘wheres My straight pride parade?’ Etc etc etc.

The former is justified though. The later really isn’t. They’re afraid someone is coming To attack them somehow. They’re nit. They just want equality representation and fairness. That’s all.
I do agree both extremes are often embarrassing. Very often. But we can’t be lead by extremes. And we shouldn’t fall for whoever is leading extremes of any agenda or cause.

Stop moaning ffs · 11-06-2019 8:58pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I'd have the balls. But the fact that you said that implied that only men can debate. That makes you a sexist.

If you’re going to split hairs on that frankly pedantic level I’m going to assume you have no hairs on the balls you don’t have

I’m joking. But let’s just swap it for gumption or courage of convictions if it’s more your temperature

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 11-06-2019 9:08pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It is. People are afraid to speak about these things "in real life" as they would be wrongfully branded as some kind of "phobe" for not embracing something they may have a legitimate issue with.

It is telling. Debate is not welcome. Agree with the minority or else you are privileged.

I find it's more because they can't. You can disagree with people or certain lifestyles - fine - but when you enter into a debate you have to actually be able to debate!

Case in point - saying something like "try this in Tehran!" or "oh yeah, 'religion of peace'" is NOT debating. It's making stupid and uninformed comments. And THAT'S why people get branded phobes. Incorrectly, perhaps - just plain ignorant would be a better description - but if you make stupid comments based on poor research and a lack of informed research, you WILL be slated.

Not because you're not allowed to say something, but because you don't have the ability to express it properly.

Debate is welcome. Malinformed opinion is not.

(not "you" personally)

MrFresh · 11-06-2019 9:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It is. People are afraid to speak about these things "in real life" as they would be wrongfully branded as some kind of "phobe" for not embracing something they may have a legitimate issue with.

It is telling. Debate is not welcome. Agree with the minority or else you are privileged.

Ah, the victim card. The reason you can't debate in public is because your points don't stand up to much scrutiny and you get embarrassed when called on it.

11-06-2019 10:05pm

LGBT is tied in with feminism. Feminism just wants more power, and therefore will act like it represents minority groups as well. They demonise the "privileged" white straight male, so that we will feel guilty about ourselves and will be subservient to their demands. But believe me if we were living in an Islamic state, these LGBT guys would be living their worst nightmare.

11-06-2019 10:35pm

MrFresh wrote:

Ah, the victim card. The reason you can't debate in public is because your points don't stand up to much scrutiny and you get embarrassed when called on it.

Not even a little bit.

I'm happy to debate anyone in public. I can see why others aren't though. A lot of high profile people have lost jobs by saying something that some subsection of self percieved victims found offensive and lost their livelihood.

And for someone like you to accuse someone of playing the victim card...

Come on now.

MadYaker · 11-06-2019 11:05pm

DrPhilG wrote: »

I've been scolded out of the Pride month thread for derailing it (apologies) so I'll ask here.

First off, this is a legitimate question, I'm not looking to bash/condemn anyone in the LGBTQ community, and I'm not looking to condemn Muslims or Islam.

I'm just genuinely curious about why there has been an increase, often at LGBTQ marches etc, of support shown by that community, towards the Muslim community.

I'm not saying that supporting one another and speaking out against bigotry and homoohobia together is a bad thing. I'm just surprised that the LGBTQ community support Islam, but condemn Christianity.

I can totally understand them condemning both, as both religions teach that homosexuality is wrong/sinful. I just don't get why one is supported and the other is not.

Again, this is a genuine question that I'm curious about so please don't drag it down to a mud slinging match.

You've made a massive generalisation in your post there which unfortunately renders the whole thing a pile of nonsense. I can see why you weren't allowed to continue with this on the other thread.

11-06-2019 11:18pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

Case in point - saying something like "try this in Tehran!" or "oh yeah, 'religion of peace'" is NOT debating. It's making stupid and uninformed comments. And THAT'S why people get branded phobes. Incorrectly, perhaps - just plain ignorant would be a better description - but if you make stupid comments based on poor research and a lack of informed research, you WILL be slated.

I completely agree.

But in the same way, the other side are also prone to blindly saying soundbytes that they've heard on VOX or other sites without any substance.

I like debate. I hate people who aren't open to being wrong. I like to learn.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 11-06-2019 11:32pm

Deleted User wrote: »

I completely agree.

But in the same way, the other side are also prone to blindly saying soundbytes that they've heard on VOX or other sites without any substance.

I like debate. I hate people who aren't open to being wrong. I like to learn.

Oh, I'm not saying it's limited to one side! But there's a difference in how people try to cover up their ignorance.

The uninformed left will shout blindly until the other side just leaves. "They who shout loudest, win."
The ununformed right will whinge that debate is being shut down. As somsone else put it, "the victim card".

11-06-2019 11:37pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

The uninformed left will shout blindly until the other side just leaves. "They who shout loudest, win." The ununformed right will whinge that debate is being shut down. As somsone else put it, "the victim card".

I disagree there. Maybe I'm misrepresenting myself here by looking uniformed but you can't deny that unpopular right leaning opinions, while not technically being shut down, are punished either socially or financially in the current climate.

For example, wearing a repeal jumper was acceptable, even applauded. If someone was to wear a "I'm not exactly for abortion" t-shirt, they'd have been castigated.

Stephen15 · 11-06-2019 11:40pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

In any case, the idea that Muslims automatically agree with Sharia law and want to implement it in western society is absolute bull**** to anyone who spends even a little time informing themselves by actually spending time with Muslims and talking to them, rather than reading tabloids and listening to right-wing podcasts; as most people, while being devout (to either religion) aren't as homophobic as a lot of people would like us to think.

All of what you say is true. The problem is not with induvidual Muslims the problems is with Islam and the herd mentality that prevails in many Islamic countries. Islam is less like a religion but more like a political ideology akin to fascism or communism. Blaming induvidual Muslims for the actions in Islamic countries is a bit like blaming people living in Communist Russia or Nazi Germany for the evil ideologies promoted by both.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 11-06-2019 11:46pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

The uninformed left will shout blindly until the other side just leaves. "They who shout loudest, win." The ununformed right will whinge that debate is being shut down. As somsone else put it, "the victim card".

I disagree there. Maybe I'm misrepresenting myself here by looking uniformed but you can't deny that unpopular right leaning opinions, while not technically being shut down, are punished either socially or financially in the current climate.

For example, wearing a repeal jumper was acceptable, even applauded. If someone was to wear a "I'm not exactly for abortion" t-shirt, they'd have been castigated.

I see what you're saying, but my initial point was purely with regards to debate.

In any case, I generally disagree that people should lose their job unless there's a conflict of interest, but it would depend on what the specific "unpopular right wing opinion" was.

11-06-2019 11:51pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

I see what you're saying, but my initial point was purely with regards to debate.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote:

In any case, I generally disagree that people should lose their job unless there's a conflict of interest, but it would depend on what the specific "unpopular right wing opinion" was.

I wholesale agree

Atoms for Peace · 12-06-2019 12:03am

As an ideology I don't like it, just like I don't like national socialism and Bolshevism. To see what happens to those who blindly ally themselves with Islamism should watch "the road to terror" by Adam Curtis, it's on YouTube.

mcmoustache · 12-06-2019 12:10am

Danzy wrote: »

Clonskeagh is deeply intolerant and hard line.

The head of its Fatwa council has said that putting gays to death is "to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements".

He isn't viewed as contentious.

That's another added to the cnut list. That dude from Trinity, Ali Selem (I think that's his name) is another.

Ian Paisley Junior and Arlene Foster? More cnuts. They have similar beliefs and are very mainstream but I don't view all prods as cnuts.

mcmoustache · 12-06-2019 12:18am

Atoms for Peace wrote: »

As an ideology I don't like it, just like I don't like national socialism and Bolshevism. To see what happens to those who blindly ally themselves with Islamism should watch "the road to terror" by Adam Curtis, it's on YouTube.

I haven't seen that one yet but the title reminds me of when the Iranian students (muslims) "allied" with the Islamists during the revolution. Let's just say that it didn't end that well for the students.

Iranians are a very sound bunch of people that do very well over here but we sould do well to remember why they left the place. They didn't come here to export Islamism; they came to escape it.

Stephen15 · 12-06-2019 12:32am

mcmoustache wrote: »

Iranians are a very sound bunch of people that do very well over here but we sould do well to remember why they left the place. They didn't come here to export Islamism; they came to escape it.

Any form of mass organised immigration from a particular country or race of people in to another country or region attracts undesirable factions similar to what is already living that homeland all it takes is a minority.

Also while first generation immigrants often come with an open mind and a view to want to integrate second and third generations often to more extreme beliefs aswell as crime as they become marginalised.

nozzferrahhtoo · 12-06-2019 7:03am

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Amazing how leftists will come to the aid of Islam whenever it is condemned for the evil actions of the radicals within that religion but yet when the Catholic church is condemned for the evil actions of those within it's ranks

Not all that amazing really if you stop ignoring the simple detail that "Islam" and "Christianity" are a religion while the Catholic Church is a business model / establishment built on top of a religion.

The amazement falls away when you stop falsely conflating a religion with the churches built onto that religion. So your first failing here is not comparing like with like at all.

The second failing however is you are contriving to paint only half the picture when you claim that church is "condemned for the evil actions of those within it's ranks" and I suspect you know it and are doing it intentionally and wilfully.

The issue most Irish people have with the Church is not the "evil actions"...... pederasty and rape of children for example lets not refer to these things obliquely with innuendo...... within it's ranks but how the institution AS A WHOLE then proceeded to deal with the victims and perpetrators of those crimes at pretty much every level of the hierarchy of that church. All the while as an Institution presuming to educate and nanny our society on subjects like sexual morality.

Justin Credible Darts · 12-06-2019 7:39am

I think all religion is brain washing and utterly ridiculous for any same person person to buy in to this invisible man.

that said i have no problem with those who do believe, as long as they dont spout their beliefs on me , as i would not spout mine on others..
I could openly berate christianity in this country and what will happen, some people will get upset.
Try that in saudi arabia with Islam and tell me all religious people share a love for their common man, and their freedom of opinion.

nozzferrahhtoo · 12-06-2019 8:17am

Justin Credible Darts wrote: »

I think all religion is brain washing and utterly ridiculous for any same person person to buy in to this invisible man.

I used to in my youth be tempted to assume religious people were somehow insane too. But how are we defining "sane" in that case given most people in our history and present day appear to have some belief in a god?

If we were to give "sane" a simple definition such as "How the majority of human brains work the majority of the time" then the "insane" ones by that definition would be us "atheists".

I think it is too easy in other words for us the vast minority to claim to be the sane ones. After all most insane people appear to think they are the sane ones and everyone else is mad.

No, it seems believing in unsubstantiated nonsense like the existence of a god is a belief one can have while being entirely and perfectly sane. That or the majority of our species is insane most of the time.

Unless of course the majority of people claiming to believe in a god..... actually don't. In which case they are sane, but simply liars. There is SOME good reasons to think this might be the case, that people believe in belief, rather than actually believe in god. In fact the clergy project in the US, which is an Anonymous support group for Clergy who do not actually believe in a god..... has a membership that surprised the people who set it up.

12-06-2019 11:02am

suicide_circus wrote: »

dunno just got the impression that bisexuality hasnt been taken super seriously by da community lately

MrFresh wrote: »

The term does seem to be losing it's meaning. I read a personal issue post from someone who was mad at her female friend because she wanted to go to pride to pick up another girl for a threesome with her fella. Now in my mind this would make the friend bisexual.

Yea - a huge problem I think is that people are often misusing the term. Quite a lot of people do not even know how Sexual Orientation is defined. Even in a discussion relatively recently in fact where I quoted multiple sources showing how it is defined people still had a "nuh-uh" reaction and preferred their own definitions for which they could not quote a single source and could not even actually define.

This problem exists especially with people who prefer languages to be prescriptive rather than descriptive. I think language is descriptive much more than it is prescriptive. Some people are the exact opposite.

But Orientation is defined based on your ongoing incidents of attraction. It is not at all defined by who you actually have sex with. Nor is it defined by one off incidents - or exceptions.

For example a man working as a sex worker for men - who has a lot of sex with men - _may_ still be wholly and entirely heterosexual. Because sexuality is defined based on who he is attracted to - not who he is having sex with.

To take the Wiki article on Sexual Orientation for example - the key phrase is in the first sentence - "Sexual orientation is an enduring pattern of romantic or sexual attraction to persons of the opposite sex or gender, the same sex or gender, or to both sexes or more than one gender.".

Enduring Pattern. PersonS not person.

In other words a single incident of having sex with someone of our own gender - or even a long term ongoing sexual relationship with a single person of your own gender - whether you are actually attracted to that person or doing it for some other reason (for example in the person you talk about from personal issues she may have been doing it as a favour to her boyfriend rather than for herself) - does not make you homosexual or bisexual.

One way to make sure a term loses its meaning or stops being taken seriously - is to over use and over apply it. And I think with "Bisexuality" that has happened all too often and so people identifying with that term suffer as a result. Every college guy or gal who jumps into bed for a threesome to try it out - or like the anecdote above goes looking for someone for a threesome to try it out - gets stamped with the label. And this is compounded with the "Everyone is a bit bi" myth we often hear people trot out.

So I can well understand why electro~bitch sometimes suffers for the term within the community. When the word means all kinds of things to all kinds of people - then she is likely to receive all kinds of reactions to it. Some good. Some bad. Some comical. And some just plain ignorant or suspicious.

Outlaw Pete · 12-06-2019 4:47pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

The issue most Irish people have with the Church is not the "evil actions"...... pederasty and rape of children for example lets not refer to these things obliquely with innuendo...... within it's ranks but how the institution AS A WHOLE then proceeded to deal with the victims and perpetrators of those crimes at pretty much every level of the hierarchy of that church. All the while as an Institution presuming to educate and nanny our society on subjects like sexual morality.

All you are doing with the above is solidifying my point, not refuting it. If anything, what you've said with the above shows that my comparison was even more apt than I'd suggested, not less so, given that AS A WHOLE (just like the Catholic Church) Islam does not condemn the radicals in their midst, who murder homosexuals and stone and burn women to death. Or at least not any more than their Catholic counterparts did at least. In fact, it's well known that so called Islamic moderates have often shielded such people in a similar fashion to how the Catholic Church did so with their evil doers.

So, cheers, nozz, appreciate it, would have made that point had I thought of it.

scamalert · 12-06-2019 5:27pm

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

All you are doing with the above is solidifying my point, not refuting it. If anything, what you've said with the above shows that my comparison was even more apt than I'd suggested, not less so, given that AS A WHOLE (just like the Catholic Church) Islam does not condemn the radicals in their midst, who murder homosexuals and stone and burn women to death. Or at least not any more than their Catholic counterparts did at least. In fact, it's well known that so called Islamic moderates have often shielded such people in a similar fashion to how the Catholic Church did so with their evil doers.

So, cheers, nozz, appreciate it, would have made that point had I thought of it.

your comparing apples to potatoes here, at least in western countries we evolved to look past silly things, arab countries are still pretty much -1000BC in their beliefs.

MrFresh · 12-06-2019 5:47pm

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

All you are doing with the above is solidifying my point, not refuting it. If anything, what you've said with the above shows that my comparison was even more apt than I'd suggested, not less so, given that AS A WHOLE (just like the Catholic Church) Islam does not condemn the radicals in their midst, who murder homosexuals and stone and burn women to death. Or at least not any more than their Catholic counterparts did at least. In fact, it's well known that so called Islamic moderates have often shielded such people in a similar fashion to how the Catholic Church did so with their evil doers.

So, cheers, nozz, appreciate it, would have made that point had I thought of it.

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.

LGBT and Islam

Comments