Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on [email protected] 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 [email protected]

LGBT and Islam

1235717

Comments

  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,029 ✭✭✭✭Richard Hillman


    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




  • 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.

    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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.




  • 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.

    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.


  • Advertisement


  • 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.

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


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,850 ✭✭✭Stop moaning ffs


    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 :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,825 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    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)

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



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


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 444 ✭✭chuchuchu


    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.




  • 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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,113 ✭✭✭✭MadYaker


    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.

    lgbt_brum_web.jpg

    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.




  • 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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,825 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    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".

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





  • 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.


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


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 32,825 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    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.

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





  • 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.

    I wholesale agree


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,888 ✭✭✭Atoms for Peace


    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.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 7,237 ✭✭✭mcmoustache


    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.


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


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,320 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    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.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,404 ✭✭✭Justin Credible Darts


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 9,320 ✭✭✭nozzferrahhtoo


    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.


  • Posts: 0 Landon Fancy Toe


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,423 ✭✭✭✭Outlaw Pete


    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.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,739 ✭✭✭scamalert


    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.


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


    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.


Advertisement