LGBT and Islam

Danzy · 12-06-2019 11:46pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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.

Salman Rushdie does not take it seriously because his 24 hour armed guard do that for him.

One eyed Jack · 12-06-2019 11:54pm

Danzy wrote: »

Salman Rushdie does not take it seriously because his 24 hour armed guard do that for him.

He didn’t have any armed guards when he wrote the satanic verses and was critical of Islam lonnnnng before he ever came to prominence in the West. Nowadays there are people playing the victim because they imagine they would be shot for their opinions. They imagine their opinions are that important that anyone would take a blind bit of notice :rolleyes:

Danzy · 12-06-2019 11:55pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

He didn’t have any armed guards when he wrote the satanic verses and was critical of Islam lonnnnng before he ever came to prominence in the West. Nowadays there are people playing the victim because they imagine they would be shot for their opinions. They imagine their opinions are that important that anyone would take a blind bit of notice :rolleyes:

Do you even know who Salman Rushdie is?

jmreire · 12-06-2019 11:56pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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.

But he IS taking it seriously, Jack. And I don't blame him either. He took it so serious that he recanted, and became a practicing Muslim again. That was his public statement, and it was done to try and get the fatwa lifted. He might make a joke out of bravado, but inwardly, he knew full well what the fatwa meant, and he was afraid. The kind of pressure he was and still is under is immense. Have you ever been in a situation, even for a short while, where your every move has to be planned? Where you will go? When you will go? Who you will go with? Continuously watching what is happening around you? Never having a set routine, in case you might be tracked? Might sound a bit melodramatic, but that's what Rushdie had to put up with for years, and all the time, an armed guy beside him. Not surprising that it got to him.Treating it as a joke??? Like I said, maybe out of bravado, but he was not laughing, I can assure you. Question now is, will he live to a ripe old age, and die in his bed, surrounded by Family and friend's, or will the fatwa finish him? If you were a betting man, what would you bet on?

jmreire · 13-06-2019 12:09am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

He didn’t have any armed guards when he wrote the satanic verses and was critical of Islam lonnnnng before he ever came to prominence in the West. Nowadays there are people playing the victim because they imagine they would be shot for their opinions. They imagine their opinions are that important that anyone would take a blind bit of notice :rolleyes:

Well, Jack...just google "Iran Protests" and see how many people are playing the victims. and getting injured,jailed and killed for it.
Just as a matter of interest, do you know which verse of the Satanic Verses earned him his Fatwa??? And why was it considered such desecration the Rushdie was sentenced to death for writing it?
Was very interesting, as a matter of fact.

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2019 12:10am

Danzy wrote: »

Do you even know who Salman Rushdie is?

Yes, of course I do, I can remember him being interviewed on the Late Late about it and all. He was quite public about the whole ordeal.

jmreire wrote: »

But he IS taking it seriously, Jack. And I don't blame him either. He took it so serious that he recanted, and became a practicing Muslim again. That was his public statement, and it was done to try and get the fatwa lifted. He might make a joke out of bravado, but inwardly, he knew full well what the fatwa meant, and he was afraid. The kind of pressure he was and still is under is immense. Have you ever been in a situation, even for a short while, where your every move has to be planned? Where you will go? When you will go? Who you will go with? Continuously watching what is happening around you? Never having a set routine, in case you might be tracked? Might sound a bit melodramatic, but that's what Rushdie had to put up with for years, and all the time, an armed guy beside him. Not surprising that it got to him.Treating it as a joke??? Like I said, maybe out of bravado, but he was not laughing, I can assure you.

I’ve been married, yes :pac:

But seriously though, while I take your point, my point is that he’s still alive, and not only has he survived being critical of Islam, but he is celebrated in the West for it. There are many thousands more Muslims who are critical of Islam in just the same way as there are many thousands of Catholics who are critical of Catholicism in spite of the possibility of being ostracised or indeed being threatened with death for their opinions.

Nowadays people receive death threats for all sorts of reasons, it just depends upon how seriously one is willing to take them and if they have the courage of their convictions to stand behind their opinions in spite of people making threats on their life. It’s still unlikely they are going to make good on those threats. To say that death threats are any more likely in Islamic societies than they are in the West, ignores the fact that in either society there are always a minority of utter fcukwits who will make good on their threats every once in a while. It doesn’t mean anyone should ever live in fear of their lives as though the West is about to be taken over by Islam any time soon. The threat just isn’t credible. Relax.

Danzy · 13-06-2019 12:13am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yes, of course I do, I can remember him being interviewed on the Late Late about it and all. He was quite public about the whole ordeal.

I’ve been married, yes :pac:

But seriously though, while I take your point, my point is that he’s still alive, and not only has he survived being critical of Islam, but he is celebrated in the West for it. There are many thousands more Muslims who are critical of Islam in just the same way as there are many thousands of Catholics who are critical of Catholicism in spite of the possibility of being ostracised or indeed being threatened with death for their opinions.

Nowadays people receive death threats for all sorts of reasons, it just depends upon how seriously one is willing to take them and if they have the courage of their convictions to stand behind their opinions in spite of people making threats on their life. It’s still unlikely they are going to make good on those threats. To say that death threats are any more likely in Islamic societies than they are in the West, ignores the fact that in either society there are always a minority of utter fcukwits who will make good on their threats every once in a while. It doesn’t mean anyone should ever live in fear of their lives as though the West is about to be taken over by Islam any time soon. The threat just isn’t credible. Relax.

****ing hell, we have David Dukes lawyer here.

jmreire · 13-06-2019 12:53am

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Yes, of course I do, I can remember him being interviewed on the Late Late about it and all. He was quite public about the whole ordeal.

I’ve been married, yes :pac:

But seriously though, while I take your point, my point is that he’s still alive, and not only has he survived being critical of Islam, but he is celebrated in the West for it. There are many thousands more Muslims who are critical of Islam in just the same way as there are many thousands of Catholics who are critical of Catholicism in spite of the possibility of being ostracised or indeed being threatened with death for their opinions.

Nowadays people receive death threats for all sorts of reasons, it just depends upon how seriously one is willing to take them and if they have the courage of their convictions to stand behind their opinions in spite of people making threats on their life. It’s still unlikely they are going to make good on those threats. To say that death threats are any more likely in Islamic societies than they are in the West, ignores the fact that in either society there are always a minority of utter fcukwits who will make good on their threats every once in a while. It doesn’t mean anyone should ever live in fear of their lives as though the West is about to be taken over by Islam any time soon. The threat just isn’t credible. Relax.

Yes Jack, he is still alive, but largely due to the fact that he has 24/7 armed protection, and he lives a very sheltered life. Sure there are Muslims not happy with their Lives, but openly voicing their opinions or openly protesting against their Leaders has led to many being injured, jailed or even killed. Muslim's just don't have the freedom to openly criticize their Leaders. Catholics can and do criticize the Church. The proof of that can be seen in the changes that have occurred. Yet, I have never heard of the Church making any death threat's ( or issuing of fatwa's if you prefer ) against its detractors. Despite the regular bashing the Church and Catholics in general are getting at this point in time, there is no retaliation. I cannot see Islam and Muslims accepting similar criticism quietly.

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2019 1:47am

jmreire wrote: »

Yes Jack, he is still alive, but largely due to the fact that he has 24/7 armed protection, and he lives a very sheltered life. Sure there are Muslims not happy with their Lives, but openly voicing their opinions or openly protesting against their Leaders has led to many being injured, jailed or even killed. Muslim's just don't have the freedom to openly criticize their Leaders. Catholics can and do criticize the Church. The proof of that can be seen in the changes that have occurred. Yet, I have never heard of the Church making any death threat's ( or issuing of fatwa's if you prefer ) against its detractors. Despite the regular bashing the Church and Catholics in general are getting at this point in time, there is no retaliation. I cannot see Islam and Muslims accepting similar criticism quietly.

That has more to do with the price of celebrity fame than anything it has to do with his criticism of Islam to be fair. I can’t think of that many celebrities that don’t have 24/7 protection living sheltered lives either tbh.

Muslims can and do openly criticise their leaders and yes, some have been put to death, I’m not denying that at all, and many Christians have been put to death for speaking out against their leaders, because Christians are just as likely as Muslims to get a bit trigger happy in defending their beliefs -

Christian terrorism

As many as 10,000 Christians die for their beliefs every year according to conservative estimates -

Christian martyrs

So while it’s true in Ireland that Catholics generally aren’t persecuted nor do they tend to be arming themselves to defend their beliefs (I’m ignoring the political situation in the north), it’s also true to say that people in Ireland who are critical of Islam aren’t being persecuted, nor are Muslims in Ireland arming themselves to defend their beliefs. It appears that contrary to some people’s beliefs, Muslims and Islam in Irish society at least, get about as het up about criticism of their religion as their Christian counterparts.

The issue appears to be one of culture, as opposed to a specific religion.

Hardcharger · 13-06-2019 2:09am

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.

Obviously because Islam is feared and Christianity is not.

By virtue signalling they think they can save themselves.

When the Jews were herded into the ghettos the Nazis recieved help from Jewish leaders and Jewish police who ran and policed the ghettos on their behalf. The bodies burned in the camps were shoved into the ovens by Jews desperate to live who accepted this duty rather than to be killed immediately. Ultimately the Jewish leaders Jewish police and Jewish camp workers were also killed.

The Nazis did not spare collaborators.

Similarly radical Islamists want to kill all gays.
In countries where radical Islam is in power gays are routinely killed.

In less than century or more based on demographics and the spread of Islam compared to other faiths the majority faith in the West will be Islam. Leading the charge is radical political Islam taking their marching orders from Whabbist Saudi Arabia.

When this happens the gays if they are stupid enough to continue to be openly gay in such a society who march against Islamophobia will be all killed.

MrFresh · 13-06-2019 7:02am

Deleted User wrote: »

So would that justify him killing someone?

No. Nothing would.

jmreire wrote: »

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.

That would be pushing your religion on someone else with violence. That's a different matter to simply being offended. But you wouldn't judge other Jewish people by the actions of that one would you?

Danzy wrote: »

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

No.

jackboy wrote: »

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

Yes, that's why it's called extremism.

Sunny Disposition · 13-06-2019 7:11am

Find the rise of Islam in Europe worrying tbh, not v sure how successfully it can be integrated.
Really don’t get homophobia, like why anyone would care what other people are at. Think most people don’t understand it either, just makes no sense.
Am surprised with gay movement supporting Islam, I’d have thought Islam wouldn’t have had much tolerance for homosexuality?

Diceicle · 13-06-2019 7:22am

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.

Ok. However, in a 2016 survey of UK Muslims some 52% would make being gay illegal - not gay acts - just being gay. And that's Muslims in the westernised UK who want that.
Tbf, just under 25% wanted the Sharia implemented - that is still about 5 times too high imo.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-06-2019 8:42am

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

All you are doing with the above is solidifying my point, not refuting it.

False, I directly refuted it. You claimed falsely that we jump on the Catholic Church for the evil actions of some in it's ranks. The truth however, not your historical revisionism of it, is that our issue is with how the church as a whole.... at pretty much every level of it's hierarchy.... THEN responded to the actions of those rapists in their ranks and to the victims of it.

I also directly refuted you by pointing out you are not at all attempting to compare like with like. You are comparing the actions of individuals in a religion on one hand to the actions of individuals in an institution based on that religion on the other. Islam is a religion. Christianity is a religion. The Catholic Church however is NOT a religion. It is a business model built on a religion. Your fallaciously conflating the two is our failing, not mine.

So not only is it false for you to claim I did not refute you.... I did so TWICE in two very distinct ways.

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

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.

Well protecting the perpetrators of crimes takes money. Silencing victims takes money. Transferring rapists from one parish to another takes money. Paying media spokesmen to deal with the social repercussions of raping children takes money. And so on.

While I grant you it is overly emotive to call someone a "pedo supporter" if they donate money to the church knowing this is how much of the money is used...... it is not actually entirely inaccurate either is it? If you are giving money to an institution that knowingly facilitated, and in some ways still is facilitating, the rape of children as one of their expenditure streams..... then you are supporting that financially.

I think calling them a "pedo supporter" is not the right way at all to make such a person aware of this failing...... but the intention is pure none the less. And I can understand why it is emotive for them too. After all the church was not simply raping children. They were doing so while presuming to lecture us as a society on things like sexual morality, and doing things like preaching the sinful nature of condoms in AIDS ridden countries like Africa.

People tend to hate criminals, especially child rapists. But Holier than thou moral preaching while commiting crimes tends to stick in the craw of people and get them riled up.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-06-2019 8:42am

Deleted User wrote: »

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?

Hard to say. I got a lot of death threats for an article I wrote about the Catholic Crackers. The article still exists so I still occasionally get a death threat ambling into my inbox.

That said though I think you are right in that if you gave the average person the choice of neighbour between a fundamentalist Christian, a fundamentalist Muslim, or a Fundamentalist Jain.... I think everyone here knows which order they would pick them in...... and I think everyone here knows why. One of them is more likely than the other to attack or even kill you. While another is more likely to do nothing more than sweep the street outside your house.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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.

Is that a problem of the joke though or the observer? To be honest I can think of VERY VERY few jokes that I heard a long time ago to great hilarity, that I now get all that much humour from at all.

And often where I do, it is not the joke but the joke teller that illicits that humor. For example much of the material of Dave Allen that I can still laugh at has nothing to do with the material and everything to do with how HE tells the jokes.

The fact is we all age. It is often not that the material needs to be refreshed, but the audience. The Dave Allen joke about thinking at a funeral that you bless yourself by saying "In the name of the father, and the son, and into the hole he goes" foes example.... the pleasure I derive from that joke now is not the joke itself. But finding new people to tell it to. It KILLS as a joke over here in Germany, they love it.

It is a GREAT joke. But I personally do not find it funny any more because I have known it for over 20 years. Any joke is really only as good as the person who hears it.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

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.

From reading your posts you are giving the impression, whether you intended to or not, that you believe taking something seriously.... and making jokes about something..... are somehow mutually exclusive.

I do not think they are. Not even a tiny bit. One does not at all take from, or impinge on, the other. I think Rushdie takes his life under CONSTANT and ONGOING threats of violence and death very seriously. I think however he ALSO has the faculty of humour and can apply it to that scenario.

In fact not only are they not mutually exclusive, I would suspect they are mutually beneficial. Living under that constant threat, I suspect the ability to joke about it is quite cathartic and very beneficial to his mental well being.

Further joking about it shows the world that we will not be cowed by threats and terrorists. That while we take them seriously and take steps to thwart them and defeat them......... they will never take away our freedom, our spirit, and our humour and good will. That humour is not showing that he does not take it seriously. It is showing he DOES take it seriously and he is giving the two fingers rightly to the people involved.

Danzy · 13-06-2019 10:22am

Diceicle wrote: »

Ok. However, in a 2016 survey of UK Muslims some 52% would make being gay illegal - not gay acts - just being gay. And that's Muslims in the westernised UK who want that.
Tbf, just under 25% wanted the Sharia implemented - that is still about 5 times too high imo.

25% wanting a legal/societal system that can only be described as ultra fascist.

If it was at 1% they would have a problem.

jackboy · 13-06-2019 11:15am

MrFresh wrote: »

Yes, that's why it's called extremism.

The scale of Islamic extremism massively dwarfs Christian extremism in the modern world.

Hector Savage · 13-06-2019 11:41am

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.

Mentall illness op, simple as that, pure mental illness.

Hector Savage · 13-06-2019 11:56am

DrPhilG wrote: »

But I've read recently (I'll try to find the link) that Christianity is now the most persecuted faith in the world. In terms of actual violence and death that is. Places like North Korea, India, Pakistan are deadly places for a Christian.

But I haven't seen any support from LGBT groups for persecuted Christians.

Of course not, it's not reported on , does not fit the agenda of MSM

Hector Savage · 13-06-2019 12:07pm

Jimmy McGill wrote: »

Check out the Apostate Prophet on YouTube. He's an ex muslim from Turkish/German background (but now living in the States) with first hand experience of their brainwashing. His videos will change how you view islam.

No No No, privileged middle class white kids from Ireland know better than him now come on !!!!

Gimme A Pound · 13-06-2019 12:23pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

Mentall illness op, simple as that, pure mental illness.

Come on, Hector - only a psychiatrist can diagnose mental illness. It's just cognitive dissonance/doublethink. Something all entrenched in a political ideology resort to. They are on the left, therefore they'll support any left-wing cause, no matter how absurd in comparison to their other views.

Like those on the right who hate women suddenly "care" about how women are affected by islam.

Now I'm sure some of the above folk have a mental illness, but it's not a pre-requisite for engaging in cognitive dissonance/doublethink/an inability to think for themselves.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-06-2019 1:00pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

Mentall illness op, simple as that, pure mental illness.

Perhaps I've misunderstood your post, but if you're describing either hoosexuality or Islam as a mental illness, this may be your last AH post for a while.

Hector Savage · 13-06-2019 1:10pm

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

Perhaps I've misunderstood your post, but if you're describing either hoosexuality or Islam as a mental illness, this may be your last AH post for a while.

Wow !
Classy as ever! trying to get me banned by misrepresenting my post!

What I meant was - to clarify - the doublethink here is the mental illness.
Not being gay or being a Muslim.

Danzy · 13-06-2019 1:17pm

jackboy wrote: »

The scale of Islamic extremism massively dwarfs Christian extremism in the modern world.

The scale of Islamic extremism dwarfs all other religious and political extremism combined.

nozzferrahhtoo · 13-06-2019 1:19pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

Wow ! Classy as ever! trying to get me banned by misrepresenting my post!

Oh please, when the user starts a post by acknowledging they may have misunderstood you then an accusation they are doing so deliberately is a pretty desperate one to make. I had to endure the same crap from a small gang of users recently when I openly said "I do not know who you are talking about but it Sounds like X" only to be accused in a string of posts of putting words and claims int he other persons mouth.

Hector Savage wrote: »

What I meant was - to clarify - the doublethink here is the mental illness. Not being gay or being a Muslim.

Double think, or the ability to hold two conflicting ideas in the mind at once, is a very normal human trait that we all likely have in different ways at different time and not at all mental illness or symptomatic of mental illness though. Your armchair psychology is lay at best, and I am being kind with that appraisal as I suspect at the back of my mind it is born more from malice rather than ignorance myself.

4068ac1elhodqr · 13-06-2019 1:27pm

This placard from the recent Birmingham school protest sums up the confused situation perfectly with more added confusion:

Harvey Weinstein · 13-06-2019 1:43pm

Diceicle wrote: »

Ok. However, in a 2016 survey of UK Muslims some 52% would make being gay illegal - not gay acts - just being gay. And that's Muslims in the westernised UK who want that.
Tbf, just under 25% wanted the Sharia implemented - that is still about 5 times too high imo.

Or conversely try and find a survey of Muslims from any country or any part of the world which shows a majority holding favourable attitudes towards Gay people....you'll be looking a long time..

Harvey Weinstein · 13-06-2019 1:45pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWT9zhKcuJo

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2019 1:47pm

Andy Flaky Snowstorm wrote: »

This placard from the recent Birmingham school protest sums up the confused situation perfectly with more added confusion:

To be fair though, they’re two completely different issues from two completely different perspectives. On the one hand the group referred to in the opening post are a small group of political activists who include Muslims in their advocacy. The group referred to in your picture above are a group of Muslim parents who do not wish for their children to be exposed to cultural values which are at odds with their own values. There’s nothing which suggests they have to reciprocate the idiocy of a small group of individuals who have chosen to advocate on behalf of a culture they clearly don’t understand.

Harvey Weinstein · 13-06-2019 1:50pm

Orlando Florida Imam on Gays

"Death is the sentence, we know. There's nothing to be embarrassed out this..death is the sentence"

"This is the compassionate thing to do"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBlwxqqAprQ

13-06-2019 1:51pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

The group referred to in your picture above are a group of Muslim parents who do not wish for their children to be exposed to cultural values which are at odds with their own values.

They might need better placards so as the placard does not at all suggest that they have a concern with the conflict of values. The placard seems to suggest that their children will find the other values confusing. Which I think is quite insulting to their own children as children tend to understand differing value structures and differing social structures quite well - whether they are at odds with their own or not.

It is actually an accusation I got long before I became a father too - and one I still get formed more as a question now - that my children should be terribly confused by being born into an unusual family structure. If anything they understand it perfectly well and it's a minority of grown ups who are confused.

Der Stier · 13-06-2019 1:51pm

as Sam Harris was saying, Europe is Sleepwalking into Armageddon ...

https://twitter.com/BasedPoland/status/1138953502619820032

Der Stier · 13-06-2019 2:00pm

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWT9zhKcuJo

This is what the modern left support.
It is no wonder so many people are turning conservative, it's sh*t like this that made Trump win.

MrFresh · 13-06-2019 2:05pm

Der Stier wrote: »

This is what the modern left support.
.

No it isn't. Show me one person on the left that supports such a stance on homosexuals.

Der Stier · 13-06-2019 2:08pm

MrFresh wrote: »

No it isn't. Show me one person on the left that supports such a stance on homosexuals.

Well in that very video the guys at around 4mins interrupting the interview trying to get him to stop talking to them !

They describe themselves as left and they are standing with him

ancapailldorcha · 13-06-2019 2:09pm

MrFresh wrote: »

No it isn't. Show me one person on the left that supports such a stance on homosexuals.

Their points are based on cherrypicking. Asking for more isn't logical.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-06-2019 2:12pm

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

Orlando Florida Imam on Gays

"Death is the sentence, we know. There's nothing to be embarrassed out this..death is the sentence"

"This is the compassionate thing to do"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qBlwxqqAprQ

So what? He's preaching shìte, there are christians preaching the same shìte.

Should we tar all with the same brush?

MrFresh · 13-06-2019 2:13pm

Der Stier wrote: »

Well in that very video the guys at around 4mins interrupting the interview trying to get him to stop talking to them !

They describe themselves as left and they are standing with him

Are they supporting his stance on homosexuals? Looks like they are targeting the reporter and Rebel Media. Come on, you said the left support him. Show me a single quote from someone on the left that advocated the execution of homosexuals. Should be easy to find as there are a great many people on the left and you said it's what the left support.

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2019 2:15pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

They might need better placards so as the placard does not at all suggest that they have a concern with the conflict of values. The placard seems to suggest that their children will find the other values confusing. Which I think is quite insulting to their own children as children tend to understand differing value structures and differing social structures quite well - whether they are at odds with their own or not.

It is actually an accusation I got long before I became a father too - and one I still get formed more as a question now - that my children should be terribly confused by being born into an unusual family structure. If anything they understand it perfectly well and it's a minority of grown ups who are confused.

In the context of that particular conflict of values, the poster makes perfect sense.

I don’t think conflicting values among adults are by any means unique in your particular situation either tbh, it’s an accusation that was levelled at me long before I became a father either, but for different reasons obviously

It’s something which I think everyone experiences in their lives - people pushing their own values as though they know better than someone else how that person should parent their own children. I’ve always been of the opinion that parents know their own children better than strangers, because it’s their parents who raise them and will have a relationship with their children long after strangers trying to push their own values on those parents and their children have moved on with their own lives.

We may disagree on a lot, but I would never shy away from giving credit where it’s due and from the way you’ve talked about your relationship with your children, for what it’s worth I think you’re a great father tbh.

13-06-2019 2:25pm

One eyed Jack wrote: »

In the context of that particular conflict of values, the poster makes perfect sense.

Then there is some context I have not seen yet and you have not shown yet because the contents of the placard do not seem to match your description of it yet.

And this is from someone who argued in the past that slogans and so forth do not have to be _exactly_ representative and explain every nuance of the persons position. So I am not someone who is demanding complete clarity of a placard here.

But if their issue is they do not want differing values conflicting with the values their children are being instilled with - then I am not sure how a placard suggesting confusion in the child is representing that. It is two very different things. Perhaps confusion is a word I am using differently to them. Perhaps by confusion they mean more what I would call "internal conflict" or the child finding their way.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

I don’t think conflicting values among adults are by any means unique in your particular situation either tbh

Which likely goes a long way to explaining why I never once claimed or even implied it was unique to my situation. I just think it worthy of note that confused people tend to project onto children their own confusion - which is probably them assuming I guess that if they are confused then surely children will be too - if not more so.

The opposite in my experience is the reality though. Children are much more understanding and much less prone to confusion than many give them credit for. In fact I find them prone to insights that I myself never find in myself or other adults.

One eyed Jack wrote: »

We may disagree on a lot, but I would never shy away from giving credit where it’s due and from the way you’ve talked about your relationship with your children, for what it’s worth I think you’re a great father tbh.

It is the nature of forums such as this that disagreements by far stimulate more discussion than agreement. There are users including myself I see you disagree with often. Where you and they and I agree we seem to tend simply not to reply to each others posts. So I guess that skews interpersonal relationships a lot. As for being a father I have numerous failings but overall - I would say so far so good. No regrets anyway. Just areas still to improve.

Der Stier · 13-06-2019 2:27pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So what? He's preaching shìte, there are christians preaching the same shìte.

Should we tar all with the same brush?

Unfortunately research shows a lot more Muslims share this opinion than Christians.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-06-2019 2:37pm

Der Stier wrote: »

Unfortunately research shows a lot more Muslims share this opinion than Christians.

He does not represent Muslims in the same way westboro baptist church do not represent Christians.

Der Stier · 13-06-2019 2:37pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

He does not represent Muslims in the same way westboro baptist church do not represent Christians.

I do hope you are correct - really

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-06-2019 2:40pm

Hector Savage wrote: »

Wow !
Classy as ever! trying to get me banned by misrepresenting my post!

What I meant was - to clarify - the doublethink here is the mental illness.
Not being gay or being a Muslim.

Ah ok - in that case I have misunderstood (chill!)

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-06-2019 2:42pm

Der Stier wrote: »

I do hope you are correct - really

When was the last time a muslim insulted you? When was the last time a muslim attacked you? When was the last time you heard a muslim scream "FÙCKING FÀGGOTS" in a gay persons face?

I've never seen a muslim do any of that, i have seen a christian people do it all 3 in the last 6 months.

Harvey Weinstein · 13-06-2019 2:48pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

So what? He's preaching shìte, there are christians preaching the same shìte.

Should we tar all with the same brush?

Can you post some surveys from Muslims or Muslim countries which show a majority favourable opinion of Homosexuals?

How many Muslim countries recognise same sex marriage? In how many Muslim countries is it even legal to be Gay?

Hector Savage · 13-06-2019 2:49pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

When was the last time a muslim insulted you? When was the last time a muslim attacked you? When was the last time you heard a muslim scream "FÙCKING FÀGGOTS" in a gay persons face?

I've never seen a muslim do any of that, i have seen a christian people do it all 3 in the last 6 months.

You make a very good point actually.

Timberrrrrrrr · 13-06-2019 2:56pm

Harvey Weinstein wrote: »

Can you post some surveys from Muslims or Muslim countries which show a majority favourable opinion of Homosexuals?

How many Muslim countries recognise same sex marriage? In how many Muslim countries is it even legal to be Gay?

I don't live in a muslim country i live in a christian country. Why don't you post up those surveys? I have never claimed any of the above.

If an imam says xxxx about gays he does not represent all muslims.

If an christian preacher says xxxx about gays he does not represent all christians.

Is that so hard to understand?

One eyed Jack · 13-06-2019 2:58pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Then there is some context I have not seen yet and you have not shown yet because the contents of the placard do not seem to match your description of it yet.

And this is from someone who argued in the past that slogans and so forth do not have to be _exactly_ representative and explain every nuance of the persons position. So I am not someone who is demanding complete clarity of a placard here.

But if their issue is they do not want differing values conflicting with the values their children are being instilled with - then I am not sure how a placard suggesting confusion in the child is representing that. It is two very different things. Perhaps confusion is a word I am using differently to them. Perhaps by confusion they mean more what I would call "internal conflict" or the child finding their way.

I think they’re just referring to the fact that they don’t want their children taught values by the school which are in conflict with their own values. The conflict has been going on for a while now -

Birmingham school stops LGBT lessons after parents protest

There was a recent similar conflict (but in the opposite direction) here in this country -

Educate Together taking direct action in sex education primary school row as parents stage protest

Which likely goes a long way to explaining why I never once claimed or even implied it was unique to my situation. I just think it worthy of note that confused people tend to project onto children their own confusion - which is probably them assuming I guess that if they are confused then surely children will be too - if not more so.

The opposite in my experience is the reality though. Children are much more understanding and much less prone to confusion than many give them credit for. In fact I find them prone to insights that I myself never find in myself or other adults.

My point is that parents will decide what is best for their own children in their particular circumstances, as opposed to what someone else thinks is better for their children or someone else’s experience with other children who are not the children of the parents whom other people who are trying to impose their ideas upon. Other people may see the parents as confused, parents may see other people as confused, but ultimately it is the parents who maintain the right to choose how their own children should be raised and what values they should or should not be exposed to, as opposed to other people wishing to expose children to ideas their parents do not want their children exposed to.

13-06-2019 2:59pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

When was the last time a muslim insulted you? When was the last time a muslim attacked you? When was the last time you heard a muslim scream "FÙCKING FÀGGOTS" in a gay persons face?

I've never seen a muslim do any of that, i have seen a christian people do it all 3 in the last 6 months.

Hehe actually just for the interest of fairness I have have not just seen - but been the direct or near direct recipient of - all three in the last 18 months by people I am led to believe are entirely atheist

We are not immune to assholery it seems in our group either.

And at some point I can not now date in the last decade I was drawn into a physical altercation with a Wiccan who I drunkenly remember threw fecal matter - not human - at me.

This would be why statistics rather than anecdotes are more useful. Especially if the source group sizes for relative anecdotes are skewed by many multiples of %s. If we live in a country that is over 90% Christian and under 5% Muslim for example - and under 10% atheist then an anecdote pissing contest is going to be unfair to _at least_ one party.

I mean who even _meets_ a wiccan these days????

LGBT and Islam

Comments