quote: Why are you more bothered by treating Muslims as a group than you are by the fact that the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims?
I assure you that if there were Muslims on this board advocating terrorism, I'd be eager to debate this with them. Heck, in general, I find myself eager to debate any suggested application of violence when it's suggested on this board, by Muslims or others.
But I think, too, that it's rather disingenuous of you to go with the whole "kill for the love of Allah" thing, since you've previously stated that the only reason you don't think Jews are entitled to "kill for the love of God" is that the temple hasn't been rebuilt yet. That many Muslims think they have the divine authority that you believe Orthodox Jews currently lack is unfortunate, I agree.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Why are you more bothered by treating Muslims as a group than you are by the fact that the vast majority of terrorists are Muslims?
Edit to remove faulty analysis.
The fact there is much criticism that can be levied at Muslims for either supporting or not condemning terror does not mean that criticism against those who do wrong to Muslims isn't allowed.
Not one person has defended the violent actions in response to the cartoons. If there's been more discussion about the propriety of the cartoons, it's only because people disagree about the propriety of the cartoons. No one disagrees about the burning of the embassies or the death threats.
quote:Muslim countries run cartoons that make Der Sturmer look tame by comparison. They run documentaries supporting the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and blood libels about Jews killing children for their blood. They are the last people in the world who have a right to complain about cartoons that offend them.
"They"?
Why do I get the feeling that such a "they" targeted at some other groups would get a less than pleasant reaction?
posted
Dagonee: she said vast majority of terrorists are muslims, not the inverse (edit: I realized you might know this and have been making a point about faulty statistical inferences, such as is commonly done with certain chromosomal combinations and skin colors).
Which is also highly definitional and I would suspect false. The headliner terrorists who operate against the two countries she has an interest in are Muslim, but there are substantial Catholic (luckily they've died down of recent years), Maoist, and nationalist (of various stripes) terrorist movements. In fact, by far most terrorism is nationally or ethnically motivated rather than religiously motivated, though sometimes with a religious component. There isn't so much a meaningful correlation between terrorists and muslims as there is between terrorists and marginalized peoples with guns, and marginalized peoples with guns and muslims.
Interestingly, even the worst, evillest terrorists out there typically spring from cultures with what could well be called legitimate grievances against governments. In fact, those governments in many cases killed far more than the terrorist movements before the organized terror movements against them even existed. Israel is a notable exception to this, however, the government itself, while arguably often in the wrong, is not and has not been out to exterminate anyone.
quote: What do they have to do in order to convince you that the Islamic cult of death isn't some sort of minor bubble in the Islamic world, but is a major wing of Islam itself?
I wonder then what your solution is.
It seems by characterising the "Islamic cult of death" in the way you do, the only real/final solution is a war against Islam.
Which would be, if it ever eventuated (and I hope to everything that it doesn't) WWIII.
And would in no way solve or help anything or anyone.
Posts: 4393 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know, imogen...WWII certainly helped a lot of people and solved a lot of problems.
Note: I'm not suggesting that WWIII is something to be looked forward to or worked towards. I'm talking here strictly about the implied idea in your post, "Wars don't solve anything."
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Since I doubt many will, I'll back Lisa up publically. I don't feel it's racism to assert there is a major fundamentalist faction within Islam that breeds hate and exercises violence against Western civilization. The Shiites are largely responsible for this -- Sunnis are far more moderate, and have FAR greater numbers -- but I've seen very little evidence that other Muslims oppose terrorism and murder in the name of their collective god.
If it's a better analogy, replace the word Muslim with the word Catholic. How insanely quickly would a rogue element within Catholicism declaring holy war and exercising violent means to that end be excommunicated and disavowed by the Vatican? To say nothing of what actions they would take (and encourage to be taken) to speak against this group? Is it any less fair to expect the same of Islam?
Granted, it's not exactly an equal comparison -- Islam lacks the central organization of Catholicism, and maybe it's not fair to expect the same cohesive decisiveness. Nor is this analogy exactly unhypocritical -- how many so-called American Christians don't speak out against the likes of Pat Robertson, even when he condemns entire towns to hell for the crime of scientific literacy? But abortion clinics and homosexuals aside, Christians perform relatively far fewer acts of terrorism, and even poverty and ignorance are no excuse for Muslim violence.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: But I think, too, that it's rather disingenuous of you to go with the whole "kill for the love of Allah" thing, since you've previously stated that the only reason you don't think Jews are entitled to "kill for the love of God" is that the temple hasn't been rebuilt yet. That many Muslims think they have the divine authority that you believe Orthodox Jews currently lack is unfortunate, I agree.
That's crap. We don't see killing as something to look forward to. Any executions that would happen under Jewish law would be no different than executions under American law, other than the fact that they'd be even less common.
It takes a particular poisonous outlook to compare that to the mass murder and targeting of innocents that are almost all carried out by Muslims, doing so as Muslims.
For the record, and as a matter of full disclosure, if Muslims want to butcher one another because of their religion, that's just fine and dandy with me. It's when their blood-lust is directed at everyone else that we have a serious problem.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Sunnis are far more moderate, and have FAR greater numbers
Al-queda is Sunni.
Al-Queda is only one group, and doesn't betray the truth that Shiites tend to be far more radical than their Sunni counterparts. I don't doubt there are fundamentalist Sunnis, too, but nowhere near the per capita rate of the Shiite population.
That said, I'm not saying Shiite=bad, Sunni=good. Only that the Sunni population by far outnumbers the Iran/Iraq-central population of Shiites, and by and large is nowhere near as fundamentalist and violent. It would be a terrible mistake to assume Shiites are representative of the global Muslim community.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: What do they have to do in order to convince you that the Islamic cult of death isn't some sort of minor bubble in the Islamic world, but is a major wing of Islam itself?
I wonder then what your solution is.
It seems by characterising the "Islamic cult of death" in the way you do, the only real/final solution is a war against Islam.
What do they have to do in order to convince you that such a war already exists? The death-cult Muslims believe themselves to be at war with us. When one side declares war and acts as though it's at war and the other side tries to pretend that the war isn't happening, it can pride itself in being peaceful and tolerant while it buries its own people. I don't think that's a good idea.
But frankly, I think the solution is to tell Muslims -- all Muslims -- that they'd better get off their asses and do something about their death-cultists if they don't want to be held responsible for their atrocities. Whether that consists of a major, world-wide conference of Muslims that declares the death-cult mentality to be irrevocably and totally out of bounds for Muslims, or whether it consists of Western Muslims cutting all funds to Muslim states and Muslim groups who support such atrocities, or whether it is (more properly) both, they need to do so.
And people need to stop criticizing the cartoonists. Now. It's a thinly veiled attempt to avoid utter condemnation of the animalistic violence coming from the death-cultists. People do offensive cartoons about Judaism, Christianity, Democrats, Republicans, etc, and it's only the Muslims who call for blowing up a country as a response. That, in and of itself, is a good sign that the cartoons were right on target.
quote:Originally posted by imogen: Which would be, if it ever eventuated (and I hope to everything that it doesn't) WWIII.
And would in no way solve or help anything or anyone.
Right. Whatever. Let's not fight killers, because someone could get killed.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sorry starLisa, I'm not going to stop criticizing the cartoonists. Your saying that doing so is an attempt to avoid utter condemnation of the animalistic (which is silly, really, animals don't fight over religion) doens't make it so.
Furthermore up until the death of the filmmaker, the Dutch had very, very little experience with your so-called "death-cult Muslims". The cartoon wasn't thumbing its nose at that, the cartoon was an expression of Dutch will along the lines of, "Screw those filthy Muslims."
As evidenced by things like banning the burka even in voluntary cases out in public, for "safety" reasons.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think Lisa's point was that it's ridiculous to complain about a speck of dust on the bookshelf while a gorilla rampages in the living room.
The cartoonists are morons, offensive and racist. Nobody's denying that, nobody's defending them. But if you're going to criticize them, for god's sake, turn your attention to the fundamentalists burning embassies and threatening murder. This is inexcusable -- even by whining that someone drew a picture the militants don't like.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:The cartoonists are morons, offensive and racist. Nobody's denying that, nobody's defending them. But if you're going to criticize them, for god's sake, turn your attention to the fundamentalists burning embassies and threatening murder.
Actually, a number of people on this thread have defended the cartoonists. And no one on this thread has defended the murderers.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The cartoonists are morons, offensive and racist. Nobody's denying that, nobody's defending them. But if you're going to criticize them, for god's sake, turn your attention to the fundamentalists burning embassies and threatening murder.
Actually, a number of people on this thread have defended the cartoonists. And no one on this thread has defended the murderers.
Where? Looking back, I see people defending the right of the cartoonists to say what they want -- what's the nearest to your analysis, Twinky saying at least one is funny, though "a couple of them are in incredibly poor taste"?
To quote the cliche, I don't like what they say, but I'd die for their right to say it. I think that's the principle people here are arguing for, that religious fanaticism has no right to shut down free speech -- especially violently.
And no, nobody's defending the murderers -- but there's a sad lack of attention paid them relative to the amount spent criticizing the cartoonists. These are not equal crimes, and shouldn't be treated as such. Your focus, in particular, on the criticism of the global Muslim community for their failure to decry such fanaticism as "racist," is startling -- who do you think is at fault here, the cartoonists or the fundamentalists? I can insult the Bahai faith all I want, and you're still not going to have the right to murder me or set my home on fire.
I realize there's a considerable amount of antagonism toward starLisa on this board (though why, I don't particularly understand) but, lord, disagreeing with her shouldn't be a reflex. The considerable fundamentalist faction of Islam is committing the atrocities here in response to minimal insult. They are at fault -- and as such, deserve both your attention and your criticism long before you turn to the diabolical minds behind a cartoon.
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:And people need to stop criticizing the cartoonists. Now. It's a thinly veiled attempt to avoid utter condemnation of the animalistic violence coming from the death-cultists. People do offensive cartoons about Judaism, Christianity, Democrats, Republicans, etc, and it's only the Muslims who call for blowing up a country as a response.
And I condemn such offenseive cartoons fairly often. Nor would I lose my right to condemn them if someone else who happens to belong to some group I do reacted badly and made death threats.
This is an important concept: The reaction to a particular act does not make the original act any more or less offensive.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I think Lisa's point was that it's ridiculous to complain about a speck of dust on the bookshelf while a gorilla rampages in the living room.
quote:And no, nobody's defending the murderers -- but there's a sad lack of attention paid them relative to the amount spent criticizing the cartoonists. These are not equal crimes, and shouldn't be treated as such.
Both of these statements are based on the same mistaken assumption: that the amount of time someone spends discussing something on Hatrack is related to how great a wrong it is.
That's just not true. First, no one has defended the violent actions. If we all join hands and chant together, "2-4-6-8 Islamic violence we all hate!" can we then get back to discussing the issue that people actually have different opinions on: the cartoons.
quote:They are at fault -- and as such, deserve both your attention and your criticism long before you turn to the diabolical minds behind a cartoon.
Yes, they are at fault. There's a lot of very bad crap that occurs in this world, and that doesn't mean no one can complain about lesser crap.
Otherwise, there could be only (edit: one) complaint in the entire world at the time.
posted
I think that the Muslims simply overreacted. Sure the stereotypes created by this cartoon and other recent events have made Muslims scapegoats but lighting a flag on fire and dancing around it like a bunch of wildmen isn't gonna make those stereotypes disappear. It's like how some ignorant white people stereotype us blacks. Sure to some degree they may have some basis but unless the group, whatever it is, can succesfully unite against what is going on there is little that can be done. I've seen stuff like this happen all the time. I live by DC and whenever some 4 year old gets shot everyone holds a candle vigil pledging to end all violence. Of course, the next day some other dude gets shot. My feeling toward this issue is that starLisa is right. Unless Muslims can PROVE that they aren't gonna light a flag on fire next time some chump talks trash about them, they will still be the target of racism and stereotypes.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Allow me to reiterate: violence agaisnts persons or property in response to what someone else says is completely unacceptable, and I consider it so wrong and immoral that I take that as a given. I do not spend my time saying, "Embezzling is wrong," or, "Rape is wrong," because it's obvious.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Otherwise, there could be only complaint in the entire world at the time.
Um, I think you missed out a 'one' in that sentence. Because, of course, there is only complaint in the entire world. And in starLisa's case, only one complaint, at that.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is that clear enough? I hope specifics and repetition sufficiently articulate my position.
-----
quote:My feeling toward this issue is that starLisa is right. Unless Muslims can PROVE that they aren't gonna light a flag on fire next time some chump talks trash about them, they will still be the target of racism and stereotypes.
This line of thought opens some very unsavory possibilities. I'm surprised an African-American would think this way-because a cursory look at American crime statistics would by your train of thought lead someone to say, "Until blacks can PROVE they're not going to rob from and kill each other, they're going to be the targets of racism and stereotype."
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: Is that clear enough? I hope specifics and repetition sufficiently articulate my position.
-----
quote:My feeling toward this issue is that starLisa is right. Unless Muslims can PROVE that they aren't gonna light a flag on fire next time some chump talks trash about them, they will still be the target of racism and stereotypes.
This line of thought opens some very unsavory possibilities. I'm surprised an African-American would think this way-because a cursory look at American crime statistics would by your train of thought lead someone to say, "Until blacks can PROVE they're not going to rob from and kill each other, they're going to be the targets of racism and stereotype."
Blacks proved their stereotype wrong long ago w. the Million Man March.
Posts: 1158 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
You are welcome. I shall let my quote stand as a monument to your mistake, to comfort me when I grow old and can no longer breathe flames at the drop of a post.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Blacks proved their stereotype wrong long ago w. the Million Man March.
Ummm...I fail to see how that follows. Muslims in America march without violence frequently. Such as, y'know, Louis Farrakhan-that Muslim dude who convened the Million Man March.
Furthermore given Farrakhan's racist, sexist, and anti-Semitic beliefs...I wonder what, exactly, the Million Man March proved? It did some undeniable good, of course...but African-Americans still rob from and do violence to each other in unfavorably large statistical amounts.
Your point that the Million Man March "proved stereotypes wrong" is invalid.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
...yeah. Soap, I'm gonna doubt you're not a troll. For numerous reasons, but the one that clinched it is this last statement. No black man I know would pretend stereotypes about them ever wavered, much less were proven wrong.
How many fake black posters does this make on Hatrack, now? Three?
Posts: 3293 | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Lalo: I realize there's a considerable amount of antagonism toward starLisa on this board (though why, I don't particularly understand) but, lord, disagreeing with her shouldn't be a reflex.
"Well, if I'm the one to do it They'll run their quill pens through it I'm obnoxious and disliked, you know that, sir." --1776
But this is one topic where it doesn't matter how I phrase things. I'm still going to get called a racist for stupid reasons. So will anyone who dares point out that there is no dealing with Islam as though it's some sort of civilized culture. It's not a racial thing, since many people raised Muslim have left it, and many others have joined it. It's a matter of choice.
The reason racism is evil isn't because it looks at a group, rather than at individuals. It's evil because it condemns individuals for something they cannot change. Something that is not a matter of choice. That doesn't apply here.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: If we all join hands and chant together, "2-4-6-8 Islamic violence we all hate!" can we then get back to discussing the issue that people actually have different opinions on: the cartoons.
See, now you're going to get slammed for using the term "Islamic violence".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:The reason racism is evil isn't because it looks at a group, rather than at individuals. It's evil because it condemns individuals for something they cannot change. Something that is not a matter of choice. That doesn't apply here.
So it's ok for me to condemn you for being Orthodox, then? After all, you could certainly change your beliefs, and indeed you would if you actually looked at the evidence.
Posts: 10645 | Registered: Jul 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:. So will anyone who dares point out that there is no dealing with Islam as though it's some sort of civilized culture.
Actually, I think you're right. I don't think Islam is a single coherent culture at all, so dealing with all Islamic cultures as if they were a single culture -- civilized or not -- is doomed to failure.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:The reason racism is evil isn't because it looks at a group, rather than at individuals. It's evil because it condemns individuals for something they cannot change. Something that is not a matter of choice. That doesn't apply here.
So it's ok for me to condemn you for being Orthodox, then? After all, you could certainly change your beliefs, and indeed you would if you actually looked at the evidence.
Well, that last bit is insipid. You don't know enough about it to make such a claim. But ignoring that, then sure. If Orthodox Jews supported acts of mass murder by other Orthodox Jews against all and sundry, and I continued to identify as one? By all means, you'd be right to condemn me.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:If Orthodox Jews supported acts of mass murder by other Orthodox Jews against all and sundry, and I continued to identify as one?
How many Orthodox Jews would have to support mass murder -- against, say, people who are descended matrilinearly from Jews but do not consider themselves to be Jewish -- before you'd say that "Orthodox Jews" support acts of mass murder?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I said "If Orthodox Jews supported acts of mass murder by other Orthodox Jews". That means that other Orthodox Jews are carrying out acts of mass murder (like the Muslim death-cultists), and Orthodox Jews were supporting it.
Let's even take it out of murder. Jack Abramoff. The man is an Orthodox Jew. He's also a crook, apparently.
Now, if almost every time you heard about a political scandal that involved fraud and abuse of funds, it turned out to be an Orthodox Jew doing it, and if most Orthodox Jewish communities didn't really have much to say about it, I'd say you'd be absolutely correct to slam Orthodox Jews, as a group, for that kind of behavior.
But instead, when someone like Ami Popper flips out and shoots 7 unarmed, non-combatant Arab construction workers dead, you hear universal condemnation from Jews the world over, and Popper gets slammed in jail for the rest of his misbegotten life. That's how we deal with such people. But Muslim suicide bombers? They get parades. They get schools and streets and towns named after them.
You're arguing out your ass, Tom. It's really offensive that you'd even make the comparison you're trying to make. Do you get that we're talking about communal acceptance of these atrocities?
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Now, if almost every time you heard about a political scandal that involved fraud and abuse of funds, it turned out to be an Orthodox Jew doing it, and if most Orthodox Jewish communities didn't really have much to say about it, I'd say you'd be absolutely correct to slam Orthodox Jews, as a group, for that kind of behavior.
"Almost every time" I see gang violence on the news, it seems as if it's always a young black man who is the suspect. What would you say I should conclude from this?
quote:But instead, when someone like Ami Popper flips out and shoots 7 unarmed, non-combatant Arab construction workers dead, you hear universal condemnation from Jews the world over, and Popper gets slammed in jail for the rest of his misbegotten life. That's how we deal with such people. But Muslim suicide bombers? They get parades. They get schools and streets and towns named after them.
But that's because the suicide bombers are viewed by those celebrating them as brave revolutionaries committing a noble sacrifice, whereas a guy who flips out and shoots people seems to us to be just crazy. But we generally celebrate our own violent (and sometimes immoral) heroes too.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
On the contrary, with the exception of Ami Popper being alive at the end of his murders, he did exactly what the "brave revolutionaries" do: murdered unarmed non-combatants from the other side.
We have no heroes who do things like that. The closest you can get is civilians killed in time of war incidentally in pursuit of some military objective, never targeting civilians for murder specifically.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:"Almost every time" I see gang violence on the news, it seems as if it's always a young black man who is the suspect. What would you say I should conclude from this?
Your comparison is actually inaccurate, since starLisa is talking about who has actually committed the crime and you are talking about who is suspected of that crime.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Now, if almost every time you heard about a political scandal that involved fraud and abuse of funds, it turned out to be an Orthodox Jew doing it, and if most Orthodox Jewish communities didn't really have much to say about it, I'd say you'd be absolutely correct to slam Orthodox Jews, as a group, for that kind of behavior.
"Almost every time" I see gang violence on the news, it seems as if it's always a young black man who is the suspect. What would you say I should conclude from this?
I haven't noticed black leaders applauding such crime. Have you? They've made it abundantly clear how much that kind of thing appalls them, and black police officers are, if anything, more likely to come down hard on black perpetrators.
Try again. No one treats hoodlums as heroes.
quote:Originally posted by Tresopax:
quote:But instead, when someone like Ami Popper flips out and shoots 7 unarmed, non-combatant Arab construction workers dead, you hear universal condemnation from Jews the world over, and Popper gets slammed in jail for the rest of his misbegotten life. That's how we deal with such people. But Muslim suicide bombers? They get parades. They get schools and streets and towns named after them.
But that's because the suicide bombers are viewed by those celebrating them as brave revolutionaries committing a noble sacrifice, whereas a guy who flips out and shoots people seems to us to be just crazy. But we generally celebrate our own violent (and sometimes immoral) heroes too.
Anyone who views a guy who straps on an explosive belt and blows up kids riding on a bus is an animal. And anyone who considers such an animal to be a brave revolutionary deserves to be treated as though he carried out the atrocity himself.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Rakeesh: On the contrary, with the exception of Ami Popper being alive at the end of his murders, he did exactly what the "brave revolutionaries" do: murdered unarmed non-combatants from the other side.
Exactly. It was a vile crime, and he's lucky Israel doesn't have the death penalty, or he'd be dead right now. Compare that to the lionizing of suicide bombers as "martyrs".
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And anyone who considers such an animal to be a brave revolutionary deserves to be treated as though he carried out the atrocity himself.
Hm. I see a slippery slope here. Where would that stop? Somewhere before "people who disagree with me are animals," I'm sure, but where?
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:And anyone who considers such an animal to be a brave revolutionary deserves to be treated as though he carried out the atrocity himself.
The dangerous step is when you attempt to generalize that all persons of group X consider such a person to be a brave revolutionary.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There are days when I really dislike being the sole Muslim voice on Hatrack, and this is one of them.
I wish you guys could hear the debate within the Muslim community on this right now. In my community as on this bulletin board, NO-ONE is trying to defend the people who are bombing embassies or writing violent slogans on placards. One thing I feel fairly certain about in my mind is that the Prophet (pbuh) would neither have done nor sanctioned these things. There is a debate about the cartoons: whether they should have been printed or not. My personal view is that yes, we have to expect everything to be the target of satire in the West, and no I haven't seen the cartoons, but from what I have heard the intent of those cartoons went beyond satire to deliberate insult. And for many Muslims, an insult to the Prophet is harder to take than an insult to them personally. I sympathise with that. The Prophet is held up as an example of all that is good about Islam, all that Muslims aspire to be. It's hard to have that trashed. Does that sanction violent protest? Not in a million years. And nothing in my interpretation of Islam comes close to sanctioning that.
A lot of this is symptomatic of wider issues in Islam, about how we interpret the Qur'an and who we blame for the current problems of the Middle East. I think some Muslims have been guilty of blaming others for problems that have really been caused by Muslims themselves. We DO need to take a long hard look at ourselves and ask ourselves if the way we live our lives is really consistent with Allah's call to live ethically and to promote social justice. And we do need help from the West (Muslims and non-Muslims) to facilitate that debate. Sadly, the publication of those cartoons has done nothing to help move that debate on - if anything, it adds to the "victim mentality" that many Muslims have got caught up in.
I always feel horribly wrenched when I see my fellow Muslims behaving like this. I want to disown them and say "I have no part in that." And yet I am also a Muslim, and I remain so partly because I believe that Islam can be a force for good in the world. I guess the only thing I can sensibly do is to live my life as proof of my beliefs, and hope that people who know me get the message.
Posts: 1550 | Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by amira tharani: Sadly, the publication of those cartoons has done nothing to help move that debate on - if anything, it adds to the "victim mentality" that many Muslims have got caught up in.
Maybe bringing things to a head is what is needed.
quote:Originally posted by amira tharani: I always feel horribly wrenched when I see my fellow Muslims behaving like this. I want to disown them and say "I have no part in that."
So why not do that?
quote:Originally posted by amira tharani: And yet I am also a Muslim, and I remain so partly because I believe that Islam can be a force for good in the world.
If what you call Islam is Islam, then you may be right about that. But why not disown them and say that they are not Muslims and that it's not just that you disagree with their interpretation, but that they are completely "other".
It's that kind of condemnation that I think is missing here. Not from you in particular, but from the loud voices. I'd love to hear Muslim leaders get up and say, "Anyone who commits a suicide bombing is not a shahid, but a rather a vile sinner against Allah and the Quran. Anyone who does such a thing or gives aid and support to a person who does, knowing what kind of person they are, is not a Muslim, but rather an enemy of Islam."
That's pretty presumptuous of me, I know. But as I said, that's what's missing.
Posts: 12266 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
amira, thanks for posting. I know it would be a lot easier not to, and I appreciate what you've said.
Posts: 7954 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
(edit: I realized you might know this and have been making a point about faulty statistical inferences, such as is commonly done with certain chromosomal combinations and skin colors).![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
