Why don't we have sikhophobia, hinduphobia or buddhismophobia?

Scroll to see replies

Hey, don't think that just because Merkel wants to save her job (if she had not stemmed the flow of immigrants, her own party would have rebelled against her) that people agree with her.

Her ratings are low. It is a complete farce what that woman has done. And there is a lot of criticism for her giving in to Erdogan.

Another badly translated proverb for you (we have rich vocab of proverbs in my country):
Dog would bark, caravan will pass.....

us, average people, we can bark, shout, scream, riot as much as we want, politics will "pass".
Also, for mere human beings like us, we only need enough money to shut up, close our eyes and be deaf... (still all my opinion, please don't ask for scientific paper quotations)...

and coming back to my original point, turks are one of the less religious muslim community, they drink , they even have their own vodka type :biggrin:

*I'm pretty sure there must positive correlation between drinking alcohol and being accepted*

Reply 81

tenzzzin

Islam is the second largest religion in the world, and considering the stigmatisation of people from the middle east in the past decade or so, Islamaphobia has sprung up. Also, many Sikhs and Hindus have been involved in Islamaphobic incidents, mistaken for Muslims. The main reason for this, I would argue, is terrorism (particularly 9/11).

The icon of terror that Al Qaeda and Bin Laden became spread an image of middle eastern men with beards being terrorists. Obviously not everyone bought into the idea quite so easily, but thanks to the media, middle eastern men with beards and turbans have, to some, almost become synonymous with terrorists. And most of the terrorist groups heard about on the news are Muslim.

So the reason we don't have Sikhophobia or Hinduphobia is because there are less radical connotations with Sikhism and Hinduism (although Hindus have been known to be pretty extreme, just not on our turf) ,
**
[I could get very cynical/conspiracy theorist here and say that there could be an agenda for the sake of oil to stir up extremism and start wars, destabilising the middle east for the sake of profit and using the media as a means of riling up western society against "them", leading to Islamaphobia and justifying the invasion of certain countries, for which there is some grounds in believing but shouldn't be used as a main argument as it relies primarily on speculation and conspiracy]
**
and there is so little media coverage of Sikhism and Hinduism anyway that the Islamaphobia is often directed at them, too (despite them not being Muslims.) As for Buddhism... I don't want to start a new argument but as someone with Buddhist parents, Western society's view of Buddhism has been completely cannibalised by western culture.

To conclude;
1) Islam is a much larger religion
2) Islam has connotations of radicals and terrorism
3) Hinduism and Sikhism are not portrayed as radicals in the media
4) Islamaphobia is not like Arachnaphobia, a naturally occurring phenomena that can be explained through evolution. (although some argue that xenophobia helped our primate ancestors because they needed the drive to fight over food and resources and stick with their tribe)
Islamaphobia is simply a stigmatisation of a religion and/or the culture involved.

I hope you read through my post properly. I look forward to hearing your response. I might change my mind if you are convincing in your argument.

Reply 82

brainhuman

Original post by weamy

conspiracy theory definiton -
a belief that some covert but influential organization is responsible for an unexplained event

So no, not a conspiracy, but just a theory/hypothesis.

"and nothing to do with islam and it being an incredibly violent, medieval cult that was never reformed?"

Umm. Islam is not violent. You seem to be under the common misconception that just because someone says in the name of allah, it means they are muslim.
My analogy for that is that of someone saying "in the name of being sober" followed by them drinking 2 gallons of wine.
ISIS are b**t***s who are saying they are muslim as an attempt to get recruits and due to the location they are based.

I never said that only the west was under attack from terrorist organizations.

P.S. My theory is still possible.

So how come so many people do say in the name of Allah?

You may not consider them Muslims, but they themselves consider themselves Muslims.

And we are only talking terror here, right? How about the millions of Muslims that do not commit acts of terror, but still wouldn't fit into western culture? Why is it a "phobia" to say "I do not want to live in a society with Muslim culture".

Reply 83

Good bloke

Original post by Butternuts96

It's not factual when 1.8 billion people believe differently. That's just your view as a hateful islamophobe which differs from what atheist historians think of Islam.

If you are going to use "Islamophobe" I suggest you tell me what definition you are using. Are you including mere criticism of Islam in it? Or do you accuse me of hating Moslems? If the latter, on what specific basis?

Don't keep throwing out insults and appealing to the beliefs of a load of superstitious and, often, badly-educated people who have been indoctrinated into their beliefs from birth.. Tell me exactly what I said that is hateful, and why.

Original post by Butternuts96

Why do you say "Moslem" rather than "Muslim"?

I've been spelling the word in that perfectly acceptable and valid way for many years now and have no intention of changing. I suggest you check out a reputable dictionary:

http://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/moslem

I also use "gaol", "mediaeval" and "encyclopaedia"; why do you not complain about that?

Original post by Butternuts96

Why do I feel that you're using some kind of derogatory term?

Presumably because you don't understand English well enough.

Reply 84

weamy

Original post by brainhuman

I can't answer that question because I simply do not know the answer.

Well, some people who commit crime don't think they're doing anything wrong. What's your point?

What do you mean by 'wouldn't fit into western culture'? Can you give me some examples?
I suppose it's not a phobia.

BTW, what's wrong with not fitting in?
Let's all hate people who don't follow the majority. Nerdophobia. Hippie-ophobia.

Reply 85

Good bloke

Original post by Leukocyte

Oh again with the unnecessary false claims about Islam.

What, precisely, have I said that is factually incorrect (other than that Mohammed made it all up himself, of course, which is my own, well-founded, opinion)? Do you deny he was a warlord? Did he not lead his people in wars in Arabia? Were they not superstitious? Please tell me which facts are wrong.

Original post by Leukocyte

The companions were Salaf. You could be reasonable too if you are a salaf.

The companions lived in the seventh century and were fighting a war. You live in the twenty-first century and are part of the supposed religion of peace.

Reply 86

Truthteller10

This is because the minority members of Hindu's Sikh's and Buddhists are all peaceful and tolerant in countries were they are in the minority and majority.

Muslims however are generally intolerant in places they are in the majority and the minority, so in an act of deflection, Muslims have decided to coin a phrase that exonerates them from any sort of criticism.

They use two words actually. "Islamophobic" and/or "racist" even though Islam is an idea which can't cause a phobia, and a religion which has many different ethnic members so can't be racist.

Reply 87

Truthteller10

Original post by Butternuts96

It's not factual when 1.8 billion people believe differently. That's just your view as a hateful islamophobe which differs from what atheist historians think of Islam.

You're not much of a "Good bloke" on TSR.
Why do you say "Moslem" rather than "Muslim"? Why do I feel that you're using some kind of derogatory term?

Mate, the whole 1.8 billion garbage you muslims spout trying to tell us that it's only a small minority of muslims who are radical all get incinerated with just a simple search on the Islamic terror section on the pew research website

Reply 88

Hachkay

Because Islamic countries have the most oil, the USA therefore wants to control anything and everything....they do so by war. How do they get away with it? Brainwash the general public to think that Islam is a disastrous religion full of terrorism. Ha.

Reply 89

SeamanDemon

Original post by Hachkay

Are you saying that USA propaganda is making us in Europe afraid of Muslims, and not the continental terrorist attacks by extreme Islamists?
Nah mate

Reply 90

brainhuman

Original post by weamy

I mean they have views that directly oppose those that we have worked towards for a long time. They are more or less stuck in the century that their religion was formed in.

We have moved way beyond the time Christianity was formed. I don't want to go back to that.

And stop being silly. Nerdphobia really?

Reply 91

Hachkay

[QUOTE="Hachkay;64679499"]

Original post by SeamanDemon

Are you saying that USA propaganda is making us in Europe afraid of Muslims, and not the continental terrorist attacks by extreme Islamists?
Nah mate[/QUOTE

Most definitely, do you know the amount of terrorism that occurs in the east who are not Muslim, because most individuals such as yourself are clueless.

Reply 92

TheALevelStudent

Original post by Zargabaath

Couldn't think of the right word to describe them :lol:

Surely Sikhism is Vedic based though? It's just an interpretation on one specific type of Hinduism that in itself follows the Vedas

"I am not Hindu, nor am I Muslim."
Ang 1136, SGGS.

Reply 93

Zargabaath

Original post by TheALevelStudent

"I am not Hindu, nor am I Muslim."
Ang 1136, SGGS.

That doesn't change the roots of the religion, or the influences that would've shaped it.

Reply 94

TheALevelStudent

Original post by Zargabaath

That doesn't change the roots of the religion, or the influences that would've shaped it.

Undeniably there are many similarities between the two religions, however this not because sikhi is a branch of Hinduism.
Say for example we were presented with a maths problem. We are in the same class. You used one method to calculate an answer and I another. For arguments sake we both get the right answer. However we both used different methods. One may presume we copied each other as we have the same answer, but as I mentioned earlier our working was different. Similarly this is the case with sikhi and Hinduism.

The bits that overlap are a common truth. 1 + 1 will always = 2. Just because you write it first doesn't mean I copied you etc, it's just how it is.

Reply 95

fatiana

omg THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR POSTING THIS!

Reply 96

TheBBQ

Original post by Zargabaath

Couldn't think of the right word to describe them :lol:

Surely Sikhism is Vedic based though? It's just an interpretation on one specific type of Hinduism that in itself follows the Vedas

Wrong. Completely different to Hinduism.

That's like saying Islam is an interpretation of Judaism.

Reply 97

username1044970

Original post by Zargabaath

Couldn't think of the right word to describe them :lol:

Surely Sikhism is Vedic based though? It's just an interpretation on one specific type of Hinduism that in itself follows the Vedas

ਬੇਦ ਕਤੇਬ ਇਫਤਰਾ ਭਾਈ ਦਿਲ ਕਾ ਫਿਕਰੁ ਨ ਜਾਇ ॥

The Vedas and the Scriptures are only make-believe, O Siblings of Destiny; they do not relieve the anxiety of the heart. (Guru Granth Sahib, ang/page 727)

The Sikh Gurus used prevailing beliefs, including "dharmic" and "Abrahamic" concepts as literary devices to convey their teachings; they rejected the Vedas, Puranas, and other Hindu literature as well as the Abrahamic texts as scriptures of authority.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 98

Josb

Original post by HucktheForde

Because north korea has nuclear weapons.

If saddam hussein REALLY had nuclear weapons the usa would not invade so daringly.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Even with nuclear weapons North Korea is vulnerable. The USA could destroy all their army and launching sites in a few minutes. The problem is that China wouldn't allow that.