40 new Tory members shared or 'liked' racist Facebook posts
Scroll to see replies
Original post by The RAR
Yes, I mean something like that. Let me rephrase what I said, those quotes show fear towards Islam hence why the term Islamaphobia is justified. I always thought of hatred or fear being the same thing in a lot of situations
The term is wrong and very dishonest.
You are confusing phobia with the normal human "fight or flee" response triggered in a situation where a genuine threat to life or safety is present.
With phobia there is no threat or logical reason, just irrational fear.
Hatred and irrational fear are two very different things.
Frightened people try to escape, run, hide, cry or freeze with panic.
They do not demonstrate anger or hate.
There is a big difference between people who suffer from arachnophobia and me.
I dislike spiders for a reason and will only flee when I encounter one I suspect is dangerous.
Those with an irrational phobia of spiders will either flee on sight of any spider or massively overreact
Nobody fears an ideology- they either agree, disagree or don't care.
Agreeing or disagreeing usually has a rational basis.
Such as "that's nonsense", "how appalling" or "yes that's true".
Hatred of people is very different and rarely rational.
oh well🤷 can't entirely 'make it' in life if your opinions are contrary to societies changing views😁
So the only people who would ever call ancient, objectively barbaric texts evil are militant atheists? The Bible is for example very clear on some of the things it says about gays. Would you not call that evil?
Original post by londonmyst
Are you a militant atheist?
My father is; the moment he spots anything connected to any religion he yells about religion being an evil cult out to scam money and control the gullible.
He wants to ban all religious books & symbols, seize all assets of religious organisations and use religious buildings to house the homeless.
My father is; the moment he spots anything connected to any religion he yells about religion being an evil cult out to scam money and control the gullible.
He wants to ban all religious books & symbols, seize all assets of religious organisations and use religious buildings to house the homeless.
A biased view is not a truthful view. An alien studying these texts talking about killing gays, about killing unbelievers will not think they are 'evil' texts?
Original post by The RAR
Is not the truth in everyone's eyes, but you can say it that way if that is how you like it
Original post by yudothis
A biased view is not a truthful view. An alien studying these texts talking about killing gays, about killing unbelievers will not think they are 'evil' texts?
I don't know what the Quran says exactly but a lot of religious texts are written in context, if we are going to literally believe it word for word then yes it is evil. Hence why I said your truth is not the truth for everyone. Perceptions differ between people, you might think they are being biased but they can say the same about you as they think the Quran is a good book.
(edited 5 years ago)
But it's not a good book. Whatsoever. It was founded upon military conquest. Ideology was necessary to bind humans closer together, and that is what the purpose of Islam was, to bind captured lands together, create unity. It is by a warlord, trying to establish control. Any 'good' interpretation, is just bias.
Original post by The RAR
I don't know what the Quran says exactly but a lot of religious texts are written in context, if we are going to literally believe it word for word then yes it is evil. Hence why I said your truth is not the truth for everyone. Perceptions differ between people, you might think they are being biased but they can say the same about you as they think the Quran is a good book.
Original post by yudothis
So the only people who would ever call ancient, objectively barbaric texts evil are militant atheists? The Bible is for example very clear on some of the things it says about gays. Would you not call that evil?
I have studied theology and history.
I don't dispute the fact that all three ancient abrahamic book of scripture and most other religious texts contains some deeply unpleasant content.
Vile intolerant invective, violent solicitations, vicious separatism and preaching appalling punishments for those who disagree.
I have made detailed posts about the toxic elements present within of fundamentalist religion and ancient books of scripture.
Most people don't use the same rhetoric as militant atheists like Richard Dawkins and anti-theists.
I prefer to label evil people as evil, not books or other written texts.
Books were written by people- they lack the ability to act, don't have free will and possess no ability to choose between right&wrong.
I'm not in the habit of personifying a book by apportioning to them the worst of human human actions and motivations, such as evil.
So Mein Kampf is not evil? Because it's just a book? Why is evil necessarily human? Plenty of stories contain explorations of evil far beyond humans. Such as items or the like.
Original post by londonmyst
I have studied theology and history.
I don't dispute the fact that all three ancient abrahamic book of scripture and most other religious texts contains some deeply unpleasant content.
Vile intolerant invective, violent solicitations, vicious separatism and preaching appalling punishments for those who disagree.
I have made detailed posts about the toxic elements present within of fundamentalist religion and ancient books of scripture.
Most people don't use the same rhetoric as militant atheists like Richard Dawkins and anti-theists.
I prefer to label evil people as evil, not books or other written texts.
Books were written by people- they lack the ability to act, don't have free will and possess no ability to choose between right&wrong.
I'm not in the habit of personifying a book by apportioning to them the worst of human human actions and motivations, such as evil.
I don't dispute the fact that all three ancient abrahamic book of scripture and most other religious texts contains some deeply unpleasant content.
Vile intolerant invective, violent solicitations, vicious separatism and preaching appalling punishments for those who disagree.
I have made detailed posts about the toxic elements present within of fundamentalist religion and ancient books of scripture.
Most people don't use the same rhetoric as militant atheists like Richard Dawkins and anti-theists.
I prefer to label evil people as evil, not books or other written texts.
Books were written by people- they lack the ability to act, don't have free will and possess no ability to choose between right&wrong.
I'm not in the habit of personifying a book by apportioning to them the worst of human human actions and motivations, such as evil.
Original post by The RAR
I don't know what the Quran says exactly but a lot of religious texts are written in context, if we are going to literally believe it word for word then yes it is evil. Hence why I said your truth is not the truth for everyone. Perceptions differ between people, you might think they are being biased but they can say the same about you as they think the Quran is a good book.
Context is always an important factor, in anything.
The fact is that all three ancient abrahamic books of religious scripture contain some content that is positive and some content that is negative.
Some of the content can be helpful advice, other quotes are vile solicitations to violence.
At the end of the day, those books were written by people who lived a very long time ago.
Britain has changed a lot since WW2, the world has changed a lot in the last 2000 years.
Original post by londonmyst
Context is always an important factor, in anything.
The fact is that all three ancient abrahamic books of religious scripture contain some content that is positive and some content that is negative.
Some of the content can be helpful advice, other quotes are vile solicitations to violence.
At the end of the day, those books were written by people who lived a very long time ago.
Britain has changed a lot since WW2, the world has changed a lot in the last 2000 years.
The fact is that all three ancient abrahamic books of religious scripture contain some content that is positive and some content that is negative.
Some of the content can be helpful advice, other quotes are vile solicitations to violence.
At the end of the day, those books were written by people who lived a very long time ago.
Britain has changed a lot since WW2, the world has changed a lot in the last 2000 years.
Exactly! Societies change throughout times, and the books do contain both good and bad stuff hence why it comes down to perceptions.
I have run out of reps to give you
Original post by The RAR
I don't know what the Quran says exactly but a lot of religious texts are written in context, if we are going to literally believe it word for word then yes it is evil. Hence why I said your truth is not the truth for everyone. Perceptions differ between people, you might think they are being biased but they can say the same about you as they think the Quran is a good book.
The problem with Islam and the Quran however, is that it's literally-the-word-of-god-and-if-you-disagree-you-are-a-false-muslim-maybe-even-time-to-kill-you. With other religions like Christianity, the holy text is seen more as metaphor.
Original post by yudothis
So Mein Kampf is not evil? Because it's just a book? Why is evil necessarily human? Plenty of stories contain explorations of evil far beyond humans. Such as items or the like.
No.
Adolf Hitler was evil and proved it- in his deeds, writings and public speeches.
As was Eckart, Streicher, Himmler, Goebbels, Eichmann and all the rest of them.
Nazism, fascism and fundamentalist religion are bad trees- ones that inevitably attract humanity's bad apples and were likely designed to produce bad apples.
History makes this obvious.
Yes, stories can be used to illustrate what evil people can do and the way that they often manipulate people or disguises themselves as good.
Only a human being has the capability, free will and intent to choose evil.
An unopened book with unpleasant words or bizarre ideas will sit on a shelf gathering dust.
It has no power to do anything of its own accord and no magical ability to make use of others to fulfill the words printed within its pages.
Original post by DarthRoar
The problem with Islam and the Quran however, is that it's literally-the-word-of-god-and-if-you-disagree-you-are-a-false-muslim-maybe-even-time-to-kill-you. With other religions like Christianity, the holy text is seen more as metaphor.
That is the fundamentalist approach to religion, applies to the bible and christianity too.
I'm guessing you have yet to meet fundamentalist christians.
The theological terms are scriptural inerrancy and infallibility- holy books contain no errors, are always right and provide all the information necessary for life.
Yet when you ask fundamentalist followers of both Islam and Christianity they both admit that the only thing God ever wrote was the 10 Commandments.
I have asked them.
There are plenty of other approaches to religion, fundamentalist is only one approach.
Liberal, reform, orthodox, conservative/traditionalist, ultra-traditionalist and fundamentalist.
The fundamentalist camps of both religions answers attempting to get around their own facts are strikingly similar.
They both admit that human scribes and religious figures did physically write the books of religious scripture.
But according to fundamentalist christians the bible book of scriptures are all the the word of God, written under the inspiration and guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Fundamentalist islam too; their version is the koran is the word of God, was verbally told to islam's prophet by the archangel Gabriel, then the prophet memorised each verse and taught it to his followers.
Islam's prophet could not read or write, customary traditions of the region's sixth century tribal based societies were mainly verbal or memorized rituals.
Only a small proportion of islam's early membership had been taught to read or write, the few who could write acted as scribes and compiled all the verses into books.
Eventually all the verses and books of scripture were placed into a single volume- after the death of islam's prophet.
Even the fundamentalists of islam acknowledge that the koran as a single written text did not exist during the lifetime of their prophet.
Can we please stop using the term Islamophobia and actually just ask the reasons as to why they dislike Muslims and then attempt to rationalise them for them.
Ffs.
Ffs.
Original post by Qup
Can we please stop using the term Islamophobia and actually just ask the reasons as to why they dislike Muslims and then attempt to rationalise them for them.
Ffs.
Ffs.
Agree with you about the inappropriate phobia term.
Bigots usually make their reasoning very obvious to all- because they are vile bigots, brutal racists or vicious hate criminals.
Nothing to do with an irrational fear, pure hate and criminal thuggery.
That is a naive view in my opinion.
Original post by londonmyst
No.
Adolf Hitler was evil and proved it- in his deeds, writings and public speeches.
As was Eckart, Streicher, Himmler, Goebbels, Eichmann and all the rest of them.
Nazism, fascism and fundamentalist religion are bad trees- ones that inevitably attract humanity's bad apples and were likely designed to produce bad apples.
History makes this obvious.
Yes, stories can be used to illustrate what evil people can do and the way that they often manipulate people or disguises themselves as good.
Only a human being has the capability, free will and intent to choose evil.
An unopened book with unpleasant words or bizarre ideas will sit on a shelf gathering dust.
It has no power to do anything of its own accord and no magical ability to make use of others to fulfill the words printed within its pages.
Adolf Hitler was evil and proved it- in his deeds, writings and public speeches.
As was Eckart, Streicher, Himmler, Goebbels, Eichmann and all the rest of them.
Nazism, fascism and fundamentalist religion are bad trees- ones that inevitably attract humanity's bad apples and were likely designed to produce bad apples.
History makes this obvious.
Yes, stories can be used to illustrate what evil people can do and the way that they often manipulate people or disguises themselves as good.
Only a human being has the capability, free will and intent to choose evil.
An unopened book with unpleasant words or bizarre ideas will sit on a shelf gathering dust.
It has no power to do anything of its own accord and no magical ability to make use of others to fulfill the words printed within its pages.
Original post by yudothis
That is a naive view in my opinion.
I believe in personal responsibility.
Not the fashionable victim centric blame culture where everyone portrays themselves as a victim and desperately seeks to blame someone/anyone/anything else for their own bad choices.
Adults are responsible for their actions- thus they should accept responsibility for their choices and mistakes.
Not seek to evade all responsibility by blaming their poor decision making on: the big bad book, music, computer games, their parents, the government or a particular politician (alive or dead) that they have never met.
I grew up around political revolutionaries, vile conspiracy theorists and religious cranks.
I didn't join them and become one.
It was my choice and I accept all the consequences of the decision I made.
I never blamed anyone else. I just believe that ideas can be evil, and thus a text is evil if the ideas it contains are evil.
You are just attributing humanity to the idea of 'evil'. It has nothing to do with personal responsibility.
You are just attributing humanity to the idea of 'evil'. It has nothing to do with personal responsibility.
Original post by londonmyst
I believe in personal responsibility.
Not the fashionable victim centric blame culture where everyone portrays themselves as a victim and desperately seeks to blame someone/anyone/anything else for their own bad choices.
Adults are responsible for their actions- thus they should accept responsibility for their choices and mistakes.
Not seek to evade all responsibility by blaming their poor decision making on: the big bad book, music, computer games, their parents, the government or a particular politician (alive or dead) that they have never met.
I grew up around political revolutionaries, vile conspiracy theorists and religious cranks.
I didn't join them and become one.
It was my choice and I accept all the consequences of the decision I made.
Not the fashionable victim centric blame culture where everyone portrays themselves as a victim and desperately seeks to blame someone/anyone/anything else for their own bad choices.
Adults are responsible for their actions- thus they should accept responsibility for their choices and mistakes.
Not seek to evade all responsibility by blaming their poor decision making on: the big bad book, music, computer games, their parents, the government or a particular politician (alive or dead) that they have never met.
I grew up around political revolutionaries, vile conspiracy theorists and religious cranks.
I didn't join them and become one.
It was my choice and I accept all the consequences of the decision I made.
just found out that I know one of the tory candidates who was suspended. *****y guy in real life, glad to see him gone. Only thing I would say is that personally I think kicking him out for his mean comments about Islam is wierd when they didn't kick him from standing for his criminal record for growing/dealing cannabis.
Original post by yudothis
I never blamed anyone else. I just believe that ideas can be evil, and thus a text is evil if the ideas it contains are evil.
You are just attributing humanity to the idea of 'evil'. It has nothing to do with personal responsibility.
You are just attributing humanity to the idea of 'evil'. It has nothing to do with personal responsibility.
Not the whole of humanity, a small proportion of humanity- the very bad apples who choose to do evil and sometimes choose to form a sinister group or assist other evil persons.
Most people are decent, want to help others and make the world a better place for everyone.
A book filled with the horrible ideas of an evil person can't take personal responsibility, it is an inanimate object incapable of choosing action or intent.
Responsibility belongs to the human author, their publisher and anyone else who decides to try carry out the evil author's ideas/instructions.
I take a different approach to you, I focus exclusively on the evil humans and the evil deeds they choose to do.
You seem willing to divide your focus between evil humans and their books.
Perhaps you will do the same with unpleasant music or violent video games.
Problem with that approach is- a book can't be put on trial, held accountable by the legal system or punished for its actions.
I believe in criminal sanctions that are adequate to the criminal offense committed by evil people and protect victims along with public safety/national security/public order.
Do the crime, guaranteed the time.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- I've found St Andrews to be a racist university
- Thames Water boss says bills need to rise by 40%
- Have the Tories stopped being Conservative?
- Extremist social media apps should be banned in schools, colleges and universities.
- BBC: Tory donor accused of racist remarks about Diane Abbott
- 2024 Budget: Chancellor Jeremy Hunt under pressure to cut taxes
- UK politics AUA (Ask Us Anything) – no question too simple!
- The Feel Good News Thread!
- 2023–24 by-elections thread
- Official Canterbury Christ Church University 2023 Applicant Thread
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- Feeling lonely on placement
- Official: University of Aberdeen A100 2024 Offer Holders
- Lee Anderson: MP suspended from Tory party over 'Islamists' comments
- Official University of Southampton freshers 2023 chat
- current/past students at hull-york medical school
- MSc Psychology Cardiff University 2024 / re locating
- Can I join societies in second year ?
- Uni
- Reshuffle: David Cameron is back and Braverman sacked
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
