Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Westerners and the inability to differentiate between ISIS and Muslims Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    I can read, thank you.
    Clearly not because of your ridiculous comment.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    I'm not generalising, I'm not innate to come unprepared and use statements without supporting evidence.

    Scholars argue that hitler was not a Christian, some argue against. After doing my research and reading the abominable Mein Kempf I was able to create my own opinion, thank you very much.

    He went to a catholic school and was bought up in a monestary school. He said his eradication of Jews was 'the lord's work'

    Even if you don't think he was a practicing Christian you yourself said that it was a form of Christianity. There are many forms with the same core beliefs. Read this evidenced article http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm and hit me up afterwards
    You are SO wrong, maybe you should learn German (that allows you to read a whole bunch of things), talk to former Nazis, read about Himmler, the SS, etc. ...
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ivybridge)
    Clearly not because of your ridiculous comment.
    I say his comment is ridiculous, you say mine, I think no difference. I just can't forget everything I read and learned and then say: Hei, totally okay to write this vaguely on such an important topic!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    You are SO wrong, maybe you should learn German (that allows you to read a whole bunch of things), talk to former Nazis, read about Himmler, the SS, etc. ...
    Well I don't think you can declare either of us as definitively right or wrong because, you know, hitler is dead. I can have my opinion and you can have yours. History was written by the victors and all that.

    How did this post digress so much?




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    I say his comment is ridiculous, you say mine, I think no difference. I just can't forget everything I read and learned and then say: Hei, totally okay to write this vaguely on such an important topic!
    :lol:? I call yours 'ridiculous' because it relies on something other than what was actually said. You realised this as you changed your comment. Stop arguing the toss, you made a stupid remark - get over it.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nathanielle)
    You are SO wrong, maybe you should learn German (that allows you to read a whole bunch of things), talk to former Nazis, read about Himmler, the SS, etc. ...
    History is open to interpretation. The fact that there are scholars arguing both sides with equal strength renders your 'You are SO wrong' inaccurate. History as a discipline is largely subjective. Facts are there but there are no facts about that specific thing - it's all down to interpretation.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    I'm so excited for this. Go on, enlighten us. What are these 'intolerable' views of Muslims? These factual views you speak of.

    It takes some audacity to claim you understand the values of another religion when throughout history all that has been done in an effort for integration between religions and cultures is exactly Jack-****.
    misogyny and homophobia, for instance, and no freedom to leave the religion...and very harsh punishments for petty crimes.

    and what's not to understand? the qur'an spells all this stuff out. and the adherents to islam today, even in the west, come from a cuture of literalism - how can you dispute that?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BubbleBoobies)
    misogyny and homophobia, for instance, and no freedom to leave the religion...and very harsh punishments for petty crimes.

    and what's not to understand? the qur'an spells all this stuff out. and the adherents to islam today, even in the west, come from a cuture of literalism - how can you dispute that?

    Misogyny and homophobia are inherent in every 'God fearing' religion. (Misogyny is also an inherently British value. We have lived in a patriarchy for the past 100+ years.)
    You could accuse Christianity of having the same backwards principles. Society has moved on. So have most people - though clearly some can't get over history and past laws of a land that is/was not theirs. Or is that the colonialism speaking?

    No freedom to leave the religion? What do you think it is? A club that we go to every week and sign with the blood of our forefinger? It's literally as simple as not believing in God anymore. There isn't any formalities for severing ties with a religion. The 'no freedom' that you claim to know about refers to spiritual freedom in the perceptual sense, as in there is no escape from God as he is apparently omnipresent.

    'Very harsh punishments' let me guess the hand chopping for stealing and the whipping? They are old laws. OLD AS IN THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

    The Qur'an is guidance. It acts as God's guidance. It is not a literal interpretation of the words because a lot of the stuff in the Qur'an - and equally the bible, the Torah and many holy scriptures - would be illegal simply because we are not in the same era as when they were transcribed.

    You cannot sit there and tell me what a culture that you make no effort to understand believe in.

    Non-secular religious views - especially old scriptures - stem from the same ideology. One God, one prophet, one holy book. The teachings may vary slightly but you cannot systematically say that every person of every religion follows a step by step guide within their religion because they do not. It is ignorant of you to assume that they take the word of their God literally because unless you have seen a Muslim walking in Hammersmith with no hands because he stole a galaxy bar from the corner shop or a Christian stoning to death a homosexual in clear view of other people then you cannot say that the rules are literally followed.

    Go through the Qur'an and the bible and find real life examples in the progressive WESTERN world - to refer back to my question - of each and every single ruling then maybe you will have sufficient evidence to support your tenuous claims of inherent literalism.

    Ps literalism isn't a cultural characteristic.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The funding of UK mosques by the Saudi's pushing Wahhabism doesn't help when it comes to differentiation.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    Misogyny and homophobia are inherent in every 'God fearing' religion. (Misogyny is also an inherently British value. We have lived in a patriarchy for the past 100+ years.)
    You could accuse Christianity of having the same backwards principles. Society has moved on. So have most people - though clearly some can't get over history and past laws of a land that is/was not theirs. Or is that the colonialism speaking?
    I'm an atheist though so that means nothing to me - islam is *still* one of those religions. but the fact that christianity is coated in sugar after hundreds of years of enlightenment culture in europe (you cant say the same about islam in the middle east!) means that nobody really even believes in christianity in its full form anymore. same goes for israel.

    No freedom to leave the religion? What do you think it is? A club that we go to every week and sign with the blood of our forefinger? It's literally as simple as not believing in God anymore. There isn't any formalities for severing ties with a religion. The 'no freedom' that you claim to know about refers to spiritual freedom in the perceptual sense, as in there is no escape from God as he is apparently omnipresent.
    read the quran (this still happens in the middle east! a few months ago, a saudi blogger got a huge amount of jail time and lashes for atheism - thats still ****ing appalling)

    'Very harsh punishments' let me guess the hand chopping for stealing and the whipping? They are old laws. OLD AS IN THOUSANDS OF YEARS.
    read the qur'an (this is still practised where sharia is implemented, quite a lot of countries in the midle east, for instance - muslims come from these middle eastern surroundings culturally)

    The Qur'an is guidance. It acts as God's guidance. It is not a literal interpretation of the words because a lot of the stuff in the Qur'an - and equally the bible, the Torah and many holy scriptures - would be illegal simply because we are not in the same era as when they were transcribed.
    illegality doesn't mean that it isnt canon of that religion though -_- jesus christ.

    You cannot sit there and tell me what a culture that you make no effort to understand believe in.
    ?

    Non-secular religious views - especially old scriptures - stem from the same ideology. One God, one prophet, one holy book. The teachings may vary slightly but you cannot systematically say that every person of every religion follows a step by step guide within their religion because they do not. It is ignorant of you to assume that they take the word of their God literally because unless you have seen a Muslim walking in Hammersmith with no hands because he stole a galaxy bar from the corner shop or a Christian stoning to death a homosexual in clear view of other people then you cannot say that the rules are literally followed.
    this is ****ing irrelevant - you're essentially saying that the western influences (or legal system) stop that religion from being practised! that doesn't change the nature of that religion! if that muslim was in the middle east where the religion was allowed to be implemented, either individually or legally, it would be a ****ing different story

    Go through the Qur'an and the bible and find real life examples in the progressive WESTERN world - to refer back to my question - of each and every single ruling then maybe you will have sufficient evidence to support your tenuous claims of inherent literalism.
    the western world is friction against religion - you've missed that point. culture is AGAINST islam in the west -_- only religious culture is in favour of islam

    Ps literalism isn't a cultural characteristic.
    it is though
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    I guess this is why "Westerners" voted a Muslim to be mayor of London? Thought it would be shits and giggles to elect a terrorist? :facepalm:
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    Misogyny and homophobia are inherent in every 'God fearing' religion. (Misogyny is also an inherently British value. We have lived in a patriarchy for the past 100+ years.)
    You could accuse Christianity of having the same backwards principles. Society has moved on. So have most people - though clearly some can't get over history and past laws of a land that is/was not theirs. Or is that the colonialism speaking?

    No freedom to leave the religion? What do you think it is? A club that we go to every week and sign with the blood of our forefinger? It's literally as simple as not believing in God anymore. There isn't any formalities for severing ties with a religion. The 'no freedom' that you claim to know about refers to spiritual freedom in the perceptual sense, as in there is no escape from God as he is apparently omnipresent.

    'Very harsh punishments' let me guess the hand chopping for stealing and the whipping? They are old laws. OLD AS IN THOUSANDS OF YEARS.

    The Qur'an is guidance. It acts as God's guidance. It is not a literal interpretation of the words because a lot of the stuff in the Qur'an - and equally the bible, the Torah and many holy scriptures - would be illegal simply because we are not in the same era as when they were transcribed.

    You cannot sit there and tell me what a culture that you make no effort to understand believe in.

    Non-secular religious views - especially old scriptures - stem from the same ideology. One God, one prophet, one holy book. The teachings may vary slightly but you cannot systematically say that every person of every religion follows a step by step guide within their religion because they do not. It is ignorant of you to assume that they take the word of their God literally because unless you have seen a Muslim walking in Hammersmith with no hands because he stole a galaxy bar from the corner shop or a Christian stoning to death a homosexual in clear view of other people then you cannot say that the rules are literally followed.

    Go through the Qur'an and the bible and find real life examples in the progressive WESTERN world - to refer back to my question - of each and every single ruling then maybe you will have sufficient evidence to support your tenuous claims of inherent literalism.

    Ps literalism isn't a cultural characteristic.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    wow I think am in love with you!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mona-S)
    wow I think am in love with you!!
    sorry but I just refuted that
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BubbleBoobies)
    sorry but I just refuted that
    Why do you keep using Saudi Arabia as your reference. There are many Muslim countries that are not like that, for example, Malaysia.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Why do you keep comparing Islam to Christianity, it seems to be implying that all 'Westerners' inherently support the actions of Christians which is utterly wrong. As an atheist, I think Christianity is equally as regressive an ideology as Islam, or any other religion for that matter. The fact that these texts dictate the lives of millions of people in various countries around the world is truly sad; there is no freedom in a theocracy.

    And to say that ISIS aren't Muslims is just a silly attempt to keep the religion credible. They read the same texts as any other Muslim - granted, they do take a very extreme view of it which (thankfully) the vast majority of Muslims do not support, but that doesn't necessarily invalidate their views because it's just an interpretation of the text. And the fact that any text can be interpreted in such an abhorrent way shows that it is inherently flawed.

    Most of the things that you describe no longer happen here because of western secular laws, whereas they persist in many middle eastern countries. Of course, Christianity itself is also responsible for a great many deaths over the course of history too, so rather than generalising all people who adhere to a religion, I think the smarter thing to do is to criticise religion itself. It's clearly incompatible with individual liberty and equal rights.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    EDIT: I meant no disrespect or offence by using the term 'westerners' - I just meant the English and the political stances on terrorism. I understand and apologise for using the term so flippantly and for generalising a belief that not everyone shares (but I really have no clue how to change the title of the thread)

    ~~~~

    I have a genuine question.

    What is with the general inability to differentiate between the bad guys and a religion who do not in any way condone the radical actions or share the same extremist views as this terrorist group that inspires hatred?

    I understand the media influence and the over exaggerated 'truth' that everyone so willingly accepts. But why is it so difficult to accept a person with a religion and not associate them with terrorism because of their belief in a God? (Or even the colour of their skin. A lot of Sikh, Hindus and middle eastern non-Muslims have been subject to this vile association with terrorism.)

    But what is it with the inability to differentiate between terrorism and the brown person who believes in God? Are people that plugged in and indoctrinated by the media that they have lost the ability to form their own opinions and think for themselves?
    The question you SHOULD be asking is why can't i differentiate between criticism and dislike of my religion and criticism and dislike of EVERY SINGLE MUSLIM?

    Find the answer to that and understand the difference and you can realise your original post is incorrect and redundant.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    I'm so excited for this. Go on, enlighten us. What are these 'intolerable' views of Muslims? These factual views you speak of.
    I'm presuming that you either missed the recent (quite extensive) poll done by ICM about this which was the subject of a Channel 4 documentary, or reflexively dismissed it as baseless propaganda, as many others on this website did.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clintbarton)
    A person who uses a religion that teaches peace to commit heinous crimes are not followers of that religion no matter what they claim. They are not Muslims. They are cowards who use religion as some imperious justification for their unjustifiable actions.

    A true Muslim would not condone violence in any capacity.
    Of course ISIS are muslims. They may have a particular set of beliefs that are not mainstream, but it's really pointless saying they are not muslims. As to whether Islam prohibits violence - isn't it fairly mainstream that adulterers should be stoned to death, thieves have their hands chopped off, apostates executed…? These things are not restricted to ISIS.

    Then you have the ongoing inter-community violence between Sunni, Shia and other Islamic sects.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Well, ISIS are Muslims though, you can't deny that
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mona-S)
    Why do you keep using Saudi Arabia as your reference. There are many Muslim countries that are not like that, for example, Malaysia.
    Here's what the US State Department says about religion in Malaysia:

    Society continued to become increasingly intolerant of religious diversity. Moderate voices and opinions that differed from officially sanctioned positions on religious matters were sometimes met with violent aggression, such as Molotov cocktails, the burning of effigies, and death threats to religious converts, particularly those converting from Islam, who sometimes faced severe stigmatization.
    http://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/irf/2014/eap/238310.htm
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.