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

So gay people are now being targeted by Islamic extremists in their own countries? Watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    You're going to be banned, but I do love you. :lol:


    LOL, thanks Bro.

    I was riled up there
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by -Anonymous_Girl)
    That's not the argument you were making, you were saying that you care more about the death of people in Western countries than those that live in 'stranger places'. By YOUR logic, the death of some random person in France and the death of some random person in Afghanistan are not of the same value.

    MORONIC.
    Firstly, we need to define terms. You talk about "value" without any context, which is meaningless.
    This discussion is about our personal response to deaths, not how much those lives were "worth".

    Britain has a long and rich association with France, stretching back 1000 years. We have shared kings, languages, art and culture. Much of France used to be part of the English kingdom. We have fought many wars, both with them and against them.
    We learn French in school, most of us have been to France, some of us many times. We drive French cars and eat French food. On a clear day, you can see France from England.

    On the other hand, our historical connection with Afghanistan has been occasional, brief, and rarely pleasant. Before 2001, you'd be hard pressed to find a Briton who knew anything about the country.

    So, explain how an atrocity in Paris should affect the average Brit in the same way that a similar atrocity in Kabul should?

    It really isn't that difficult to understand.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KimKallstrom)
    His like and other Combat 18-type scum bags have been rightly ostracised by our society. As a collective we did this because we recognise that these people are a cancer and the only way to beat cancer is to fight it. So basically the opposite to what Muslim communities as a whole have done with extremist Islamists. Quite frankly you're more likely to be a pariah among these communities by joining the British Army than you are associating yourself with ISIS or Al Shabab.

    People like Maajid Nawaz and the Quilliam Foundation are more widely despised by mainstream "moderate" Muslims than people like Moazzam Begg and the poisonous creatures in CAGE. Think about that.............
    i agree with that and about the hatred majid nawaz gets from the islamic community.
    my point was though tha homophoibc attacks have signifcant history here long before islamic terrorism came along unlike the Op was sugessting. as with many things radical islamic ideology poses these and other problems just as far right groups in producing white guys with murderous intent ( ie the other guy that was arrested in US today, on his way to gay pride with assault rifles)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    When a Christian refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, it's a hate crime. When a gay hating Muslim murders 50 people, it's a gun problem
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Khaoula A)
    Also, killing is banned in the Quran and there Muslims are taught to be tolerant to others no matter their differences so I don't think people who do these acts can be given the title of being 'Islamic' or 'Muslims' when their actions have nothing to do with Islam
    If I had a fiver for every time someone made this demonstrably false claim, I'd be sorted!

    Seriously. For any Muslim to make this claim shows that they are either
    A) Not familiar with the Quran, or
    B) A liar

    Now, go and read the Quran and come back and tell me what it actually says.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    It's sura 5:32-33, just in case you didn't know
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    The religion is the most peaceful religion around otherwise it would not be peaceful for nothing.
    "It's peaceful because it's peaceful." Strong argument. I bet you win all the debates at school.

    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    It promoted nothing but peace and if you have read the entire Quran you will realise that.
    Yeah. If you skip several pages.
    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    The human rights that are in place in the western countries come from the teachings in the Quran so clearly they are knowledgeable.
    Wait, wait, wait, WHAT!?!?!?!

    :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut:

    HUMAN RIGHTS COME FROM THE QURAN??????

    FYI, the concept of Human Rights was mostly elaborated as a result of the Enlightenments (in the 18th century), during which philosophers, who had mostly left Christianity, tried to elaborate a society organised as a social contract, in which men's life did not revolve around God. The Philosophers were mostly Theists; they believed in a God creator of the Universe - and Man, but who let men alone with the duty to organise themselves. The concept of the Rights of Man was a secularist project and, at the time of its conception, literally against the three main monotheist religions.
    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    You will realise yourself that the religion is nothing but peaceful
    How can you still seriously say that after we have had several terrorist attacks of MUSLIM fanatics who have slaughtered innocent people?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Khaoula A)
    I wouldn't be so quick to label them 'Islamic' extremists. Its the month of Ramadan and all Muslims are supposed to be peaceful and avoid any conflict with anyone. Also, killing is banned in the Quran and there Muslims are taught to be tolerant to others no matter their differences so I don't think people who do these acts can be given the title of being 'Islamic' or 'Muslims' when their actions have nothing to do with Islam
    Oh for goodness sake. You honestly think people are retarded enough not to see through this crap you're spouting? It's an insult to all of us.

    (Original post by Khaoula A)
    Every single day in Palestine there are thousands and thousands of men, women and children killed by Jews for the same reason as the crimes that Isis portray; they are different religions. But as long as the offender is not Muslim the crime as written off as anything but a terrorist offence
    Since this is an attack on gay people by an Islamist extremist and you've come in ****ging off Jews for some reason, what is your opinion on the fact that there are many gay refugees in Tel Aviv from Gaza because Hamas regularly executes gays like this Orlando gunman?
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Josb)
    Wait, wait, wait, WHAT!?!?!?!

    :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut:

    HUMAN RIGHTS COME FROM THE QURAN??????

    That's the most idiotic statement I have read on TSR for a while and God know that I've seen stupid things. :lol:

    FYI, the concept of Human Rights was mostly elaborated as a result of the Enlightenments (in the 18th century), during which philosophers, who had mostly left Christianity, tried to elaborate a society organised as a social contract, in which men's life did not revolve around God. The Philosophers were mostly Theists; they believed in a God creator of the Universe - and Man, but who let men alone with the duty to organise themselves. The concept of the Rights of Man was a secularist project and, at the time of its conception, literally against the three main monotheist religions.
    PRSOM. Also, I think you meant Deists there.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Unfortunately, I fear that Islamic extremism will only increase as time goes on and fear of Islam grows. Ordinary people will feel more antagonistic towards the religion until an ultimatium is reached. I honestly don't get why extremists do the actions they do, especially since the majority of their victims are Muslim in which case it especially doesn't make sense the actions they do.

    My condolences to the families of the victims.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kyou)
    Unfortunately, I fear that Islamic extremism will only increase as time goes on and fear of Islam grows. Ordinary people will feel more antagonistic towards the religion until an ultimatium is reached. I honestly don't get why extremists do the actions they do, especially since the majority of their victims are Muslim in which case it especially doesn't make sense the actions they do.

    My condolences to the families of the victims.
    Their actions are generally very logical when you are able to get your head into their mind-set, which I have.

    They do have a sound strategy, a strategy that has relied, and continues to rely on leftists and liberals for its implementation.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    PRSOM. Also, I think you meant Deists there.
    In French, both Theism and Deism are used to define the religion of 18th century philosophers. The latter is stricter as it actually rejects any religion (no prayer, holy book, dogma, etc.; Deists only believed in a God-creator), whilst the former is broader and include several intermediate forms of beliefs between Deism and the codified religions of the Book. Voltaire himself oscillated between the two forms.

    Not sure about English though.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fight Me)
    I attend funerals to show respect for the person and the family as i know them on a personal level.

    By not attending the funeral of strangers who probably wouldn't want me there does not mean I value their life less. Its a stupid and invalid argument.
    And yet, you claim that by publicly mourning some deaths less than others, we value their lives less.

    This is not about the "value" of an individual's life (although I'm not sure how you calculate that - or is every life of the same value?), it's about how the deaths of people affect us individually.

    Personally, I would be more affected by news footage of a dead Syrian child than I would be by hearing of the death from natural causes of a 90 year old stranger, three streets from me. The "value" of the life is both unquantifiable and irrelevant. They were both strangers, although one lived less than a mile away. It is how the news of the death affects us that counts, and that depends on a variety of factors.

    To insist that all lives are of "the same value" is meaningless nonsense.
    Do you really think that your mother's life is no more valuable than that of a serial and unrepentant child rapist and murderer? And that you would mourn them both the same?
    SMH
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Fight Me)
    I attend funerals to show respect for the person and the family as i know them on a personal level.

    By not attending the funeral of strangers who probably wouldn't want me there does not mean I value their life less. Its a stupid and invalid argument.
    And yet, you claim that by publicly mourning some deaths less than others, we value their lives less.

    This is not about the "value" of an individual's life (although I'm not sure how you calculate that - or is every life of the same value?), it's about how the deaths of people affect us individually.

    Personally, I would be more affected by news footage of a dead Syrian child than I would be by hearing of the death from natural causes of a 90 year old stranger, three streets from me. The "value" of the life is both unquantifiable and irrelevant. They were both strangers, although one lived less than a mile away. It is how the news of the death affects us that counts, and that depends on a variety of factors.

    To insist that all lives are of "the same value" is meaningless nonsense.
    Do you really think that your mother's life is no more valuable than that of a serial and unrepentant child rapist and murderer in a different country? And that you would mourn them both the same?
    SMH
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    "It's peaceful because it's peaceful." Strong argument. I bet you win all the debates at school.


    Yeah. If you skip several pages.
    Wait, wait, wait, WHAT!?!?!?!

    :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut: :lolwut:

    HUMAN RIGHTS COME FROM THE QURAN??????

    That's the most idiotic statement I have read on TSR for a while and God know that I've seen stupid things. :lol:

    FYI, the concept of Human Rights was mostly elaborated as a result of the Enlightenments (in the 18th century), during which philosophers, who had mostly left Christianity, tried to elaborate a society organised as a social contract, in which men's life did not revolve around God. The Philosophers were mostly Theists; they believed in a God creator of the Universe - and Man, but who let men alone with the duty to organise themselves. The concept of the Rights of Man was a secularist project and, at the time of its conception, literally against the three main monotheist religions.

    How can you still seriously say that after we have had several terrorist attacks of MUSLIM fanatics who have slaughtered innocent people?
    PRSOM
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    Of course they want to be known as 'Islamic State' that's what they claim to be killing so many people for. Without their claim of being Islamic what reason do they have to do commit such acts?
    None.
    The only justification they use is from the Quran and sunnah. That's why they call themselves "Islamic".
    Thought it was pretty obvious really.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    We can start by refusing clerics trained in Saudi Arabia and funding for schools and mosques coming from this barbaric country.
    We could adopt a similar policy as the Austrians and limit all foreign funding of mosques, Islamic groups etc... to a one-off payment.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...aw-restricting
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    We could adopt a similar policy as the Austrians and limit all foreign funding of mosques, Islamic groups etc... to a one-off payment.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...aw-restricting
    Japan and Angola completely banned Islam LOL.


    Why would the wanna ban the religion of peace?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Epicurean)
    We could adopt a similar policy as the Austrians and limit all foreign funding of mosques, Islamic groups etc... to a one-off payment.

    https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...aw-restricting
    Yeah, currently, the Saudi fund pretty much whatever they want.
    Online

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eternalhinch)
    The religion is the most peaceful religion around otherwise it would not be peaceful for nothing. It promoted nothing but peace and if you have read the entire Quran you will realise that.
    The Quran promotes both peace and violence, tolerance and intolerance.
    You would know that if you had read it.

    The human rights that are in place in the western countries come from the teachings in the Quran so clearly they are knowledgeable.
    Are you high?

    Explain how the Quran teaches religious freedom. (Article 18)
    The Quran does not forbid slavery, it permits it. (Article 4)
    The Quran prescribes torture and inhuman punishment (Article 5)
    Why are women discriminated against in some legal situations (Article 7)

    http://www.un.org/en/universal-decla...-human-rights/
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Yeah, currently, the Saudi fund pretty much whatever they want.
    Indeed. I discussed this topic in a PM not too long ago. I think there is a pretty strong argument for undertaking such a policy:

    The Austrian method would be to limit the funding of any mosques to a single one-off payment, and restricting continuous funding. So mosques can still be funded and built within the UK. The only difference between the current system here and the Austrian system is that we currently permit continuous funding. It is quite evident that we have an issue with radicalism and it is also the case that who funds a mosque or Islamic group has control over what it preaches. So I don't see why it should be controversial to limit the influence of foreign Salafi and Wahhabi groups and encouraging the growth of a more British Islam.

    For example, many Western European nations with large Muslim populations are largely funded from abroad and if we observe the number of Muslims in each country and look at the number of Muslims from that country who have joined ISIS, we get some rather astonishing figures.

    France
    1,200 have joined ISIS
    Estimated Muslim population is 5 million
    240 ISIS members per million Muslims in France

    Belgium
    440 have joined ISIS
    Estimated Muslim population is 660,000
    667 ISIS members per million Muslims in Belgium

    Indonesia
    500 have joined ISIS
    Estimated Muslim population is 205 million
    2.4 ISIS members per million Muslims in Indonesia

    India
    18 have joined ISIS
    Estimated Muslim population is 172 million
    0.1 ISIS members per million Muslims in India

    I think everyone will agree that these figures here are astounding. I think the major difference is that countries like India and Indonesia already have well developed national Islamic organisations and groups and so there is less room or need for foreign funding and thus Salafi groups struggle more to gain a foothold. For example, the Indonesian Islamic organisation Nahdlatul Ulama has some 40 million members. The same is not true in Western nations like France, Belgium and the UK, hence our need to take action against such foreign funding.

    (Original post by Newsout)
    Japan and Angola completely banned Islam LOL.


    Why would the wanna ban the religion of peace?
    Islam isn't banned in Angola or Japan. I know Muslims who have lived in Japan.

    I wouldn't want to ban Islam.
 
 
 
  • 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
  • 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.