Criticism of Islam is not a hate crime, nor racist, nor enophobic

Announcements Posted on
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    I agree that it was an unwise choice of words, especially as it should have been obvious that they would be repeatedly quoted out of context by his detractors. I am not surprised that he felt obliged to mitigate the situation. However, on reading the entire passage it is quite clear that he meant not giving in to demands for special privilege, not making life physically hard and it is only people with an agenda of discrediting him by smear tactics who would insist on it. Ironic that many of those people are often crying "context".

    Because most Christians, Jews, Hindus, etc, don't claim that their stories are the perfect, unchangeable, universal guide for all humanity, and it is highly disingenuous to claim that they do. On top of which, have you not seen the news in the last 15 years? If not, today might be a good day to start catching up!

    Surely a Muslim who believes in the infallible immutability of the Quran and the perfection of the example of Muhammad must support this, because it is enshrined in the Quran and sunnah. By definition they are Islamists. It seems that it is you that is trying to redefine terms.

    Someone who rejects parts of Islam is obviously not an Islamist, by definition!
    Someone who has a problem with him equating Islam with race and nationality, saying during that same speech that European Muslims who support violence against Western troops must be forcibly deported to their "countries of origin" is not simply attempting to smear him, they make valid points. He did not even specify what he meant by supporting violence against Western troops so one could take that to mean that any Muslim who is against any war being fought by any Western country should be deported. In other words, Muslims should not have the same rights to free speech as everyone else. Moreover, denying Muslims the special privileges that they don't get to begin with is not going to make conditions harder for them, and his motive was to make Europe less attractive to Muslims. So obviously people are going to call him out, because "context" didn't do a thing to change how wrong that phrase was.

    Most Western Jews, Christians and so forth do not follow their scriptures word by word. I have been following the news, and have seen how LGBT people in Uganda have suffered from violence and laws which turn them into criminals because the Bible says that they are. I have seen how just earlier this year, the Christianist LRA kidnapped hundreds of people to turn them into soldiers/slaves as they wage their holy war to establish a state based on the Ten Commandments and so forth. And the lynchings in India of people who eat beef by the growing Hindu extremists. Where have these religions admitted that there are imperfections in their scriptures? Nowhere.

    Someone who believes that Muhammad was a perfect individual because he was kind, peaceful and loved his enemies (as they were taught to believe) is not going to be an Islamist, because such a person would believe in treating others the way that they want to be treated. Someone who is aware of and accepts Muhammad's war crimes yet still believes him to be perfect and that his example must be emulated is one. Again, you fail to make the distinction.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think Islam is incompatible with our western ideology and lifestyle. Saying this on twitter can get me arrested in some European countries.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    Someone who has a problem with him equating Islam with race and nationality, saying during that same speech that European Muslims who support violence against Western troops must be forcibly deported to their "countries of origin" is not simply attempting to smear him, they make valid points. He did not even specify what he meant by supporting violence against Western troops so one could take that to mean that any Muslim who is against any war being fought by any Western country should be deported. In other words, Muslims should not have the same rights to free speech as everyone else. Moreover, denying Muslims the special privileges that they don't get to begin with is not going to make conditions harder for them, and his motive was to make Europe less attractive to Muslims. So obviously people are going to call him out, because "context" didn't do a thing to change how wrong that phrase was.
    While I don't agree with everything he says, I also don't think that wanting to deport those who "take part in, plot, assist or condone violence against the West" is "bigoted". If it was just "all Muslims", then yes, but those convicted of violent jihad against western society, no.

    [/quote]Most Western Jews, Christians and so forth do not follow their scriptures word by word. I have been following the news, and have seen how LGBT people in Uganda have suffered from violence and laws which turn them into criminals because the Bible says that they are. I have seen how just earlier this year, the Christianist LRA kidnapped hundreds of people to turn them into soldiers/slaves as they wage their holy war to establish a state based on the Ten Commandments and so forth. And the lynchings in India of people who eat beef by the growing Hindu extremists. Where have these religions admitted that there are imperfections in their scriptures? Nowhere.[/quote] Both the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury have expressed the church's acceptance of homosexuality. The LRA is not a single-issue organisation. Their leadership has stated that they are fighting to re-establish multi-party democracy in Uganda. I'm surprised that you didn't bring up the KKK.

    Someone who believes that Muhammad was a perfect individual because he was kind, peaceful and loved his enemies (as they were taught to believe) is not going to be an Islamist, because such a person would believe in treating others the way that they want to be treated. Someone who is aware of and accepts Muhammad's war crimes yet still believes him to be perfect and that his example must be emulated is one. Again, you fail to make the distinction.
    I was very clear. Anyone who merely has a cultural affiliation with Islam is not an Islamist. However, if you make specific claims about the Quran and Muhammad, then the onus is on you to know WTF you are talking about, because such statements give tacit support to those who have read it all and still make those claims. It's not like the full story is some kind of well-kept secret!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Both the Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury have expressed the church's acceptance of homosexuality. The LRA is not a single-issue organisation. Their leadership has stated that they are fighting to re-establish multi-party democracy in Uganda. I'm surprised that you didn't bring up the KKK.

    I was very clear. Anyone who merely has a cultural affiliation with Islam is not an Islamist. However, if you make specific claims about the Quran and Muhammad, then the onus is on you to know WTF you are talking about, because such statements give tacit support to those who have read it all and still make those claims. It's not like the full story is some kind of well-kept secret!
    That's irrelevant. The fact remains that Christianity is being used as a justification to mistreat LGBT people in multiple non-Western countries. Western-backed figureheads like the Pope aren't going to do a thing to change that. And what's happening to LGBT people in Uganda is state-sponsored, it's not just the work of a terrorist organisation like the LRA. An overwhelming majority of the Christian population there think that homosexuality is unacceptable as well. Why? Because their god said so.

    If the person is claims to be a scholar and knowledgeable of Islam then yes. The average Western Muslim who just goes to the mosque every now and then and hears sugar-coated BS about their prophet, then comes out thinking that he is the best person who ever lived should not be expected to have the same level of knowledge. Most religious people do not.

    I already pointed out the many things that are wrong with Murray's statement so will leave it at that.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aniki_)
    I think Islam is incompatible with our western ideology and lifestyle. Saying this on twitter can get me arrested in some European countries.
    if you think that, you need to open your eyes to the millions of perfectly normal, peaceful Muslims living within our society today, and stop believing everything breitbart/ the daily express says.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    if you think that, you need to open your eyes to the millions of perfectly normal, peaceful Muslims living within our society today, and stop believing everything breitbart/ the daily express says.
    But we have already established that the majority of Muslims do not follow Islam, but rather a sanitised and cherry-picked revisionism. Therefore the behaviour of most Muslims is irrelevant to a discussion about Islam.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    the behaviour of most Muslims is irrelevant to a discussion about Islam.
    as I see it: the problem is, there is not one "true" Islam

    there are many Islams, and all of them are more or less equally "true", or also equally "false"
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aniki_)
    I think Islam is incompatible with our western ideology and lifestyle
    this is true, if you take the literal interpretation of the holy texts and the main Islamic experiences in history

    but, of course, there are "creative", "modern", "revisionist", "moderate" etc interpretations : all of them, just as "true" or just as "false" as the original ones
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AmazingArry)

    So even though the rest of society adapts to new issues, Islam will not and cannot change and that is the problem.
    personally, I think that Islam will change : but it will take a long, long time
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    personally, I think that Islam will change : but it will take a long, long time
    Islam is currently changing, but not in the good way.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Josb)
    Islam is currently changing, but not in the good way.
    there are many variables at play : world economy, migration flows, wars in the Middle East etc
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    While I agree that debate should not be shut down to conform to political correctness, I have a serious problem with criticizing Islam as a coherent and monolithic ideology. It isn't, but when one does so, it can be a dogwhistle call to racism and bigotry - just look at what Trump is saying.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    He lived in a very different society to our own, long ago. Traditions were different back then, and they still are now. Its not a valid criticism to whinge about Mohammed being a pedophile when practically the whole world was more positively predisposed to that sort of stuff.
    But Mo was Mo, the prophet. His actions are what Muslims base their life on. I mean what you are saying here is that Mo is not a good role model (because he lived at a different time). Try going to a Muslim country and start telling people Mo is not a good role model.

    And rather sad that you can't simply say "yes, he was a pedophile". Admitting something is not a sign of weakness, but strength.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    My prophet is Richard P Feynman, not sure why you think he's a lunatic.

    And bare in mind that in non-democratic, non-western societies, 1500 years ago, its open to interpretation whether or not that is 'disgusting'. Should I bring up the dozens of cases of Christian pedophilia in the last 5 years? Or is that justified because its a non-foreign religion?
    Your prophet is Feynman? Not only is that weird, but an insult to his memory.

    And the last part just demonstrates your complete lack of understanding and thinking. No, that is not justified and no one here criticizing Islam said it is.

    You would do much better promoting your agenda if you stopped your one-sided bias tirade.

    You are even contradicting yourself. On one hand you argue that we can't lump all Muslims together because most choose to see the good parts in their ideology. On the other hand, you can't even admit Mo was a pedo.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    I'd never do that first, if I call someone an idiot, its likely that their boring old aggressive attacks annoyed me
    But judging by your posts, anyone saying anything against Islam is carrying out boring old aggressive attacks that annoy you...

    I do wonder why you have this agenda of yours.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can we not just agree that all religions are ridiculous?
    I mean, how are they any different to the 'Myths' that Ancient Greeks/Egyptians etc. worshipped?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by WBZ144)
    It goes both ways, there are people who are constantly talking about how to be "tougher" on Muslims and make their lives harder then try to disguise this as "criticism of Islam". There are also people who say that it's OK to hate Muslims on the basis of their beliefs (without knowing what beliefs each individual Muslim holds) and claim that this is not bigotry.
    No, you're absolutely wrong.

    Being "tougher on Muslims" is not synonymous for "criticism of Islam". The former is a group of people, the latter is an adherence. That said, being tough on Muslims - a group which still holds capricious and hateful beliefs on many social issues - is not something which can be considered Islamophobic or hate-speech.

    Islamophobia means being intolerant of Muslims - as a group.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jake4198)
    No, you're absolutely wrong.

    Being "tougher on Muslims" is not synonymous for "criticism of Islam". The former is a group of people, the latter is an adherence. That said, being tough on Muslims - a group which still holds capricious and hateful beliefs on many social issues - is not something which can be considered Islamophobic or hate-speech.

    Islamophobia means being intolerant of Muslims - as a group.
    You contradict yourself right there. In that case, what would count as anti-Muslim bigotry if not collective punishment?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jake4198)
    No, you're absolutely wrong.

    Being "tougher on Muslims" is not synonymous for "criticism of Islam". The former is a group of people, the latter is an adherence. That said, being tough on Muslims - a group which still holds capricious and hateful beliefs on many social issues - is not something which can be considered Islamophobic or hate-speech.

    Islamophobia means being intolerant of Muslims - as a group.
    In my view, conservatives and UKIP supporters hold 'capricious and hateful beliefs on many social issues'.

    But should we ignore that because they're not foreign?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    In my view, conservatives and UKIP supporters hold 'capricious and hateful beliefs on many social issues'.

    But should we ignore that because they're not foreign?
    You really think these people are being ignored? It's almost fashionable to hate these people. Nigel Farage now, after the '£350mil to NHS' more than ever.
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: October 20, 2016
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Today on TSR
Poll
How are you feeling about doing A-levels?
Useful resources

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.