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

Which is a greater threat to society, Islam or Islamophobia? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Which is a greater threat?
    Islam
    62
    57.94%
    Islamophobia
    33
    30.84%
    Both
    12
    11.21%

    Offline

    18
    (Original post by AxSirlotl)
    If you look at the reasons why people become terrorists, one reason is discrimination. If we treat Muslims less favourably than other religious groups, there would be more Muslims who would hate the west. Is that illogical? If we treat Muslims equally, there will be no/less reasons for someone to become radicalised.
    The trouble being that many people have a rather ludicrous definition of, 'treating Muslims equally' and 'discrimination.'

    In any case, discrimination on grounds of religion is already illegal.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hydeman)
    The casual anti-Americanism and the seemingly irrelevant reference to inequality are lamentable, but I can't say that it's too far off the mark with regards to a lot of post-1945 American foreign policy.

    I would say, though, that this is neither unique to America nor necessarily a bad thing (which is the clear implication) -- I don't think anybody of any mentionable moral fibre was arguing that this was a bad approach to take with European fascism in the 1940s, for instance.
    Love you too
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Ethereal World)
    Love you too
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ethereal World)
    Love you too
    EtherealWorld why'd you change your DP. Don't let these *******s get to you. I take it you didn't see my PM. Lol. ROFL.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MR.ANONYMOUS 786)
    EtherealWorld why'd you change your DP. Don't let these *******s get to you. I take it you didn't see my PM. Lol. ROFL.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Lol I just saw it (I accidentally deleted it when I deleted the front page of my messages instead of the last page).....

    I didn't change it because some people take the piss out of me because like :rolleyes: that's their problem!!!

    I just changed it because I oscillate between whether I want a picture of me or Swiftie cause she is my ultimate bae....and .....

    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dara Dahl)
    Or both?

    (Off-shoot from the "Islamophobia is the greatest threat to society" thread)
    Obviously Islamophobia.

    There always have been tiny minorities of people that will use anything as an excuse to bomb people. 10-20 years ago Christians were bombing ****ing abortion clinics.

    Terrorism existed long before Islam and will exist long after it, some people are just too stupid to understand that. Islamophobia is a direct threat though, because we seem to be heading the same way as antisemitic Germany. But of course, this time, <insert minority group> really is the source of all our problems!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie S)
    You have changed what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that:

    The US foreign policy sometimes consists of bombing people with different ideologies.

    I am not talking about rights, or which ideologies are morally just. I'm arguing what is written above, no more, no less.
    I didn't - I simply have already answered this.

    Firstly, this does not in any way provide an excuse towards what ISIS does, unless you want to argue otherwise...? This is what spurred the whole argument in the first place.

    Secondly, to call it a 'foreign policy' (in its literal meaning) is silly - you and me both know it. It's even more so since Obama.

    I think we're arguing for many different points without even knowing it.

    (Original post by Jamie S)
    The definition of ad hominem isn't to portray anyone as weak, but their argument as weak by association with something/a quality of the agent giving the proposition. Saying "did you seriously agree that?" demeans the person, calling the stupid and hence demeaning their entire argumentative stance.

    But anyway, I'm more interested in the first quote
    It does not - an ad-hominem goes for the whole argument. Its ultimate purpose IS to portray someone as weak and unreliable. Asking "did you seriously agree that..." is in no way demeaning, unless the other person is super sensitive (which is still irrelevant to the strength of the argument).

    If I, as I said before, I had claimed that "you are an idiot and this is pure crap", without offering anything of qualifying nature, then yes, it would be ad-hominem.

    (This part is very important, considering it's what you accused me of and it's what you did in the first post - just sayin')
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Lol. Kl. Whatever you deem fit.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Zinann)
    I wish i could vote more than once so I could vote for Islam 5000000000 times
    Ask all your friends to vote!!
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    Of course not.

    Ok then.

    I'm not particularly anti-America but they use a whole load of violence in the name of their beliefs.

    This is a the crux of the matter right here. You have 'ISIS' floating about in your head and I have 'Islam' wringing in my ears. Though you may be critical of ISIS the post I responded to criticised the currently peaceful adherents of a major world religion who might be pushed towards radicalisation by the growing climate of fear and division. Now, we wouldn't judge our cousins across the pond for what the US government didn't in South America in the 1980s and yet the US government represents Americans in a way that ISIS can't possible represent Muslims - never mind the ones that live in the western world.
    I'm sorry, but if fear and oppression -which are definitely not a thing in Europe- lead you to joining ISIS, you have no right to complain. This is a fundamentally different point from the original one, but to answer it shortly, Islamophobia is not a thing in most of the Western world. Yes, there will be individual cases, but what does that mean? It's systematic oppression? Let us not forget that many Muslims are consistently reluctant to accepting Western values, despite living here. Do you expect other public members to be just fine with this?

    To me, Islamophobia - despite being etymologically wrong- is an excuse to curb freedom of expression.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    I did not speak of the Western world but of Western hypocrisy. As in the mindset of the developed, westernised world that the people don't see how detrimental their own governments can be to world peace. And whilst the US rarely seeks to eliminate entire countries, it has sought to topple ideologically unfavourable governments on so many occasions - and a lot of innocents have died in the process. This is true regardless of the actions of ISIS. You can't put the word 'Islam' in your post then switch it to 'ISIS' a few posts down the line and then hold me to your choosing to be less incendiary.
    Yes, I've said multiple times I somewhat agree. How does that even gain relevance to what ISIS is doing?

    Its sole purpose is literally to impose an entire religion on the whole world and kill those who resist them. Whether America or Europe has done some atrocious things is of no relevance at all. ISIS' murderous tendencies and endless killings cannot in any sense of the word be considered reasonable because America or Europe did the same in the past.

    At for your last sentence, my original post refers to Muslims who commit terrorist Acts to further Islam (in line with what the other poster said). Obviously, such people will associate with ISIS or an equivalent organisation. Does it sound that surprising to you?
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    I'm sorry, but if fear and oppression -which are definitely not a thing in Europe- lead you to joining ISIS, you have no right to complain. This is a fundamentally different point from the original one, but to answer it shortly, Islamophobia is not a thing in most of the Western world. Yes, there will be individual cases, but what does that mean? It's systematic oppression? Let us not forget that many Muslims are consistently reluctant to accepting Western values, despite living here. Do you expect other public members to be just fine with this?

    To me, Islamophobia - despite being etymologically wrong- is an excuse to curb freedom of expression.



    Yes, I've said multiple times I somewhat agree. How does that even gain relevance to what ISIS is doing?

    Its sole purpose is literally to impose an entire religion on the whole world and kill those who resist them. Whether America or Europe has done some atrocious things is of no relevance at all. ISIS' murderous tendencies and endless killings cannot in any sense of the word be considered reasonable because America or Europe did the same in the past.

    At for your last sentence, my original post refers to Muslims who commit terrorist Acts to further Islam (in line with what the other poster said). Obviously, such people will associate with ISIS or an equivalent organisation. Does it sound that surprising to you?
    You're trying to argue with me as if I'm the poster you originally responded to. I'm not here to debate freedom of expression or systematic oppression - you bring these things up because you don't actually disagree with me. You just want to disagree with me.

    I never said ISIS were being reasonable. You saying they're not reasonable doesn't contravene a single thing I've said in this thread.

    With regards to the last paragraph, if you were talking about that then you should have spoken in terms of terrorists or extremist Muslims not 'Islam'.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    You're trying to argue with me as if I'm the poster you originally responded to. I'm not here to debate freedom of expression or systematic oppression - you bring these things up because you don't actually disagree with me. You just want to disagree with me.

    I never said ISIS were being reasonable. You saying they're not reasonable doesn't contravene a single thing I've said in this thread.

    With regards to the last paragraph, if you were talking about that then you should have spoken in terms of terrorists or extremist Muslims not 'Islam'.
    Mate, the way you're missing the points is getting tiresome now.

    I replied to the other point, and then YOU replied to me. Obviously I won't ignore the other poster's comment, considering my own depended on it, and in turn yours was dependent on mine.

    Yet you still mentioned the "Western hypocrisy" to compare it. It was the very first thing you did, actually.

    Jeez... for the final time, ISIS or whatever Muslim does extremist acts, it will be because of Islam. By definition, it is not relevant.

    Case dismissed.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    Mate, the way you're missing the points is getting tiresome now.I replied to the other point, and then YOU replied to me. Obviously I won't ignore the other poster's comment, considering my own depended on it, and in turn yours was dependent on mine.Yet you still mentioned the "Western hypocrisy" to compare it. It was the very first thing you did, actually.Jeez... for the final time, ISIS or whatever Muslim does extremist acts, it will be because of Islam. By definition, it is not relevant.Case dismissed.
    You keep adding in irrelevant points that I'm not obliged to consider.

    You don't need to ignore them, feel free to send your arguments their way. But you took issue with what I said - which is independent of their personal opinion.

    That doesn't mean I think ISIS are reasonable. It means that American foreign policy is unreasonable.

    And your thinking that doesn't contravene my original statement whatsoever.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AxSirlotl)
    Islamaphobia - Making the west anti-Islam will give more reason for some Muslims to commit terrorist acts. Look back at the 20th century, more specifically the 1930's and 40's when Jews were used as a scapegoat, take what you will from that.
    Not quite the same thing. You're being slightly disingenuous.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    You keep adding in irrelevant points that I'm not obliged to consider.
    What? I bring irrelevant things to the thread? Your very first post was absolutely irrelevant in itself. Lol.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    You don't need to ignore them, feel free to send your arguments their way. But you took issue with what I said - which is independent of their personal opinion.
    Once again, you cannot understand what I'm saying. It's getting seriously tiresome repeating myself.Put in even simpler terms, your post cannot be taken in isolation from the other poster's. That much is self-evident, as you like to say.

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    That doesn't mean I think ISIS are reasonable. It means that American foreign policy is unreasonable.
    Which is irrelevant to the thread and the thread title. But that aside, I got your point - what now? How does America being unreasonable justify anything of what you said?

    [By the way, please learn what foreign policy or policy in general actually is in actual terms. Both you and the James J or whatever he is called are using it grossly incorrectly.]

    (Original post by RayApparently)
    And your thinking that doesn't contravene my original statement whatsoever.
    It doesn't because I didn't actually put in the effort to do that - I have already told you I don't agree entirely with you. I will not elaborate on it because it, for the third time, irrelevant.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    What? I bring irrelevant things to the thread? Your very first post was absolutely irrelevant in itself. Lol.



    Once again, you cannot understand what I'm saying. It's getting seriously tiresome repeating myself.Put in even simpler terms, your post cannot be taken in isolation from the other poster's. That much is self-evident, as you like to say.



    Which is irrelevant to the thread and the thread title. But that aside, I got your point - what now? How does America being unreasonable justify anything of what you said?

    [By the way, please learn what foreign policy or policy in general actually is in actual terms. Both you and the James J or whatever he is called are using it grossly incorrectly.]



    It doesn't because I didn't actually put in the effort to do that - I have already told you I don't agree entirely with you. I will not elaborate on it because it, for the third time, irrelevant.
    It wasn't 'irrelevant'. I was making a point. Which though self-explanatory, I proceeded to go through the tedious process of explaining.

    I understand what you're saying - I just disagree.

    Justify what I said? That is all of what I said.

    I know what it means. I used it correctly - if in a tongue-in-cheek manner.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    It wasn't 'irrelevant'. I was making a point. Which though self-explanatory, I proceeded to go through the tedious process of explaining.

    I understand what you're saying - I just disagree.

    Justify what I said? That is all of what I said.

    I know what it means. I used it correctly - if in a tongue-in-cheek manner.
    You made a point but failed to link its relevance - that's all I've been waiting for. I can't see how randomly posting things around without making it relevant is productive.

    So, indeed, the justification is a mess, if that's what you wanna call it.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    You made a point but failed to link its relevance - that's all I've been waiting for. I can't see how randomly posting things around without making it relevant is productive.

    So, indeed, the justification is a mess, if that's what you wanna call it.
    You failed to see the relevance (i.e irony).

    To be honest I can't believe you've wasted this much of my time extending my throwing some glibness back at your smug post.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RayApparently)
    You failed to see the relevance (i.e irony).

    To be honest I can't believe you've wasted this much of my time extending my throwing some glibness back at your smug post.
    It's not irony - call it so if you like, but you know it's not. You thought it was a valid point to make.

    Were it not so, you would have said it on the first page instead of writing whole posts of irrelevance. If anything, I can't believe YOU wasted all this time for nothing.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by *Stefan*)
    It's not irony - call it so if you like, but you know it's not. You thought it was a valid point to make.

    Were it not so, you would have said it on the first page instead of writing whole posts of irrelevance. If anything, I can't believe YOU wasted all this time for nothing.
    It is irony. God, you're not asking me to explain the irony are you?

    Valid point? How many times do I need to scream one-liner at you? It was, to quote that other guy a tongue-in-cheek post that was basically correct. You however have been trying to drag me into a protracted debate to defend an ugly post you made.

    Well I did try to fob you off as my post was self-explanatory but noooooo.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.