Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    What on earth are you talking about? The two "most Islamic" countries for their respective branch of Islam, Saudi Arabia and Iran, both murder homosexuals and apostates. Homosexuality is a crime under the Assad government, and even before the civil war they faced oppression, sexual abuse and honour killings.

    To claim this stuff is non-existent in "highest population Muslim regions" is laughable, so much so that you are either completely deluded or incredibly ignorant of the Middle East
    I think you'll find that Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh are the highest population Muslim countries. In Indonesia, terrorism is very low, we've had one small, failed attack there in the last year. How many do you think have been in Iraq?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mariachi)
    I never mentioned raping unbelievers : most likely, you are confusing me with QE2

    you sound like a very confused person : why don't you read the posts you are answering ?

    best
    I did not say that either. Every statement I make is very carefully worded so as to be entirely supportable by scripture. I only say that Islam permits using captives for sex. And that under international legal consensus, using captives for sex is rape. Therefore, in context, Islam permits rape (under certain circumstances).

    I have noticed alevelstresss using made-up quotes before.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    I think you'll find that Indonesia, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh are the highest population Muslim countries.
    Indeed, and Pakistan has one of the worst terrorism problems in the world. It's not a coincidence that this problem with terrorism is coincident with the fact Pakistanis are much more traditionally pious than Bangladeshis or Indonesians.

    In Indonesia, terrorism is very low, we've had one small, failed attack there in the last year.
    I've probably spent more than 12 weeks in Indonesia over the course of my life, I know a little about it. Indonesia firstly is much more secular than the Middle East, it's brand of Islam is also quite syncretistic (they believe in various saints, there are some animistic and magical elements thrown in that predate Islam's arrival in South East Asia).

    Indonesia doesn't try to be the "most Islamic"; it is quite comfortable in its own skin with its own little brand of Islam. But even with all that in mind, Indonesia had a serious terrorism problem in the early 2000s. If you knew much about Indonesia you'd be aware of the Bali Bombing, one of the worst attacks since 9/11

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings

    Indonesia has dealt with its terrorism problem, for the most part, by destroying the Jemaah Islamiah network. The people have no interest in supporting terrorism or buying into the Islamic victimhood narrative, and it's also no coincidence that one of the biggest hotspots for terroristic extremism in Indonesia is in Aceh, the only part of the archipelago to be under Shariah law.

    So you see; the "more Islamic" a people or a country are, the worse the violence and sectarianism gets.

    How many do you think have been in Iraq?
    How many what?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    There was a 326% increase in anti-muslim hate crimes in 2015 alone (source), and promoting this "us vs them" mentality makes the (ostensible) lack of integration worse, not better.

    It's really disturbing how muslims (as a homogenous group) are treated as fair game for many people, this can be seen even in mainstream discourse. Worrying.
    It is important to be able to tell the difference between racism/xenophobia and criticising an unacceptable ideology. The people who think that the Brexit vote means that Brown Foreigners will be "sent home" are not criticising the unacceptable elements of religious ideology. They wouldn't recognise a hudd punishment if it chopped their hand off.

    Ironically, that ideology engenders an absolute "us and them" mentality, yet simply pointing this out is promoting an "us and them" mentality in some people's eyes!
    Lack of integration and assimilation is not caused by people criticising the lack of integration and assimilation. It is the other way around.

    These really aren't difficult concepts to understand.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    I did not say that either. Every statement I make is very carefully worded so as to be entirely supportable by scripture. I only say that Islam permits using captives for sex. And that under international legal consensus, using captives for sex is rape. Therefore, in context, Islam permits rape (under certain circumstances).

    I have noticed alevelstresss using made-up quotes before.
    I entirely agree that raping slave women is a quite different thing from raping unbelievers (in general). While Islam allows sex with (your own) slave women, there is no such general allowance for sex with unbelieving women : and you quite clearly mentioned slave women in your post

    the reason why I thought that our very confused friend mistook me for you is that he accused me of basing my claim by quoting the Quran, while I had made no such quote at all, and you had

    best
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    you are either completely deluded or incredibly ignorant of the Middle East
    Don't think you needed the "either/or" there.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    These really aren't difficult concepts to understand.
    Patronisation as a debating tactic, cute.

    It is important to be able to tell the difference between racism/xenophobia and criticising an unacceptable ideology.
    Of course. But the problem is that many people do not make the distinction between anti-muslim bigotry and criticism of Islam (as the statistics attest), and even among the ones that do there appears to be a growing tendency to drift into the former category themselves.
    Lack of integration and assimilation is not caused by people criticising the lack of integration and assimilation. It is the other way around.
    Anti-muslim bigotry is a criticism of the lack of integration, or criticising Islam is a criticism of the lack of integration?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    Patronisation as a debating tactic, cute.
    Simple statement of fact. If you feel patronised by that, it's not my problem. You do not have a right to not feel patronised, just as I do not have a right to not feel exasperated.

    Of course. But the problem is that many people do not make the distinction between anti-muslim bigotry and criticism of Islam
    True. These people also seem quick to cry "Islamophobe" or "bigot" at people doing either.

    (as the statistics attest),
    What statistics are these?

    and even among the ones that do there appears to be a growing tendency to drift into the former category themselves.
    Examples? References?

    Anti-muslim bigotry is a criticism of the lack of integration, or criticising Islam is a criticism of the lack of integration?
    Neither of those statements makes any sense in the context of the comment you were replying to.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    Indeed, and Pakistan has one of the worst terrorism problems in the world. It's not a coincidence that this problem with terrorism is coincident with the fact Pakistanis are much more traditionally pious than Bangladeshis or Indonesians.



    I've probably spent more than 12 weeks in Indonesia over the course of my life, I know a little about it. Indonesia firstly is much more secular than the Middle East, it's brand of Islam is also quite syncretistic (they believe in various saints, there are some animistic and magical elements thrown in that predate Islam's arrival in South East Asia).

    Indonesia doesn't try to be the "most Islamic"; it is quite comfortable in its own skin with its own little brand of Islam. But even with all that in mind, Indonesia had a serious terrorism problem in the early 2000s. If you knew much about Indonesia you'd be aware of the Bali Bombing, one of the worst attacks since 9/11

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_Bali_bombings

    Indonesia has dealt with its terrorism problem, for the most part, by destroying the Jemaah Islamiah network. The people have no interest in supporting terrorism or buying into the Islamic victimhood narrative, and it's also no coincidence that one of the biggest hotspots for terroristic extremism in Indonesia is in Aceh, the only part of the archipelago to be under Shariah law.

    So you see; the "more Islamic" a people or a country are, the worse the violence and sectarianism gets.



    How many what?
    Obviously I'm aware of the Bali bombings, but I am specifically talking about terrorism in recent years. They have had very little, and the one-dimensional logic of some people about Islam being the problem should mean that Indonesia has the worst terrorism problems of any country, but instead it is pretty good. The problem of terrorism is almost contained to countries which have serious political unrest - that is the cause of terrorism, and not a heart-filled desire to save Islam.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Simple statement of fact.
    "These really aren't difficult concepts to understand" is not a "simple statement of fact". It is a subjective statement that cannot be assumed to be true for significant amounts of the population, i.e. those with severe learning difficulties, etc.

    You do not have a right to not feel patronised
    I never suggested anything to the contrary, dear.

    True. These people also seem quick to cry "Islamophobe" or "bigot" at people doing either.
    That is certainly one aspect. To my mind there are two categories of people that equate Islam with muslims (or conversely cannot distinguish between criticism of the two):

    1) Those that think all muslims are responsible for the crimes of those who purport to act in the name of Islam
    2) Those that equate criticism of Islam to essentially hate speech against muslims

    What statistics are these?
    The 326% increase in incidents of anti-Muslim abuse in 2015, to give one example (source).

    The trend toward an ever increasing number of hate crimes (based on spurious connections betweens someone's perceived race and their assumed religion/beliefs) is clear to see in all police (and other) statistics.

    Examples? References?
    This is a personal opinion with only anecdotal evidence supporting it. What I am seeing is a growing acceptance of sweeping anti-muslim generalisations and hatred even in mainstream discourse.

    I see many on the 'right' using the distinction between criticism of Islam/muslims to justify their clear bigotry against muslims. But then there is also the 'bigotry of low expectations' of those on the 'left', but overly-PC regressives are rather less harmful to society than far-right bigots.

    Neither of those statements makes any sense in the context of the comment you were replying to.
    Well, I really didn't think it was a difficult concept to understand(!).
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alevelstresss)
    Obviously the one-dimensional logic of some people about Islam being the problem should mean that Indonesia has the worst terrorism problems of any country, but instead it is pretty good.
    Ironically, your view that all Muslims, from different countries, are one homogeneous block with the same worldview is the naive and one-dimensional approach.

    The problem of terrorism is almost contained to countries which have serious political unrest -
    Like the UK, France, Belgium, Spain, Germany, Denmark, Australia, USA? Yeah, I guess so.
    When you first made this claim, I rejected it because of all the contradictory evidence, but your tactic of simply ignoring the evidence and repeating a refuted, fallacious claim, over and over, has actually convinced me.

    that is the cause of terrorism, and not a heart-filled desire to save Islam.
    Where does this "heart-felt desire to save Islam" claim come from? It is not about saving it, it is about expanding and spreading it. Jihad is a very real concept that is one of the most important elements in Islam. It covers every element of the struggle to please Allah, from the personal and introspective, to the violent and expansionist. (Seriously, you really should do some reading on Islam if you are so determined to defend it)
    Islamic ideology provides divine permission to carry out acts that people would otherwise be less likely to commit. It dehumanises the out-group allowing the barbarity of the terrorist attacks and sectarian conflict that is all too common now.
    As Steven Weinberg famously said...
    “With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion*.”
    (*Or other dogma-driven ideology - my addition)
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    "These really aren't difficult concepts to understand" is not a "simple statement of fact". It is a subjective statement that cannot be assumed to be true for significant amounts of the population, i.e. those with severe learning difficulties, etc.
    Being able to identify the difference between two obviously different thinks is not difficult.

    Are you seriously suggesting that "significant amounts of the population" have "severe learning difficulties"?

    Some people say the daftest thinks rather than admit a mistake. Ironically, it seems to be one of the elements that contributes to the very issue we are discussing.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Being able to identify the difference between two obviously different thinks is not difficult.
    Unfortunately for you, repetition of an incorrect statement does not confer upon that statement any increased validity.

    "Not difficult" for who? For you? For those of an average intelligence? For 99% of the population? If even one person finds it difficult to understand the distinction you put forth then your statement that the concepts "aren't difficult... to understand" is a "simple statement of fact" cannot be (wholly) true.

    Are you seriously suggesting that "significant amounts of the population" have "severe learning difficulties"?
    From the DoE:
    Approximately 75,000 children in England have a Statement of SEN and a primary SEN associated with learning disabilities. Of these, just over half have a moderate learning difficulty, one third have a severe learning difficulty and just over one in ten have a profound multiple learning difficulty.
    I would say 30,000+ children with severe learning difficulties is "significant", yes.

    Some people say the daftest thinks rather than admit a mistake.
    Indeed.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    I never suggested anything to the contrary, dear.
    Don't you ****ing patronise me sonny.
    Mods! MODS!! I'm being patronised!

    That is certainly one aspect. To my mind there are two categories of people that equate Islam with muslims (or conversely cannot distinguish between criticism of the two):

    1) Those that think all muslims are responsible for the crimes of those who purport to act in the name of Islam
    This group is a bit of a straw man that does not seem to exist outside the minds of apologists for Islam.

    2) Those that equate criticism of Islam to essentially hate speech against muslims
    This group is much more common, as evidenced by this and other threads.

    Ironic, don't you think, that those who accuse others of conflating Islam and Muslims are actually the more frequent offenders?

    The 326% increase in incidents of anti-Muslim abuse in 2015, to give one example (source).

    The trend toward an ever increasing number of hate crimes (based on spurious connections betweens someone's perceived race and their assumed religion/beliefs) is clear to see in all police (and other) statistics.
    But this does not show any correlation to criticism of Islam, which you claimed. It only shows an increase in attacks deemed as "anti-muslim" by a group dedicated to highlighting what it perceives as "anti-Muslim" attacks. The majority of attacks are "non-threatening verbal", and TellMAMA includes shouts of "paki" and "get out of this country" as anti Muslim bigotry. It goes without saying that such attacks are examples of racism an xenophobia, and not religiously motivated. Other examples of "attacks" include a sign saying "halal is barbaric" - which could logically be supported as traditionally, halal slaughter requires the animal to be fully conscious while it bleeds to death. Anothr class of "Anti-Muslim attack" is the drawing of characatures of Muhammad, which re clearly not "anti-Muslim bigotry" but an extension of liberal democracy's long and rich history of satire and the mocking of sacred cows.
    So, without details of what each individual "attack" consisted of, it is pretty meaningless in the context of determining anti-Muslim bigotry v criticism of Islam.
    This is a personal opinion with only anecdotal evidence supporting it. What I am seeing is a growing acceptance of sweeping anti-muslim generalisations and hatred even in mainstream discourse.

    Well, I really didn't think it was a difficult concept to understand(!).
    Clearly not. However, unlike my argument, yours is a classic non sequitur as it bears no relation to the original comment. But if it is as ssimple to understand as you claim, perhaps you could simply explain what you meant?
    Thanks
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lawyer3c)
    Unfortunately for you, repetition of an incorrect statement does not confer upon that statement any increased validity.

    "Not difficult" for who? For you? For those of an average intelligence? For 99% of the population? If even one person finds it difficult to understand the distinction you put forth then your statement that the concepts "aren't difficult... to understand" is a "simple statement of fact" cannot be (wholly) true.

    From the DoE:

    I would say 30,000+ children with severe learning difficulties is "significant", yes.

    Indeed.
    Significant, def:Sufficiently great or important to be worthy of attention; noteworthy

    So, you are claiming that in the context of a debate forum on a student website, and the wider context of public debate about the difference between criticism of Islam and anti-Muslim bigotry, 24,000 school children (one third of 75000!) are a sufficiently great or important proportion of the population engaged in the debate?

    Erm, ok.

    Also, define "severe learning dificulties". I know several people in that group through friends and family, and most of them can tell the difference between obviously different things. I find it somewhat insulting to them that you dismiss them as unable to carry out basic cognitive tasks. Shame.It is not a subject for disingenuous humour.
    • Community Assistant
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    it is quite comfortable with its own little brand of Islam.
    It's the Armani of Islam.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AlexanderHam)
    If you knew much about Indonesia you'd be aware of the Bali Bombing, one of the worst attacks since 9/11
    All because Australia dared to act to stop Indonesia's genocide of the Catholic majority in East Timor.

    Not a lot of people know this, but the stemming of this genocide was actually very high up on the list of grievances against the west outlined by Osama Bin Laden.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
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.

Updated: August 23, 2016
  • 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.