Paris

[NJS 4386]

There are a lot on the liberal left who've never really accepted the way the Internet has allowed widespread criticism of religion in general to become do accepted. This is why Dawkins is so despised for daring to point out how ridiculous the whole thing is because it jars a lot of people's in-built idea of respect for belief.

 

I think this was tolerated to a point when the target was mainly Christianity but when it comes to Islam it becomes easy to conflate it with perceived dislike of Arabs or Asians.

 

The mental gymnastics of calling out "Islamaphobia" while keeping quiet about the homophobia, misogyny and intolerance inherent in the doctrine is breathtaking at times.

 

I find it similar how any criticism of Israel for being cunts instantly brings cries of anti-Semitism.

 

Of course there are people for whom the accusations on either matter are true but the way it's used an attempt to quell any questions is sickening IMO.

[toonotl 2980]

There are a lot on the liberal left who've never really accepted the way the Internet has allowed widespread criticism of religion in general to become do accepted. This is why Dawkins is so despised for daring to point out how ridiculous the whole thing is because it jars a lot of people's in-built idea of respect for belief.

 

I think this was tolerated to a point when the target was mainly Christianity but when it comes to Islam it becomes easy to conflate it with perceived dislike of Arabs or Asians.

 

The mental gymnastics of calling out "Islamaphobia" while keeping quiet about the homophobia, misogyny and intolerance inherent in the doctrine is breathtaking at times.

 

I find it similar how any criticism of Israel for being cunts instantly brings cries of anti-Semitism.

 

Of course there are people for whom the accusations on either matter are true but the way it's used an attempt to quell any questions is sickening IMO.

 

Yep. It's the misapplication of 'tolerance'. Bad ideas should not be tolerated, and the effects of bad ideas shouldn't be ignored in favour of self-flagellation. There is no way the first port of call for blame should be 'Western governments interfering in the Middle-East'. It's religion. Plain and simple.

[toonotl 2980]

It wasn't criticism of a belief that he thought was racist though, was it? It was the notion that we should close the borders to people fleeing ISIS because they're all potential terrorists.

 

It's not even a nuanced difference it's clear as day. Criticism of religious dogma and persecution is brilliant and should be encouraged. Persecution of whole populations of people based on their religion or that of their leaders is heinous and SHOULD correctly be called out.

 

Refer above.

[NJS 4386]

It wasn't criticism of a belief that he thought was racist though, was it? It was the notion that we should close the borders to people fleeing ISIS because they're all potential terrorists.

 

It's not even a nuanced difference it's clear as day. Criticism of religious dogma and persecution is brilliant and should be encouraged. Persecution of whole populations of people based on their religion or that of their leaders is heinous and SHOULD correctly be called out.

Persecution is a strong word. Of course I don't support attacks on Muslims or "rounding them up" or anything like that but I feel okay about questioning British Muslims' attitudes given certain poll results on these matters. I think Cameron's talk of British values is bollocks but when so many people say they hold their religious laws above state ones it's fair enough to object. Edited November 15, 2015 by NJS

[Happy Face 29]

 

Refer above.

The above didn't really reflect my point. I like Dawkins and his criticism of all religions, the ideas that hold their followers back, the homophobia, sexism and all that.

 

That is completely distinct from from using Friday's attacks to persecute uninvolved Muslims, to deny them rights, to stop showing then support or sympathy.

 

To defend the latter and justify it as the former is misguided.

[toonotl 2980]

Who's defended the persecution of Muslims? I'm not. I'm defending my right to 'make blanket statements about religion'.

 

You can make blanket statements about religion, because generally they'll have a book that outlines the blanket statements you can make about them. Race, not so much. They're different, you know.

 

Edit: I love the attempt to represent my argument as a defence of 'closing the borders to people based upon their religion' by the way. I should know better and argue more simply as not to arouse the 'you're a racist' brigade.

Edited November 15, 2015 by toonotl

[Happy Face 29]

Persecution is a strong word. Of course I don't support attacks on Muslims or "rounding them up" or anything like that but I feel okay about questioning British Muslims' attitudes given certain poll results on these matters. I think Cameron's talk of British values is bollocks but when so many people say they hold their religious laws above state ones it's fair enough to object.

Mostly spot on. I hold my own values above many state laws too though. I think the majority do.

 

Speeding, drug use, many gay laws until recently.

 

Disagreeing with the state is not in itself a violent or dangerous act. I encourage it in liberal cases, so have to accept it will be widespread among those with beliefs that run counter to mine too.

[Happy Face 29]

Who's defended the persecution of Muslims? I'm not. I'm defending my right to 'make blanket statements about religion'.

 

You can make blanket statements about religion, because generally they'll have a book that outlines the blanket statements you can make about them. Race, not so much. They're different, you know.

 

Edit: I love the attempt to represent my argument as a defence of 'closing the borders to people based upon their religion' by the way. I should know better and argue more simply as not to arouse the 'you're a racist' brigade.

 

SEW made a clear and unambiguous point about his big racist mate wanting to close the borders. His mate wants to persecute victims of ISIS for the acts of ISIS.

 

This got misrepresented as if he was saying all criticism of religion is racist.

 

Does criticism of religion no favours to defend those knackers.

[toonotl 2980]

Once again, who's defending 'those knackers'? I'm not. I've said pretty unambiguously that I'm not defending 'those knackers'.

[Happy Face 29]

So why's there been such opposition to the post from SEW?

 

Glad we're all agreed

[Christmas Tree 4725]

All this willy waving is enjoyable to read, however it would be nice to hear how you would resolve this situation if it was up to you.

[toonotl 2980]

So why's there been such opposition to the post from SEW?

 

Glad we're all agreed

 

SEW hasn't mentioned once the problem of religion in terrorism, and chose to blame Western governments as the chief cause of the terror attacks. With that in mind, when the issue of bigotry against religion was raised, I asked for clarification on what constitutes 'bigotry against religion'. Call it a hunch, but I thought we'd get into exactly the sort of exchange we're in now. You know, a bunch of hippies trying to intimate that I'm a racist, and me having to constantly restate my position, in the process stifling the entire conversation. Anyway, having asked for clarification on SEW position, you should try it some time, I was told by SEW that, 'bigotry against religion' involved 'making blanket statements about religion'.

 

My issue with that idea is that making general comments about religion is not inherently bigoted. Religions have 'general' beliefs that they adhere to as contained in their religious scripture. This is how a religion is different to a race. This is how you can make general statements about religion. This is how you criticise an idea without, *gasp*, being a traitor to tolerance warriors of the left.

 

Should we discriminate against people on the basis of their beliefs? No.

Should we acknowledge the problems inherent in those beliefs without consideration for hurt feelings? Yes. Absolutely.

[PaddockLad 17274]

So why's there been such opposition to the post from SEW?

Glad we're all agreed

Because SEW accused someone he's presumably known for donkeys years of being a racist when it was just an emotional outburst to the horrific events in Paris. People seldom engage their brain before committing their thoughts to social media, He's done the same as his mate tbh, both statements are plainly stupid but let's face it not the worst thing that's happened this weekend. Or maybe I've got that all completely wrong and his mate is the Lord high grand wizard of the Chester le Street branch of the KKK and SEW has won awards for his work exposing "racism" in society in general Edited November 15, 2015 by PaddockLad

[toonotl 2980]

 

Too true. SEW is Ben Affleck.

 

 

Gross!

[NJS 4386]

So why's there been such opposition to the post from SEW?

 

Glad we're all agreed

The bloke is as quick to be an apologit for religion as I am to criticise it.

 

I don't mean he holds belief but he's alway been quick to object to any bad-mouthing - for example when there was criticsm of Patrick Muamba thanking God for saving him when it was a doctor and science.

[PaddockLad 17274]

 

Too true. SEW is Ben Affleck.

 

 

 

Gross!

whooah! That's spooky....

 

You've just outed yourself as someone who takes Bill Maher as an intellectual role model though

 

By the way, if SEW is Affleck, you're Maher, who plays HF?....."intellectually rigorous liberal minded statistician"

[toonotl 2980]

whooah! That's spooky....

 

You've just outed yourself as someone who takes Bill Maher as an intellectual role model though

 

By the way, if SEW is Affleck, you're Maher, who plays HF?....."intellectually rigorous liberal minded statistician"

 

Does it?

[NJS 4386]

Mostly spot on. I hold my own values above many state laws too though. I think the majority do.

 

Speeding, drug use, many gay laws until recently.

 

Disagreeing with the state is not in itself a violent or dangerous act. I encourage it in liberal cases, so have to accept it will be widespread among those with beliefs that run counter to mine too.

A good dose of rebellion regarding laws is fine (especially regarding personal responsibility ones like drugs or sexuality) - expressing sympathy with the Charlie Hebdo killers and calling for blasphemy or apostasy to be crimes punishable by extreme sentences is not imo because they impose them on others.

[NJS 4386]

who plays HF?....."intellectually rigorous liberal minded statistician"

 

 

Ben Goldacre is probably the closest

[PaddockLad 17274]

Does it?

Listen son, it's the Internet. Round these parts we take tiny inferences and twist them till they squeal, then make a sweeping generalisation about the bastard we've just dishonestly created to prove a spurious point. Got it?

[Renton 21627]

Think it was more French foreign policy the attackers are supposed to have referenced last night.

 

Not much shit going down in free western secular countries not engaged in the middle eat is there? Switzerland and that?

HF, I'm going to drag this post up again, what do you mean? Are you suggesting that it's only countries involved in the ME that have been targeted? Are there moral differences between Spain and Denmark compared with Germany and Switzerland? Should we just bury our heads to the conflicts on the European borders and not say anything for fear of reprisal (whilst of course accepting mass migration of refugees). For clarification, is this what you're suggesting?

[PaddockLad 17274]

Ben Goldacre is probably the closest

I like that but I wouldn't want HF giving me a medical examination

Edited November 15, 2015 by PaddockLad

[Dr Gloom 21924]

most western countries have opened their borders to Muslim refugees, fleeing persecution, and rightly so, because our culture is built in tolerance, freedom and acceptance. There are always going to be bigots on the fringes and that's fine as well because we have freedom of speech. I'm also free to believe that religion is nonsense and anyone that practices it is an idiot as long as my beliefs don't threaten anyone else's.

It's the fundamentalists doing the majority of the persecution as far as I can see. I have no issue with anyone making blanket statements about these cunts.

[Park Life 71]

I got away with calling the Saudi's savages. Beat that fuckers.

[Dr Gloom 21924]

And while im making blanket statements about religion, I'd also point out that a lot of Muslim countries are pretty horrific countries to live because people are denied basic freedoms and human rights that we enjoy in the west - again because of religion. I welcome Muslim people seeking a better life here in the west as long as they don't bring their fucked up ideologues with them and start encouraging their kids to murder innocent people.

 

I think Renton's right about a clash of cultures. We on the left want to be tolerant, Muslim extremists don't tolerate anything not in the Koran. I'm not even sure islamiphobia was a word prior to 9/11.