Irony in Islam

[reverse]

See this it the right use of free speech…to hammer out ideas.

 

Now ..backtracking a bit.

 

In the Red corner we have a liberal democratic , individual worshiping view of reality.

 

And in the Blue corner we have a god worshiping highly structured view of reality.

 

Lets get ready to ruuuuuuumbbble.

 

The Blue corner sees the slow creep of liberalism and godlessness creeping across the world via mass media and greed for power and personal wealth.

This is seen as a direct threat to everything they hold dear.

 

what do they do?

[Aardvark]

The Blue corner sees the slow creep of liberalism and godlessness creeping across the world via mass media and greed for power and personal wealth.

This is seen as a direct threat to everything they hold dear.

 

what do they do?

 

Perhaps they could try to win the debate by demonstrating the superiority of their beliefs through living decent moral lives, building solid communities, providing an example for others to follow.

 

Or they could resort to wild threats and occasional outbursts of violent brutality.

[Bettina]

Perhaps they could try to win the debate by demonstrating the superiority of their beliefs through living decent moral lives' date=' building solid communities, providing an example for others to follow.

 

Or they could resort to wild threats and occasional outbursts of violent brutality.[/quote']

 

Occasional ?

 

Bettina

[Aardvark]

Occasional ?

 

Bettina

 

Well, 'continous, paranoid, pyschotic outbursts of belligerent rage' seemed a little undiplomatic.

[Bettina]

Do you think Islamics like the Olympics? I mean the events, the bright colors, the happy people?

 

I wonder what they think when they see all that.

 

Bettina

[Dak]

When did they actually "burn a heretic?" Or for that matter, when did they attack an embassy, gather by the thousands to burn effigies and flags, or commit any other acts of mass violence?

 

That was my point -- that they can't.

 

Alright, look at it like this: if america were a predominantly muslim country, and the areas where these riots/rapings/beheadings/whatever are happening were predominantly christian, do you think the islamic states of american would be rioting over cartoons because of the muslims, or do you think that the christians would be rioting in plases like gaza over the latest blaspheme against jesus because they can get away with it over there?

 

Bearing in mind that historically, when allowed, christian fundamentalists have shown a bit of a penchant for genoside, burnings etc.

 

All im saying is that i suspect that its the region thats brutal and barbaric, and that the most extreme example of this is from the local religiouse extremists (you know what religiouse extremists are like), as opposed to the religion itself being notably more brutal and barbaric than other religions.

[Aardvark]

Do you think Islamics like the Olympics? I mean the events' date=' the bright colors, the happy people?

 

I wonder what they think when they see all that.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

Possibly, 'soft target'?

[Aardvark]

All im saying is that i suspect that its the region thats brutal and barbaric' date=' and that the most extreme example of this is from the local religiouse extremists (you know what religiouse extremists are like), as opposed to the religion itself being notably more brutal and barbaric than other religions.[/quote']

 

That doesn't explain Muslims in UK, France, Holland, Germany and Denmark acting in a brutal and threatening manner.

 

Remember the nice young man dressed as a suicide bomber marching in protest in London? And the signs being waved demanding death for all who insult Islam?

[Dak]

Nope.

 

Do you have a link?

[Aardvark]

Nope.

 

Do you have a link?

 

Here's the BBC.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4687996.stm

 

and

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/06/AR2006020601571.html

 

for some of the lovely slogans such as 'Be Prepared for the Real Holocaust' and 'Butcher those who mock Islam'. All brought to us by the marchers in London.

 

(i particularly like the insinuation that the holocaust wasn't 'real', do you think they are friends of David Irving?, perhaps we could extradit them to Austria, or would that be too ironic?)

[pcs]

That was my point -- that they can't.

 

Just as the pent up, violent autistics on the secularist end of the scale can't. Okay. Now we're on the same page.

 

Alright, look at it like this: if america were a predominantly muslim country, and the areas where these riots/rapings/beheadings/whatever are happening were predominantly christian, do you think the islamic states of american would be rioting over cartoons because of the muslims, or do you think that the christians would be rioting in plases like gaza over the latest blaspheme against jesus because they can get away with it over there?

 

I think you need to rephrase this scenario, it's kind of confusing.

 

But to answer your question, where exactly is the religiosphere of the past five centuries has secular thought and culture taken root and flourished? Geographically and demographically, your point doesn't hold water.

 

Bearing in mind that historically, when allowed, christian fundamentalists have shown a bit of a penchant for genoside, burnings etc.

 

And secularists have shown a penchant for fondling little girls, shooting up schools, starving men, women and children by the millions on the alter of science, and...oh yeah...burnings.

 

All im saying is that i suspect that its the region thats brutal and barbaric, and that the most extreme example of this is from the local religiouse extremists (you know what religiouse extremists are like), as opposed to the religion itself being notably more brutal and barbaric than other religions.

 

Yeah, and I'm saying such a bigoted point of view doesn't survive under scrutiny.

[reverse]

Perhaps they could try to win the debate by demonstrating the superiority of their beliefs through living decent moral lives' date=' building solid communities, providing an example for others to follow.

[/quote']

 

The blue corner thinks they are living pure lives…

Praying to their creator in thanks five times a day…

 

They are disgusted by the liberal rides that are pimped”..

Black men that want to get rich or die trying…

Young ladies that want to show their humps their humps their lovely lady bumps..

They don’t want no drama…or robberies or kids on drugs…

Or super sized citizens requiring two seats on an aircraft.

What sort of perversity is this.

 

They deal with rapists by chopping the offending item off…

that’s one way to stop repeat offending…

[Aardvark]

The blue corner thinks they are living pure lives…

Praying to their creator in thanks five times a day…

 

They are disgusted by the liberal rides that are pimped”..

Black men that want to get rich or die trying…

Young ladies that want to show their humps their humps their lovely lady bumps..

They don’t want no drama…or robberies or kids on drugs…

Or super sized citizens requiring two seats on an aircraft.

What sort of perversity is this.

 

They deal with rapists by chopping the offending item off…

that’s one way to stop repeat offending…

 

 

Encore!

 

I nominate you for cultural ambassador of and special advisor to the Muslim world.

 

With that approach maybe the blue corner will start making some progress.

[Dak]

Aardvark, im tired now so ill address your points later, but

 

Yeah, and I'm saying such a bigoted point of view doesn't survive under scrutiny.

 

how in hell does suggesting that islam isnt inherently evil count as bigoted?

[pcs]

how in hell does suggesting that islam isnt inherently evil count as bigoted?

 

I'm talking about your characterization of Christian fundamentalists.

[reverse]

Encore!

 

I nominate you for cultural ambassador of and special advisor to the Muslim world.

 

With that approach maybe the blue corner will start making some progress.

 

 

sorry...I was on a roll.

 

Red corner as you well know has it's equally valid points of view.

[reverse]

I'm talking about your characterization of .

 

See now I have heard of the fire bombings of the animal liberation front (seriously)

 

 

but not much from Christian fundamentalists.

what is the fundamentalist part about?

is it a cut away from one of the mainstream religions...why did it cut away?

[Severian]

Maybe you can show me where that is happening. I see one mistake in post 95 where I signed it twice.

 

Bettina

 

We know who you are because you have your name and picture (is that you?) to the left of the post. There is no need to sign again.

 

 

Back to the topic:

 

I notice that the people here who are raging against the muslim community are comitting a straw-man fallicy. They are arguing for freedom of speech, while those who want tolerance of other people's religion are not arguing against free speech.

 

Obviously we all think that newspapers should be free to expres their opinions. There should not be laws preventing free-speech (indeed, there should be laws guaranteeing free-speech). They should print what they want as long as they are not encouraging a crime. (Actually it is now a crime in the UK to promote racial hatred - how hatred is defined is rather unclear. I would be surprised if these cartoons didn't count, but that is a different issue.)

 

But, there is such a thing as decent behaviour. Just because the law does not forbid us from behaving antisocially doesn't mean that we should. These newspapers should never have published these pictures because they are in bad taste, offensive and do not convey any relevant information. The newpapers are supposed to have their own regulatory bodies which prevent this sort of thing (notice this is not a restriction on free-speech since it is self imposed), but in this case they proved useless.

 

The people who support the publishing of these cartoons are not supporting free-speech, they are supporting intolerance towards those with a different religion or culture.

 

Imagine this scenario. Imagine an African American standing for president. Let's say one newspaper is against his candidacy and wants his opponent to win. Would it be acceptable for them to accompany its coverage of a candidate debate with a cartoon protraying him as one of the black-and-white minstrels (if you know what I mean by that)? Of course not! Preventing them from doing so by law would be a violation of free speech, but any decent newspaper should be capable of keeping its coverage civilized.

[Tiger's Eye]

Do you think Islamics like the Olympics? I mean the events' date=' the bright colors, the happy people?

 

I wonder what they think when they see all that.

 

Bettina[/quote']

 

 

I don't think that this is a fair statement to make (though I'm a little fuzzy on it's meaning). Aren't there Muslim countries that compete in the Olympics? I'm confused now We just had the African Cup of Nations here, and all the Muslims (men, women, and children) were pretty excited with bright and happy colors. I believe that the same goes for the World Cup.

 

There is an aspect of Islam that doesn't disagree with me, and that is the violent aspect that falls under 'protecting Islam'. In short (or from what understand), I wouldn't say that it's an 'eye for an eye' thing, but people are allowed to kill if they are 'threatened or if Islam is threatened' (please correct me if I'm wrong). Islam is a religion very different from, say, Catholicism. I think that we all (Jews, Christian, and Muslims) worship the same God, but we all interpret him in different ways. Personally, I think that while Christians view God in more of a fatherly way, Muslims may look at him differently, more........sacred? I dunno. Otherwise, whatever the Muslims do is just fine with me. It's definitely a more aggressive religion, but I think that these people who torch down things are just taking things WAYYYY out of proportion. They say that they kill the infidels in the name of Allah, but apparently, these people are the 'misguided' ones (I find Islam to be something practiced according to interpretation. What I mean by this is that there are some things that are written in the Qu'raan that is interpreted differently by different people. It's kind of like the Bible: some people see it as a book of lessons and stories, while others take it as the law, written in stone. In the same way, some Muslims will use and twist the words in their holy book in order to justify their own wants to kill. However, this is NOT everyone. Again, please correct me if I made any mistakes in my explanation, especially those who REALLY know more about Islam that me ): I don't think that God or Allah would've wanted it this way.

 

Again, this is only what I think.

[reverse]

I’ve met quite a few Islamic people over the years.

Each one varies greatly in attitude,

the same as any group of people.

Some are wealthy and cultured...

some are hard working, serious, kind, polite and look the other way when you hold up a girlie calendar as a joke..

Some are the typical hot headed young men, indignant at the slightest dig. ...but that can be found in any random group of people from any culture.

Generally I have found them to have a great sense of humor.

I'm especially impressed by architectural works like the ancient palace at Alhambra.

 

please see:

 

http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings/The_Alhambra.html

[Bettina]

I don't think that this is a fair statement to make (though I'm a little fuzzy on it's meaning). Aren't there Muslim countries that compete in the Olympics? I'm confused now We just had the African Cup of Nations here, and all the Muslims (men, women, and children) were pretty excited with bright and happy colors. I believe that the same goes for the World Cup.

 

I am more curious to know if the Islamic religion allows women to compete in the 2006 Olympics along side their male counterparts. I haven't seen anything that says it is acceptable.

 

Bettina

[Tiger's Eye]

I am more curious to know if the Islamic religion allows women to compete in the 2006 Olympics along side their male counterparts. I haven't seen anything that says it is acceptable.

 

Bettina

 

Doesn't say anywhere that it's UNACCEPTABLE to compete. One of my former swim coaches was an Olympic swimmer (she was sooo awesome! ). Actually, she was recently selected to join the current International Olympic Committee in 2004.

 

Ah, here's a link about her:

 

http://www.olympic.org/uk/organisation/ioc/members/bio_uk.asp?id=900

[Bettina]

We know who you are because you have your name and picture (is that you?) to the left of the post. There is no need to sign again.

 

 

Back to the topic:

 

I notice that the people here who are raging against the muslim community are comitting a straw-man fallicy. They are arguing for freedom of speech' date=' while those who want tolerance of other people's religion are not arguing against free speech.

 

Obviously we all think that newspapers should be free to expres their opinions. There should not be laws preventing free-speech (indeed, there should be laws guaranteeing free-speech). They should print what they want as long as they are not encouraging a crime. (Actually it is now a crime in the UK to promote racial hatred - how hatred is defined is rather unclear. I would be surprised if these cartoons didn't count, but that is a different issue.)

 

But, there is such a thing as decent behaviour. Just because the law does not forbid us from behaving antisocially doesn't mean that we should. These newspapers should never have published these pictures because they are in bad taste, offensive and do not convey any relevant information. The newpapers are supposed to have their own regulatory bodies which prevent this sort of thing (notice this is not a restriction on free-speech since it is self imposed), but in this case they proved useless.

 

The people who support the publishing of these cartoons are not supporting free-speech, they are supporting intolerance towards those with a different religion or culture.

 

Imagine this scenario. Imagine an African American standing for president. Let's say one newspaper is against his candidacy and wants his opponent to win. Would it be acceptable for them to accompany its coverage of a candidate debate with a cartoon protraying him as one of the black-and-white minstrels (if you know what I mean by that)? Of course not! Preventing them from doing so by law would be a violation of free speech, but any decent newspaper should be capable of keeping its coverage civilized.[/quote']

 

Yes, the cartoon was in very bad taste, the newspaper should have apologizied, and the Muslim community had the right to complain to the management of that paper. I don't argue that. In my country we have had the pope, jesus christ, god, the president, and a host of others put into non flattering cartoons.

 

However, this does not give the Muslims the right to go out and kill people to defend there "culture". Doing so just shows the world how uncivilized and repulsive their culture/ideology/religion is. Nothing you say is going to gloss over that abomination.

 

Bettina

 

P.S. With all due respect to you, I sign my name to everything I take responsibility for. I do it everywhere, not just here. I don't think its that obnoxious.

[jeskill]

So, Tiger's Eye, just out of curiosity, how do you make female sports jive with the whole modesty thing?

 

Doesn't say anywhere that it's UNACCEPTABLE to compete. One of my former swim coaches was an Olympic swimmer (she was sooo awesome! ). Actually' date=' she was recently selected to join the current International Olympic Committee in 2004.

 

Ah, here's a link about her:

 

http://www.olympic.org/uk/organisation/ioc/members/bio_uk.asp?id=900[/quote']

[Tiger's Eye]

So, Tiger's Eye, just out of curiosity, how do you make female sports jive with the whole modesty thing?

 

I don't understand the question..."with the whole modesty thing?" Are you referring to the fact that women wear veils? That's a good question, but I'm not sure I could provide you with a suitable answer, though, since I'm not veiled, or Muslim, for that matter. Maybe they all stick to wearing swim caps and body suits I dunno (I can't really speak for ALL veiled women since I really don't know; my coach wore a cap and full body suit, though). Not all Muslim women are veiled: some dress just as casually as the women in the West do (at least, where I am), so wearing regular swimsuits, shorts, or tank-tops is not a really huge issue for them (depending where you are, since conservativeness varies from place to place, IMO).

 

Could you rephrase your question? Perhaps then I could further elaborate an appropriate reply.