We banned antisemitism, why not Islamophobia?
we made antisemitism not socially ok after the holocaust, why not do so now with the criticism of islam? look at the uighurs in china, the muslims in kashmir, the arabs in palestine, the chechens in russia, the masses especially muslim brotherhood members in egypt, the rohingya in burma yet many dont listen......
Muslims don't seem to care antisemitism is not socially ok.Originally Posted by Misfit
and they get ostracized, so why not ostracize islamophobes, mmkay? reduce it to hate speech thrown in trash that gets you fired from your job and boycotted from tech
they only criticize the existence of the criminal establishment of the state of israel which was founded on stolen land. that is not antisemitism. that is a fact. it was stolen land. just as america and australia were stolen land, which is why they support them so much, and if you said foul speech about jews themselves.....that's another story
Why would they get ostracized when their leaders openly express antisemitism themselves?
I'm talking about the west, not the whole world. the west needs to shut up about stuff like how the hijab is oppressive just like how they needed to shut up about the kippah.
Actually the west is built on the idea of not shutting up. You're confusing it with totalitarian dictatorships. The hijab is a tool of oppression these governments use to suppress women.
Wearing head coverings seems to precede Islam. It evidently was a sign of high class, like wearing high heels is today.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab:
Veiling did not originate with the advent of Islam. Statuettes depicting veiled priestesses date back as far as 2500 BCE.[72] Elite women in ancient Mesopotamia and in the Byzantine, Greek, and Persian empires wore the veil as a sign of respectability and high status.[73] In ancient Mesopotamia, Assyria had explicit sumptuary laws detailing which women must veil and which women must not, depending upon the woman's class, rank, and occupation in society.[73] Female slaves and prostitutes were forbidden to veil and faced harsh penalties if they did so.[7] Veiling was thus not only a marker of aristocratic rank, but also served to "differentiate between 'respectable' women and those who were publicly available"
I often see this brought up as an argument(?) in the narrative. Can't figure out why.
You seem to be confusing the hijab with the burka.
No I am not.
what if a woman wanted to wear the burka? Whatcha gonna do then? what if a convert to islam (i should say revert) whose parents beg her not to convert to islam, in a western country, wears hijab or burka out of choice?
youre confusing governments with religion. most muslim governments are not theocracies, unfortunately....lol
I'm not going to do anything. And I don't care about people who accept slave morality.
There is a difference.
Jews are thought mostly as an ethnos. Though, originally it was (and formally stays) a religious term.
While mahometans are mainly thought as a religiogious group. Comparable ethnical term for them would be Arabs.
So it's ok to criticize ideas (as a religion) and bad to criticize an ethnos. To criticize Arabs would be thought as bad too.
You may meet in Western medias a lot of antirussian stereotypes and other idiotic nazistic propaganda. It's thought as ok for tens of years there. Just for example, I saw on this forum someones said about Russians as about criminals and drunks, 2nd including to me. Those dudes don't care that recently in USSR there was no significant problems with crimes, lesser than in USA of that time. Same with drugs, mb until now. And was much lesser problems with alcohol here as life was better. Before mid of 1800s there was no problems with alcohol in Russia, lesser than in west Europe. Crimes were not more common than anywhere. It's since 1990s coming of capitalism the life here turns to hell. But I doubt it's much better with crimes and mb alcohol in today USA. There is no objectivity when that shit is assinged to Russians in general, it's mostly propaganda for political reasons, same as was used by Hithler is in today West medias - and that is supposed ok there now to say insulting idiocy about Russians but not ok about other nations.
conversion to judaism is possible, and conversion from islam to another religion based on criticism of islam seems to be something youre suggesting...sooooo??????? forced apostasy after decades of pressure leading to genocidal campaigns?
btw i am on klonopin withdrawal so i am especially moody today, so i do apologize if something i said came from that and not me.
Or a corset in Victorian times, yet it's universally seen as a symbol of an underclass by feminists.
Sicuramente cercherai il significato di questo.
muslims have become the scapegoat the jews once were.
There's no war tribunal about abuses against Muslims
I'd ban the moral police, they are annoying af..
@Misift I agree with this definition of antisemitism:
Do you agree with it?The working definition of antisemitism
In the spirit of the Stockholm Declaration that states: “With humanity still scarred by …antisemitism and xenophobia the international community shares a solemn responsibility to fight those evils” the committee on Antisemitism and Holocaust Denial called the IHRA Plenary in Budapest 2015 to adopt the following working definition of antisemitism.
On 26 May 2016, the Plenary in Bucharest decided to:
To guide IHRA in its work, the following examples may serve as illustrations:Adopt the following non-legally binding working definition of antisemitism:
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.”
Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits.
Contemporary examples of antisemitism in public life, the media, schools, the workplace, and in the religious sphere could, taking into account the overall context, include, but are not limited to:
- Calling for, aiding, or justifying the killing or harming of Jews in the name of a radical ideology or an extremist view of religion.
- Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations about Jews as such or the power of Jews as collective — such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
- Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.
- Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
- Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
- Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
- Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor.
- Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation.
- Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
- Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis.
- Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel.
Antisemitic acts are criminal when they are so defined by law (for example, denial of the Holocaust or distribution of antisemitic materials in some countries).
Criminal acts are antisemitic when the targets of attacks, whether they are people or property – such as buildings, schools, places of worship and cemeteries – are selected because they are, or are perceived to be, Jewish or linked to Jews.
Antisemitic discrimination is the denial to Jews of opportunities or services available to others and is illegal in many countries.
Antisemitism is against a people, rather than an ideology like Islam. It would be a double standard to ban criticism of Islam while Islam itself criticises other ideas.
I'm not sure what the groups you mentioned have to do with people criticising Islam.
We shouldn't ban the criticism of Islam, Judaism, Christianity, or any other religion. If anything, we should be fighting to preserve allowances that are threatened by increasingly meddlesome social media companies. Major corporations want to do business in the Muslim world, which makes me apprehensive about a future where tweeting critiques of Islam gets your credit cards cancelled.
That said, there's clearly a tendency to argue against Islam in ways that are taboo when applied to other religions, including Judaism. As in the Quran, it is quite easy to find theological justifications for genocide in the Old Testament. It is equally (and notoriously) antisemitic to make such insinuations about the practical beliefs of normal Jewish people.
Last edited by xerx; 01-31-2021 at 02:52 AM. Reason: rewording
Can you honestly say that YOU (as a muslim) have no interest in influencing how I choose to live my life?
I disagree Israel is a criminal settler state, which will eventually become arab majority due to the higher birth rates of the arabs and international pressure. It is like apartheid era south africa. and wishing death or rape upon muslims is islamophobic, regardless of quranic doctrines or the power and rich cultural heritage of the indian and chinese states. One only has to look at the christchurch mosque shooting and the quebec mosque shooting.
slow persuasion not force.
You see, I got a problem with that. As long as you intend on persuasion you will never be immune to critique. I'm very happy I could elucidate on the matter.
*raises hand. I'm a woman who was raised in a compelmentarian mentality (sexual segregation and elevating men while subjugating women) fundamentalist monotheist faith.
AFAIK all the users above are guys.
What choices have you got if you're in a sex or race segregated system? Yeah, I might choose A if I'm only allowed A or B as choices.
why is the culture itself segregating what is performatively holy for people? and why is the culture segregating by a body trait like race or sex?
Tired incomplete narrative about choice with headcoverings.
and yes, there's a lot of outgrouping Arab ppl, and that's messed up.
but Islam, like Christianity, has a system of beliefs which are so first-draft it hurts.
A middleschooler could write up better religious ideology.
Islam is a religion and it's fine to criticize a religion. It's fine to criticize Judaism too, in fact that happens all the time in the West. Christianity is also constantly being criticized in the West, again, that's fine and I'll be happy to join in. The only religion Westerners are afraid of openly criticizing is Islam. I wonder if it has anything to do with violent threats they receive from a handfull of crazy Islamists when they criticize Islam? Hm.
Note I am not saying all muslims are like this, but even the ones that aeren't like this, really, are afraid of speaking out against the ones that are. I know how muslim communities work since there are many in my part of the world, elected local officials are afraid and turn a blind eye to the abuses that happen in these communities, whether it's homosexuals getting attacked on the street or violence against women. And there is a caste of imams, who hide behind the average muslim in these communities, and constantly complain about "Islamophobia" to anyone who openly criticizes Islam, and make members of their communities feel victimized (which they are in some way, but they are not being served by believing they are victims of some grand scheme against them).
All in all the OP seems very confused to me in these recent rants.
The definition I included says that criticism of Israel is OK, but to blame all Jews for the actions of the Israeli government is not.
If you disagree, then you shouldn't object to those who say that all Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathisers.
one can find good and beauty and usefulness in religions, here and there, but until we get comfortable with calling out the naked emperors and 'tearing down idols,' we're going to have hate-harboring and illogical religions that hold people back instead of lifting them up
The best way to assimilate immigrants is to give them a ladder to the middle class.
Middle class people adapt to the spirit of the institutions to which they belong — like corporations and universities, which exhibit attitudes that are more-or-less shared by the society at large — and remold their religious beliefs to fit an anodyne, comfortably bourgeois lifestyle.
The worst way to assimilate immigrants is to keep reminding them that they're different from you.
Last edited by xerx; 02-02-2021 at 02:22 AM.
"Antisemitism for me but not for thee!"
kek
OP is muslim
The west's real core or nature is Prometheus the morning star. In Abrahmic religions such as Islam, Christianity and Judaism that is known as Lucifer or the devil or just the antagonist, in norse mythology its Odin. The ideal of Europe specifically has always been Faustian in nature. This will probably never change. Its in our blood and bones. They cannot understand, because its not part of their history and nature as a civilization separate from us.
The sin of eating from the tree of knowledge is the west's " soul and nature.
If I had to choose one word to identify the uniqueness of the West it
would be “Faustian.” This is the word Oswald Spengler used to desig-
nate the “soul” of the West. He believed that Western civilization was
driven by an unusually dynamic and expansive psyche. The “prime-
symbol” of this Faustian soul was “pure and limitless space.” This soul
had a “tendency towards the infinite,” a tendency most acutely ex-
pressed in modern mathematics. The “infinite continuum,” the exponen-
tial logarithm and “its dissociation from all connexion with magnitude”
and transference to a “transcendent relational world” were some of the
words Spengler used to describe Western mathematics. But he also
wrote of the “bodiless music” of the Western composer, “in which har-
mony and polyphony bring him to images of utter ‘beyondness’ that
transcend all possibilities of visual definition,” and, before the modern
era, of the Gothic “form-feeling” of “pure, imperceptible, unlimited
space.”
.
.
.
Spengler thus viewed the West as a strikingly vibrant culture driven
by a type of personality overflowing with expansive impulses—
“intellectual will-to-power.” “Fighting,” “progressing,” “overcoming of
resistances,” battling “against what is near, tangible and easy”—these
were some of the terms Spengler used to describe this soul. - RICARDO DUCHESNE
I know you know exactly what I'm talking about. Sacrifice for power, knowledge & freedom. To gain one must always lose something in return as payment. e_e even Elon has to sacrifice for his dream to reach Mars. <= a real life Promethean.
These things are all very un-Eastern, un-Abrahamic. Forbidden & shunned.
Thinking every human is the same tabula rasa is the road to death and war. Other civilizations have their own soul/nature, a seed firmly planted in the soil that is the people.
Last edited by SGF; 02-01-2021 at 11:29 AM.
I don't have a religion.
If you are like most Muslims throughout history, you have the same religion as your parents and grandparents - simply because they conditioned you into it from birth. Maybe a seal is on your heart.
I see no evidence that you are happy to crush my arguments or that you are even able to do so. If you intend to close down discussions when it is not to your liking, then I suggest you don't waste the time of others by proselytizing to them. Although this is preferable to killing them for not converting to the ideology you follow.
I've always tried to make it clear that my beef is with Islam and Judiasm and Christianity themselves, rather than Jews, Muslims, or Christians themselves. I'm a critic of religion and superstition, but people who are religious/superstitious aren't necessarily bad people. I think that Islamophobes and Antisemites attack Jews and Muslims for being different rather than being anti-supernatural, though.
Its pretty much exclusively the supernaturalism I find distasteful, along with some of the more archaic religious laws in Abrahamic Holy Books.
hedonism is your religion, as your profile description explains
I think that's fairly reasonable.
hah! You understand them better than they do themselves.
(not sarcasm)
Hedonism doesn't qualify as a religion. It does not involve belief in a supernatural or superhuman power.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
