The "bravery" of the anti-Muslim

[dzheremi]

I see. So "other people have been murdered in other places, too" means that everytime someone is murdered, it's terrorism? Nothing has any context?



And it's easy to call something "histrionics" when it isn't happening to you. You aren't a member of the Egyptian church, of course, but for those of us who are, I will tell you that this is the farthest thing from an emotional appeal that there can be. Rather than being emotional about it, Egyptians Christians are resigned to it, in part because they know that self-satisfied, "kumbaya" Westerners don't care that Coptic people die so long as the West can maintain its fiction where everyone shares blame for what Islamists do. So I show that video not to say "Oh, poor me!" (that happened in Egypt, not where I live) or "Waaaah! People should feel bad for my church!" (it's been there for 2,000 years, through times much more barbaric than the current age), but for what I actually said I was doing: to show the difference between actual terrorism (what happened in that video), and what you called terrorism (people being yelled at and called bad names). Because they're not the same thing. They're not even really comparable.

<Staff Edit>

 

[Hetta]

Dude, or dudette, whatever you are. I am French. So don't tell me that nothing has happened to "my" people. What happened to my people goes back through two world wars, never mind terrorist attacks. My family lost more members during WWII than you can even imagine. I just choose not to rant and rave and think I'm more special than anyone else.

 

[dzheremi]

Oh, okay. I was unaware I was bringing down the whole French nation and not recognizing all of its sacrifices by disagreeing with you on a messageboard over what's terrorism and what isn't. Speaking of histrionics...

By the way, since you've chosen to make it about your personal history, both of my grandfathers were involved in WWII -- one as a pilot and the other as a field medic. You don't need to tell me what went on there and how it affected your family. They lived it, too, and were willing to shed blood to try to help rid the world of the Nazis, and risk their lives saving soldiers who were trying to do the same. This is not a competition. I'm pretty sure ISIS views you as just as much an infidel by virtue of not being Muslim as they would Christians in Egypt or elsewhere. The only difference is they can get to Middle Eastern and North African Christians easier.

 

[Hetta]

ISIS =/= all Muslims.

 

[dzheremi]

No one in this thread has made that equation, as far as I've seen. Certainly the idiots who would yell at innocent women and children like in the stories presented in the OP are probably thinking that, but they're wrong, and anyway that doesn't make yelling at people and being a jerk terrorism.

 

[Hetta]

In your opinion.

 

[dzheremi]

Well yes...all of these are my opinions. That's why they're posted by me, not you.

 

[Lulav]

MOD HAT ON​

This thread has undergone a major cleaning for various violations, mainly flaming
Please remember to post according to the Community rules Which is headed by:
Members of Christian Forums are considerate, motivated by love and not hate, and they respect one another.
Please remember when posting

• The content of all posted links must comply with Christian Forum's rules.

• Those who do not adhere to the Statement of Faith are welcome as members and participants in discussions, but you are required to respect these beliefs, even if you do not share them.
• Please do not post, or link to, violent, disturbing, graphic, or sexually explicit images or text. Profanity or foul language is not allowed. This includes using punctuations or acronyms to bypass the profanity filter and a few non-censored words found here.
• Please treat all members with respect and courtesy through civil dialogue.
• Do not attack another member's character or actions in any way, address only the content of their post and not the member personally.
• NO Goading. This includes images, cartoons, or smileys clearly meant to goad.

This thread is being reopened with the following caveat: Any breaching of the Rules reported will result in a permanent closure of this thread.

MOD HAT OFF​

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

TLK Valentine said: ↑
And give them a reason not to convert. Real smart.

Why would they not convert?

What would they convert to? Judaism, Christianity, Paganism, Buddhism, Hinduism, etc.
I would venture to guess some would just leave religion altogether and be either atheists, agnostic or any other flavor of non-religionism....IMHO

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/altmuslim/2015/03/why-drives-a-muslim-to-leave-hisher-faith/

Editorial Note: In recent months, we’ve seen more coverage of Islam by the Patheos Atheist channel as well as a growing spotlight on the relationship and interactions between Atheists and Muslims in wake of the Chapel Hill shootings. One of Patheos’ Atheist bloggers, Kaveh Mousavi, considers himself an ex-Muslim and writes about his conversion-to-deconversion process here. In efforts to explore these stories and interactions more, here is a piece from Farouk A. Peru, who dubs himself a “Quranist Muslim,” about attending an event organized by the Council of Ex-Muslims.

This evening, I attended an event organised the Council of Ex-Muslims. A Conservative Traditionalist Muslim might ask me, why on earth would I attend such an event? Have I lost faith at last? Since I am a Quranist, some Traditionalists assume it is simply the last stop before complete atheism. Well if it is, then I have been at this ‘last stop’ for nearly 20 years!



.

 

[Gadarene]

Fear, ignorance, and cowardice -- the usual unholy trinity of the bigot or bully.

"I'm merely acknowledging that one might not be so quick to embrace a religion or culture if they characterize their experiences with it as mostly negative and hurtful... is that so unusual?"

I'm curious as to why you do not consider the possibility that this might be the same motivation driving the attackers. Why privilege the bigotry of the Muslim girl, but not that of her attacker?

It's not their responsibility for her to convert or not -- but their actions will be part of the reason she chooses not to.

Just like the actions of other Muslims are part of the reason these guys are giving her a hard time, right?

Her reasoning is indeed flawed... but is it flawed for the same reason?

Bigotry is bigotry - irrespective of whether a Muslim or a non-Muslim does it.

ETA: It would be a shame to judge an entire belief system based on the actions of its worst members... especially if it involved ignoring the best of them:

Yes, which is why I find it odd you are putting more emphasis on the actions of the attackers here, even though both people in your hypothetical are being bigoted.

 

[Gadarene]

Firstly, it's more than one. It is an increasing number of these events according to the link. Secondly, I will never know because I don't think like that.

You sure? You seem to fancy you have a good idea about what these people are thinking.

But I do regularly, and tiresomely see, people telling others to leave "their" country for a widening degree of reasons. I don't think a day passes that I don't see some fool say something like that to another person or people, mostly online. However, this is a person getting in the face of a vulnerable person with an attitude of aggression and forcefulness.

What makes them a vulnerable person?

I've never felt remotely threatened by what an idiot on the internet has said, but if a guy got in my face in person and told me to I had to leave the country, I would experience fear for a fact. Would I leave? Uh, no. But that doesn't make the fear of actual violence any less. If enough of these people do it to enough of those people, then not only will the perpetuate the cycle of hate

Why? And why is the pressure only on one side here? Heaven forfend we name the problem of terrorism today as a predominantly Islamic problem, but a few random idiots acting independently?

As I pointed out to TLK, both reactions we are discussing here are bigoted. If you think a random Muslim has a connection to ISIS or whatever, simply because they are Muslim, then sure, that's bigotry. Using a few bad experiences as justification to hate everyone in the West - that's bigotry too.

But like TLK, you are only positioning responsibility on one side.

but they will create a permanently frightened group (probably mostly female)

This is not saying much, giving that women are purportedly oppressed by men sitting the wrong way on public transport.

- not that they would care much about that. Those little boys watching and hearing this ... what will they grow up believing?

Well, I would hope they do not presume that a few idiots are not representative of the whole.

It's racist to do that to Muslims, after all.

 

[TLK Valentine]

"I'm merely acknowledging that one might not be so quick to embrace a religion or culture if they characterize their experiences with it as mostly negative and hurtful... is that so unusual?"

I'm curious as to why you do not consider the possibility that this might be the same motivation driving the attackers. Why privilege the bigotry of the Muslim girl, but not that of her attacker?

Partially because one looks not just at motivation, but what actions are motivated. Who has the Muslim girl attacked?

Just like the actions of other Muslims are part of the reason these guys are giving her a hard time, right?

Which of course, justifies the attacks, correct?

Bigotry is bigotry - irrespective of whether a Muslim or a non-Muslim does it.

Agreed -- but you're asking me to put the bigotry of someone who chooses not to join a certain group to the bigotry of those who actively seek out members of another group and make them miserable.

Doesn't seem to be on quite the same level, does it?

Yes, which is why I find it odd you are putting more emphasis on the actions of the attackers here, even though both people in your hypothetical are being bigoted.

You consider attacks to be equal to the decision not to convert to a particular religion?

 

[Gadarene]

Partially because one looks not just at motivation, but what actions are motivated. Who has the Muslim girl attacked?

No-one, but that doesn't mean she wouldn't still be bigoted in your hypothetical.

Which of course, justifies the attacks, correct?

You're using the same line to rationalise her bigotry. Why does it not rationalise theirs?

Agreed -- but you're asking me to put the bigotry of someone who chooses not to join a certain group to the bigotry of those who actively seek out members of another group and make them miserable.

Doesn't seem to be on quite the same level, does it?

In degree, no. In principle, yes.

But when you defend the same rationale for bigotry in one case you weaken your case against in other situations.

You consider attacks to be equal to the decision not to convert to a particular religion?

I consider the rationalisations to be based on the same thing.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No-one, but that doesn't mean she wouldn't still be bigoted in your hypothetical.

Never said otherwise.

You're using the same line to rationalise her bigotry. Why does it not rationalise theirs?

Because I can't rationalize attacks as easily as you can.

In degree, no. In principle, yes.

But when you defend the same rationale for bigotry in one case you weaken your case against in other situations.

Are you defending rationale, or actions?

I consider the rationalisations to be based on the same thing.

Ignoring the actions, or equating them?

 

[Gadarene]

Because I can't rationalize attacks as easily as you can.

......

Are you defending rationale, or actions?

Try asking that before saying silly things like your previous sentence.

Ignoring the actions, or equating them?

They are based on the same attitude in principle, though they have difference in degrees in outcome. I am objecting to the same flawed principle underpinning them both and not making excuses for it in one case but not another. That way is a surefire route to losing credibility in opposing bigotry - which is something worth opposing.

 

[TLK Valentine]

......



Try asking that before saying silly things like your previous sentence.

If it was so silly, why couldn't you answer?

They are based on the same attitude in principle, though they have difference in degrees in outcome. I am objecting to the same flawed principle underpinning them both and not making excuses for it in one case but not another. That way is a surefire route to losing credibility in opposing bigotry - which is something worth opposing.

I'm not making excuses -- but I am acknowledging that it exists in a far smaller degree in one case than in the other.

Why aren't you acknowledging that?

 

[Gadarene]

If it was so silly, why couldn't you answer?

Wouldn't, rather than couldn't. I'm not rationalising attacks, so I see no need to respond to an obviously loaded statement other than to mock it.

I'm not making excuses -- but I am acknowledging that it exists in a far smaller degree in one case than in the other.

Why aren't you acknowledging that?

I have acknowledged that, several times now. I have said that they have differences in degree - but it is nonetheless also true that the basic principle behind both attitudes is the same - bigotry of the other. I think both are unwise. What is also particularly unwise is thinking there is some objective line in the sand as to how much bigotry is acceptable.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Wouldn't, rather than couldn't. I'm not rationalising attacks, so I see no need to respond to an obviously loaded statement other than to mock it.

You've placed them on the same level as refusal to convert to a religion, based on motivation.

I have acknowledged that, several times now. I have said that they have differences in degree - but it is nonetheless also true that the basic principle behind both attitudes is the same - bigotry of the other. I think both are unwise. What is also particularly unwise is thinking there is some objective line in the sand as to how much bigotry is acceptable.

So you would condemn the girl who would not convert as harshly as the men who attacked her, because their bigotry is unacceptable on either side?

 

[Gadarene]

You've placed them on the same level as refusal to convert to a religion, based on motivation.

I've said their motivation is the same, yes. That's never been the entirety of my point, however.

So you would condemn the girl who would not convert as harshly as the men who attacked her, because their bigotry is unacceptable on either side?

If you think you can judge an entire race/group by the actions of a few, yes, that is bad no matter where you go from there.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I've said their motivation is the same, yes. That's never been the entirety of my point, however.



If you think you can judge an entire race/group by the actions of a few, yes, that is bad no matter where you go from there.

Agreed! but the further you go, the worse you get.