Nothing to do with Islam?

[Rational Agnostic]

Some respondents to my thread "My thoughts on Muslim men and feminism" have insisted that the violence, oppression, and misogyny that occur so frequently in Islamic nations has nothing to do with Islam. Perhaps those of you who sincerely believe that these atrocities have nothing to do with Islam would benefit from watching a brief video from Mr. Pat Condell, who addresses this very issue.

Video removed by moderator.

 

[YmirGF]

Some respondents to my thread "My thoughts on Muslim men and feminism" have insisted that the violence, oppression, and misogyny that occur so frequently in Islamic nations has nothing to do with Islam. Perhaps those of you who sincerely believe that these atrocities have nothing to do with Islam would benefit from watching a brief video from Mr. Pat Condell, who addresses this very issue.

Video removed by moderator.

How could you post something by this hate filled Islamophobic geriatric? Nothing has anything to do with Islam. Get over it.

 

[Estro Felino]

Well...yes...I too think that blaming the religion is a wrong thing to do...because in Europe we have examples of people from the ME who deeply respect gender equality and really live a pious life.
Too few exceptions ..to accuse the entire religion.

It's more a political/anthropological problem because for example until the 60s in Egypt there were no veiled women

so I do believe that the veil is a recent invention to humiliate and subjugate women

 

[sun rise]

Of course fanatics from every religion use religion as an excuse for their fanaticism. Just one example of many too many How a child rape became a religious flashpoint for India

 

[Punta Piñal]

This video and its narrator are credible sources, given that Condell blames the Saudis and close Western allies for aiding radical Islam. In other words, he is not just another hack furthering Western geopolitical interests, but a sincere and objective critique of both Islam and its radicals. That is why he picks on close U.S. allies as well as U.S. foes. I wish I could say the same for other, less credible people who pose as anti-Islam on one day, then support the same "anti-Islam" neocons who allowed Saudi-funded 9/11 to happen.

 

[Woberts]

allowed Saudi-funded 9/11

 

[YmirGF]

Everything written to that point was actually pretty good to. Then they have to go an spoil it all...
It's like claiming Bill Gates humanitarian efforts are the work of the American government because he is an American.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

hate filled Islamophobic

Tbh honest he really is though. His penchant for being sarcastically dismissive of any viewpoint on Islam except the most extreme is part of the problem. In his world there is no Islam but the worst Islam so Islam must be destroyed.

This is the same guy who has called Islam the enemy of mankind, religion of war, that women who cover their faces (and the entire country of SA) are mentally ill and that they're governed by "primitive pigs whose only achievement in life is to be born with a penis in one hand and a Qu'ran in the other."
This is not how you have productive conversations. This is just how you trowel hate.

 

[YmirGF]

Tbh honest he really is though. His penchant for being sarcastically dismissive of any viewpoint on Islam except the most extreme is part of the problem. In his world there is no Islam but the worst Islam so Islam must be destroyed.

This is the same guy who has called Islam the enemy of mankind, religion of war, that women who cover their faces (and the entire country of SA) are mentally ill and that they're governed by "primitive pigs whose only achievement in life is to be born with a penis in one hand and a Qu'ran in the other."
This is not how you have productive conversations. This is just how you trowel hate.

You're right, of course. I keep forgetting that Islam is a religion worthy of respect and endless placation...

 

[ADigitalArtist]

You're right, of course. I keep forgetting that Islam is a religion worthy of respect and endless placation...

I'd settle for the understanding that Islam isn't a monolith and that there does exist people who are Muslims yet aren't a threat to your freedom or way of life.

Oh and not calling people who follow it mentally ill. That'd be nice too.

 

[YmirGF]

I'd settle for the understanding that Islam isn't a monolith and that there does exist people who are Muslims yet aren't a threat to your freedom or way of life. .

I do agree on that point. Islam is, in a very real way, whatever you want it to be. Don't like one "scholar"; find another you like. Even then one is not obligated to follow whatever they say.

Oh and not calling people who follow it mentally ill. That'd be nice too.

Agreed although I am sure there may well be some rather interesting psychological reasons for people to follow a given faith.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I think there is a very real sense in which debates about Islam are like a city full of bright lights. In order to see the stars--in this case the sound, reasonable arguments without hyperbole from either side--the numerous, generic lights--the prejudiced, misinformed, or otherwise inaccurate arguments--have to be switched off. It is hard to have a productive discussion about Islam and the Muslim world mainly because of the fact that so many people in that city either make sweeping generalizations and misinformed statements about Muslims and/or Islam or engage in profuse apologetics to categorically defend the religion even when some of its common interpretations clearly need reform.

It seems to me that it would significantly help the discourse about Islam if there were less hyperbole and blowing facts out of proportion. Most Muslims are absolutely not bloodthirsty terrorists, but there are strong indicators that all too many Muslims are also either outright supportive of some considerably inhumane beliefs or are apologetic toward them. I just wish it were more common for people in such debates to strike a balance between recognizing potentially unpleasant, thorny facts and not being hyperbolic or prejudiced.

 

[YmirGF]

I think there is a very real sense in which debates about Islam are like a city full of bright lights. In order to see the stars--in this case the sound, reasonable arguments without hyperbole from either side--the numerous, generic lights--the prejudiced, misinformed, or otherwise inaccurate arguments--have to be switched off. It is hard to have a productive discussion about Islam and the Muslim world mainly because of the fact that so many people in that city either make sweeping generalizations and misinformed statements about Muslims and/or Islam or engage in profuse apologetics to categorically defend the religion even when some of its common interpretations clearly need reform.

It seems to me that it would significantly help the discourse about Islam if there were less hyperbole and blowing facts out of proportion. Most Muslims are absolutely not bloodthirsty terrorists, but there are strong indicators that all too many Muslims are also either outright supportive of some considerably inhumane beliefs or are apologetic toward them. I just wish it were more common for people in such debates to strike a balance between recognizing potentially unpleasant, thorny facts and not being hyperbolic or prejudiced.

You're such a hater.

 

[icehorse]

Tbh honest he really is though. His penchant for being sarcastically dismissive of any viewpoint on Islam except the most extreme is part of the problem. In his world there is no Islam but the worst Islam so Islam must be destroyed.

This is the same guy who has called Islam the enemy of mankind, religion of war, that women who cover their faces (and the entire country of SA) are mentally ill and that they're governed by "primitive pigs whose only achievement in life is to be born with a penis in one hand and a Qu'ran in the other."
This is not how you have productive conversations. This is just how you trowel hate.

Well "islamophobia" is a fundamentally dishonest word, so there's that.
And good cases could be made for "enemy of mankind" and "religion of war".

And it could well be that shifting the Overton window is exactly how you lay the groundwork for productive conversations, because genuflecting has proven not to work.

 

[icehorse]

You're such a hater.

And clearly a racist too!

(sarcasm alert, if anyone wasn't sure)

 

[Sunstone]

I can easily see the value in a well-informed and fair-minded critique of Islam. Such a critique could be invaluable to reasonable Muslims themselves. But how often do we get that?

I myself am not sure about that question because I've only recently begun tuning into the debate threads on Islam. Yet what little I've so far seen leaves me pessimistic. Just yesterday I learned from a poster who is perhaps smarter than me, "All Muslim men are misogynists". If that's how someone even smarter than me -- let alone a doorknocker -- starts a well-informed and fair-minded critique of Islam, then I'm the world's best lover.

Apparently, this will come as news to some folks, but there is a difference between over and over and over again wholly condemning something, and a well-informed and fair-minded critique of a thing. Sure, the first looks like more fun for some of us. But apart from the joys of recreational outrage, what good does it do?

Just don't tell me it's a start towards finding solutions to the problems facing Islam today. I wasn't born in 2017. You can BS me some, but you can't BS me that much. Ten years from now the folks who are over and over and over again whining about Islam will still be whining about Islam, and they will yet to have even one sustained, positive discussion on something that can be done to fix it.

If I'm any judge, the only major change in those ten years is they will become more and more clueless and bitter about how no one acknowledges their "important insights".

I wager that this Forum sees fewer than five threads this year that can reasonably be said to debate Islam in terms of what can be done to reform it. All the other threads will focus on what's wrong with it -- even if they begin positive -- and they'll die after a few posts.

Go ahead and prove me wrong.

 

[icehorse]

I'd settle for the understanding that Islam isn't a monolith and that there does exist people who are Muslims yet aren't a threat to your freedom or way of life.

In my experience, a very common apologist argument boils down to "you cannot generalize". This argument (or variations on it), never makes sense to me, but it comes up so frequently that I'm willing to be shown why it's a good argument. To me, generalizations are a big part of what we do as humans. And of course like any tool, generalizations can be misused, but that doesn't mean we should throw the whole tool out the window.

I learned a great question from an RF moderator some time back: "If we cannot criticize a religion for fear of generalizing, then we cannot turn around and ascribe any benefits of that religion."

The next point is that there is a TON of historical evidence that leads us to conclude that it's often the extremist end of a group that wags the entire dog. That said, about half of the world's Muslims want to be ruled by Theocracy, which is in direct conflict with secularism. So while there are indeed Muslims who aren't a threat to our way of life, there are hundreds of millions who are. At what point do we conclude that the percentage is big enough that we should take some action? I think we're comfortably over that line.

 

[GoodbyeDave]

Describing the 9/11 attacks as "Saudi" doesn't imply that the Saudi government was involved. It can simply reflect the fact that 15 of the 19 involved were Saudi nationals.

 

[Akivah]

Oh and not calling people who follow it mentally ill. That'd be nice too.

It'd also be nice, not to label every one that criticizes Islam as having a phobia, would be helpful too.

 

[Akivah]

I can easily see the value in a well-informed and fair-minded critique of Islam. Such a critique could be invaluable to reasonable Muslims themselves. But how often do we get that?

I myself am not sure about that question because I've only recently begun tuning into the debate threads on Islam. Yet what little I've so far seen leaves me pessimistic. Just yesterday I learned from a poster who is perhaps smarter than me, "All Muslim men are misogynists". If that's how someone even smarter than me -- let alone a doorknocker -- starts a well-informed and fair-minded critique of Islam, then I'm the world's best lover.

Apparently, this will come as news to some folks, but there is a difference between over and over and over again wholly condemning something, and a well-informed and fair-minded critique of a thing. Sure, the first looks like more fun for some of us. But apart from the joys of recreational outrage, what good does it do?

Just don't tell me it's a start towards finding solutions to the problems facing Islam today. I wasn't born in 2017. You can BS me some, but you can't BS me that much. Ten years from now the folks who are over and over and over again whining about Islam will still be whining about Islam, and they will yet to have even one sustained, positive discussion on something that can be done to fix it.

If I'm any judge, the only major change in those ten years is they will become more and more clueless and bitter about how no one acknowledges their "important insights".

I wager that this Forum sees fewer than five threads this year that can reasonably be said to debate Islam in terms of what can be done to reform it. All the other threads will focus on what's wrong with it -- even if they begin positive -- and they'll die after a few posts.

Go ahead and prove me wrong.

@LuisDantas did such a search of Islam and posted it somewhere on RF. I found his narrative to be quite interesting.