What is Islamophobia?

[nazz]

Scripture can be interpreted. Not re-interpreted and twisted out of shape.

Says who? You? Are you the Scripture police?

What I'm arguing against is this "Everyone's interpretation is different" business, because it's not. Most Muslims seem to agree on what the Qur'an says.

Muslims agree on many things. I doubt you will find two Muslims that agree on everything. Same goes for adherents of other religions.

No, I don't speak Hebrew. Go ask a Rabbi. In fact, I know one on Twitter. Would you like me to ask him?

I have studied what the rabbis say. I don't necessarily agree with their interpretations but I acknowledge their right to interpret their holy books as they see fit. Same goes for Muslims.

 

[Augustus]

so what?

So it is Islamophobic to state that there is no such thing as 'moderate Islam', but it is also offensive to some Muslims to say there is such a thing. Are you trying to prove the word is fundamentally flawed?

As I suspected. Thanks. A typical Islamophobe tactic is to distort the words of others by taking them out of context.

he also said "It should be known that adopting a malicious and offending approach toward the sensitive issues of Islamic world by hiding behind some democratic freedoms like freedom of speech and right of free publication is unacceptable,".

So freedom of speech is unacceptable, something that Erdogan proves with his authoritarian style of government and one of the highest rates of imprisoning journalists in the world.

Is it 'Islamophobic' to call him out on this?

 

[Rival]

Yes Nazz, you've caught me; I'm part of the Secret Scripture Police.

 

[nazz]

Are any of the following statements unequivocally false:

Islam accepts the killing of apostates
Islam accepts the stoning of adulterers
Islam accepts the killing of practicing homosexuals
Islam accepts amputations, beheadings and crucifixions
Islam accepts aggressive holy war against unbelievers
Islam accepts that unbelievers are a kind of untermenschen who must accept 2nd class status in society and 'feel humbled'
Islam accepts slavery, including sexual slavery

Replace "Islam" with "some Muslims" and there is no problem.

BTW, I already mentioned that the Qur'an says homosexuals should only be flogged. Why aren't you complaining that those who put them to death are not Troo Muslims?

 

[nazz]

So it is Islamophobic to state that there is no such thing as 'moderate Islam', but it is also offensive to some Muslims to say there is such a thing. Are you trying to prove the word is fundamentally flawed?

Nope. It all depends on the context. When a fundamentalist Christians says there is no such thing as a liberal Christian that is just dogma. It's not an attack on Christianity.

he also said "It should be known that adopting a malicious and offending approach toward the sensitive issues of Islamic world by hiding behind some democratic freedoms like freedom of speech and right of free publication is unacceptable,".

So freedom of speech is unacceptable, something that Erdogan proves with his authoritarian style of government and one of the highest rates of imprisoning journalists in the world.

Is it 'Islamophobic' to call him out on this?

No.

 

[Augustus]

Replace "Islam" with "some Muslims" and there is no problem.

The word Islamophobia doesn't require I do that though because it is a fundamentally flawed word. Even 'Muslimophobia' would require me to do that, but not Islamophobia.

Am still amazed that you can think it is the best possible word to use.

BTW, I already mentioned that the Qur'an says homosexuals should only be flogged. Why are you complaining that those who put them to death are not Troo Muslims?

I know that, the Quran is not the main source of Islamic jurisprudence though. Sorry. Not my decision.

It is interesting that you see merely being 'flogged' as a positive though. What a victory for the gays.

 

[nazz]

The word Islamophobia doesn't require I do that though because it is a fundamentally flawed word. Even 'Muslimophobia' would require me to do that, but not Islamophobia.

I can't even make sense of this statement. It is Islamophobia to say "Islam accepts..." because it treats Islam as some monolithic body of doctrine with no variation.

Am still amazed that you can think it is the best possible word to use.

I'm not. And the more people protest the more I am inclined to use it.

I know that, the Quran is not the main source of Islamic jurisprudence though. Sorry. Not my decision.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't accuse Muslims as not being Troo Muslims for not following the Qur'an's supposed instructions to kill all non-believers and then make a statement like that. That same body of Islamic interpretation also has bearing on the verses you throw out as proving Islam is an evil, violent religion.

 

[nazz]

It is interesting that you see merely being 'flogged' as a positive though. What a victory for the gays.

I never remotely suggested it was a positive thing. It's barbaric. Obviously it is preferable to being killed.

 

[Augustus]

I can't even make sense of this statement. It is Islamophobia to say "Islam accepts..." because it treats Islam as some monolithic body of doctrine with no variation.

Yet you advocate the usage of the term ISLAMophobia, which treats Islam as some monolithic body of doctrine with no variation.

I'm not. And the more people protest the more I am inclined to use it.

Why have you posted about 50 posts defending the word then if there are actually better words to use?

I care about it because I feel it actually harms discourse. Posting on some forum won't change anything, but I genuinely believe it is a terrible word that helps to increase antagonism.

Do you think that there are better words to use, but we should still use an inferior term simply out of stubbornness?

You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't accuse Muslims as not being Troo Muslims for not following the Qur'an's supposed instructions to kill all non-believers and then make a statement like that. That same body of Islamic interpretation also has bearing on the verses you throw out as proving Islam is an evil, violent religion.

I never said Islam is an evil, violent religion in most people's interpretation. If it was I would be dead as I could never leave my home, and seeing as more than one Muslim actually has keys to my front door, then I couldn't stay inside either. Were I actually Islamophobic, I would be absolutely paralysed with fear 24 hours a day.

If people were arguing against Muslims in general, then I would be defending them as I have many dozens of Muslim friends, acquaintances, current/former workmates, neighbours and employees. I have spent most of the last 5 years in a long term relationship with a Muslim. If we were talking about Muslims, you and I would probably be saying many similar things. I certainly do not hold any Muslim responsible for any view they do not personally hold.

This thread is about the word Islamophobia though, which I find a horrible piece of terminology for all of the reasons I have previously explained. Everything I have said in this thread relates to why I feel this term serves no purpose to honest and well intentioned discussion. It only benefits the extremists on both sides who are no friends of mine.

 

[nazz]

Yet you advocate the usage of the term ISLAMophobia, which treats Islam as some monolithic body of doctrine with no variation.

Oh, please. You are just twisting my words now.

Why have you posted about 50 posts defending the word then if there are actually better words to use?

I care about it because I feel it actually harms discourse. Posting on some forum won't change anything, but I genuinely believe it is a terrible word that helps to increase antagonism.

Do you think that there are better words to use, but we should still use an inferior term simply out of stubbornness?

It is a perfectly good term. That has been my position all along.

I never said Islam is an evil, violent religion in most people's interpretation.

Well Islamophobes do say that.

 

[Magic Man]

That is certainly true re racism, and the word is highly devalued by it, in most cases a more accurate substitute could be used. However, the word is inherently less problematic than Islamophobia, because it simply means considering another race inferior or being prejudiced against others due to no other characteristic than their ethnicity.

Islamophobia, should refer to irrational fear of the Islamic faith. Not hatred of Islam, not hatred of Muslims, not prejudice against Muslims, not rational concerns about Islam. Remember it is also not mainstreamIslamophobia, simply Islamophobia, it doesn't necessitate that the Islam you fear is the most popular or representative kind.

It refers to irrational fear of Islam and Muslims, therefore also hatred of Islam/Muslims and prejudice against Islam/Muslims. Remember that there is a strong connection between fear and hatred. Of course it doesn't include rational concerns about Islam or Muslims.

Are any of the following statements unequivocally false:

Islam accepts the killing of apostates
Islam accepts the stoning of adulterers
Islam accepts the killing of practicing homosexuals
Islam accepts amputations, beheadings and crucifixions
Islam accepts aggressive holy war against unbelievers
Islam accepts that unbelievers are a kind of untermenschen who must accept 2nd class status in society and 'feel humbled'
Islam accepts slavery, including sexual slavery[/quote]

Yes, they are all unequivocally false.

Given this why is the best term to use Islamophobia?

None of the Muslims I know personally supports any of these, but I can't say that (some forms of) Islam don't accept all of them. People can define Islamophobia with whatever form of Islam suits their agenda. The word is too imprecise.

If you accuse someone of Islamophobia, the first thing they will usually do is to deny or debate the term itself, rather than reply to the substance of the accusation. This alone should make you not want to use the term

Why would that make me want to not use the term? People will debate all kinds of terms. Islamophobia is the irrational criticism of Islam or Muslims, so it includes fear and hatred too. It's a pretty simple term. Some people try to make it more complicated because they don't like being called Islamophobes.

 

[gsa]

Are any of the following statements unequivocally false:

Islam accepts the killing of apostates
Islam accepts the stoning of adulterers
Islam accepts the killing of practicing homosexuals
Islam accepts amputations, beheadings and crucifixions
Islam accepts aggressive holy war against unbelievers
Islam accepts that unbelievers are a kind of untermenschen who must accept 2nd class status in society and 'feel humbled'
Islam accepts slavery, including sexual slavery

Yes, they are all unequivocally false.



.[/QUOTE]

Really? You can now speak for the Muslims who say the opposite?
I mean what you wrote is just not true, and is in fact absurd and deceptive.

 

[Sees]

There is an idea gaining ground, repeated often on the forums, hinted at regularly on these recent Islamophobia threads themselves, that Islam is somehow as open-source and widely varied as other religious traditions. This idea is not Islamic though - Islam is one of the most, if not the most, structured and encapsulated of world religions.

If half of present day Muslims didn't think punishments plainly stated in the Quran are correct or appropriate - the Islamic stance on those punishments doesn't magically change. I don't see how people are actually reversing this whole thing around? It's similar to asking thousands of Americans how they feel about certain key issues and then using any, all, or a percentage of answers to be - official American policy. It's even more clear-cut with Islam however, because it doesn't adjust throughout the decades and centuries like our national policies.

The Islam that so and so practice here in the West, who like secular law and such and such more adaptable and kafir-friendly interpretations...is not a different Islam. It's simply applying a percentage of Islamic structuring and leaving out the rest.

People look to be applying their modern, western vision to something that doesn't and can't fit. To see it like this would be to see it all as a system made up by Muhammad and various Muslims over the years. It takes out the very heart of Islam.

It can't be as "enlightened" and updated per influence with outside culture or modernist reform. Acknowledging that is the primary thing which causes the Islamophobia attack to start getting thrown around. How our Muslim friends, colleagues, neighbors, etc. treat us in Wherever, USA...London...Berlin...does not have any say on "what is Islam." And nobody is ever really talking about that when criticizing, or even attacking, Islam.

The repetitive "oh, so you think all Muslims _____ " retort is very annoying and shows high level ignorance on the subject itself.

 

[nazz]

Really? You can now speak for the Muslims who say the opposite?
I mean what you wrote is just not true, and is in fact absurd and deceptive.

Muslims who say the opposite don't speak for all Muslims

 

[gsa]

Muslims who say the opposite don't speak for all Muslims

Then Islam is totally meaningless,has no doctrinal coherence and Islamophobia is as fictitious as the religion that cannot be defined.

 

[Magic Man]

Really? You can now speak for the Muslims who say the opposite?
I mean what you wrote is just not true, and is in fact absurd and deceptive.

No, I can't speak for them. What I wrote is true. Those things simply aren't true, even if some Muslims want to say they are. Of course most religious people will tell you their version of the religion is the right one, so they'd say "X religion says this", but that doesn't mean it's true.

 

[Magic Man]

Then Islam is totally meaningless,has no doctrinal coherence and Islamophobia is as fictitious as the religion that cannot be defined.

Nope.

 

[LuisDantas]

Muslims who say the opposite don't speak for all Muslims

Of course not. Nor do those who oppose them.

So we all have to look into what actually happens, don't we? Hoping for the best is all well and good, but even that has a place where it belongs and one where it does not.

 

[LuisDantas]

No, I can't speak for them. What I wrote is true. Those things simply aren't true, even if some Muslims want to say they are. Of course most religious people will tell you their version of the religion is the right one, so they'd say "X religion says this", but that doesn't mean it's true.

Sorry, Magic Man, but you are simply not being true to what one can learn from, say, the Islam DIRs.

 

[gsa]

No, I can't speak for them. What I wrote is true. Those things simply aren't true, even if some Muslims want to say they are. Of course most religious people will tell you their version of the religion is the right one, so they'd say "X religion says this", but that doesn't mean it's true.

So let's test this:

1. Islam holds the Qur'an to be the infallible, inerrant word of Allah.

2. The Qur'an calls for the hands of thieves to be amputated.

3. Islam calls for the hands of thieves to be amputated.

Now I've seen Muslims argue about this, whether or not the amputation is metaphorical for example, but to suggest that it has no basis in Islam, that teaching that Islam calls for amputation is, as you have said, "unequivocally false," is itself unequivocally false, and deceptive. And the same with your remaining examples.