UnderCover Mosque: The Return

[el Chi]

I hate the way they try and make it out as if these people are not actually following what the quaran says. Rather they make a loose translation of it becuase they are bigots. This makes the people the problem, rather than the religion.

And it's not, it is the fault of the religion. It is far more bigoted and violent than christianity or any other majour religion.

The problem is Islam, it a stupid, horrible thing. People who believe it should be openly mocked. Mosques where the kind of extremist filth is proffessed as in the video should be raised to the ground. Religious schools banned and all children banned from religious institutions.

Then we should send the SAS to pakistan to shoot every dickhead imam that thinks honour killing is acceptable.

**** cultural relativism - our culture is better than yours.

*Raises hand* Sorry, how can Solaris break race hate laws (and he just has) and not be banned from this forum?

Solaris, if you don't see the vicious irony in your post then you're even more ridiculous than I thought.

 

[Solaris]

Race Hate laws? What's even go to do with race...

I state that any institution that openly profresses that homosexuals should be killed is closed. And that those who kill women for adultery also be punished.

 

[Mr Stabby]

I believe I just illustrated their relationship in a previous post...?

It seems like you're trying to spin my words into something really stupid like "Moderates want you to love and hug extremists just the same!".

Saying that moderate Christians legitimize insane ones by sharing a common holy book. Is the same as saying that moderate Christians create a tolerant atmosphere for extremist interpretations of the bible and extremist's actions.

when did i call you stupid?

you're thick you now that?

they do

please stop repeating yourself and stop putting words in my mouth. it is not really about making a tolerant environment, but about the exploitation of people with similar beliefs.

Make your mind up.

Isn't an environment where extremism can exploit other believers a tolerant climate?

stop throwing the westboro crap, what about the other two i mentioned...how come they flourish so much, eh?
i stated my position on westboro..read it

Kent Hovind preaches to the creationist crowd, are they moderate. I don't know much about Pat Robertson, but aren't televangelists generally Baptist or that other fundamentalist one can't remember it's name. Westboro is a prefect example of why you're wrong. They are more extreme than mainstream America, yet instead of exploiting mainstream America, mainstream America hates them.

moderate believers were always present it is just that the fundamentalist weren't considered fundamentalists back then...they were the the norm.

mainstream=/= moderate, besides the middle ages weren't democratic. Regardless of whether stoning women was widely accept it's not moderate to support it.

wonder why we today call them fundamentalists?

Because they take a fundamentalist view of their holy books.

if we want to argue this analogy you have to define what moderate means to you.
100 years ago a person could be considered moderate if he didn't beat up black people.

If you're defining the extremist position as supporting segregation the moderate position can't be the same as it. If you defining segregation as the moderate position and slavery as the extremist position then slavery is the issue that extremist are pushing on society not segregation. It's an apples and oranges example as their is no racism bible to define moderate and extreme from.

my examples were the middle east, europe, USA, nazi germany. you on the other hand gave none whatsoever.

I'd give Europe as an example of moderate religion being widespread without much extremism. Mainstream American Christianity is a bit fundamentalist but it's nothing like the westboro baptists, but the extremism of the westboro baptists is not very popular, yet surely they are using the more moderate mainstream to become popular. The middle east isn't a relevant example because it is a hotbed of extremism, but liberal moderate Islam is not mainstream there.

in all these cases is the same...mild predisposition to something/someone, every now and then spawn some extreme examples.

You've given no examples of extremist using moderate religion as a stepping stone. Your saying the more religious a society is the more fundamentalists it has. Why is that the fault of religious moderates

 

[Absinthe]

Saying that moderate Christians legitimize insane ones by sharing a common holy book. Is the same as saying that moderate Christians create a tolerant atmosphere for extremist interpretations of the bible and extremist's actions.

Well, they certainly can. I already stated that most moderates have a disdain for extremism.

What I am saying is that moderates' theological arguments against extremism are hollow and hypocritical, and by expecting and demanding exceptional treatment for their own faith, they implicitly discourage many of the same arguments that would apply to violent fundamentalism. I'm not just talking about suicide bombing and witch bonfires. Something as commonplace as "I'm against stem cell research for the sake of the unborn" - which is demonstrably short-sighted and ignorant, much to the harm and neglect of sick people all across the world - demands the same respect as simply believing that a god created the universe in seven days. The comparative severity of these beliefs is besides the point. They're both covered by an umbrella argument that sees religion as something special and beyond critique. I think we can objectively conclude that many extremist beliefs are morally inferior in this day and age according to standards independent of religion. But extremists don't care about those standards because they are operating according to a divine set that supercedes all others.

Extremism is something that needs to be combated ideologically, and it is not going to be defeated with debate over which interpretation is supposedly superior considering the amount you can derive from such cryptic holy texts is vast. For every pleasant verse you can throw out against extremism, there will undoubtedly be a competing one we'd find morally objectionable, and vice versa. The strongest argument against extremism is detailing how its fundamental underpinnings are bullshit, even if that is often to no avail in the face of willful ignorance. And it is unfortunate that moderation still shares many of those same underpinnings: Unquestioning belief, "knowing" in absence of evidence, and a false sense of moral insight or wisdom.

How does this translate into creating an atmosphere of tolerance for extremism? I did mention Islam. You would be surprised how many people think that arranged marriages, even among children, should be spared criticism out of misplaced sensitivity. Many British Muslims would like to see corporeal punishment for infidelity and would no doubt be ecstatic if it were enshrined into law. And yet the outraged response to such an idea is often muted out of a fear of being seen as disrespectful or even racist. Proposals have been made to set up Islamic courts so they can operate independently from the law and according their own skewed ideas of justice. Color me shocked to see that quite a few non-Muslims would be more than willing to accommodate this crap. You may not think of these as extreme, but I certainly do. If we wish to move away from Islam, we have the Amish. They're allowed to deprive their children of decent educations and box them into single-track existences. But most people, instead of grudgingly accepting this out of a belief in parental rights, do so with a smile and quaint fascination with how those funny little farmer people live their lives! The undertones of depravation or psychological abuse don't even crest along the surface of consciousness.

 

[jverne]

Saying that moderate Christians legitimize insane ones by sharing a common holy book. Is the same as saying that moderate Christians create a tolerant atmosphere for extremist interpretations of the bible and extremist's actions.









Make your mind up.

Isn't an environment where extremism can exploit other believers a tolerant climate?



Kent Hovind preaches to the creationist crowd, are they moderate. I don't know much about Pat Robertson, but aren't televangelists generally Baptist or that other fundamentalist one can't remember it's name. Westboro is a prefect example of why you're wrong. They are more extreme than mainstream America, yet instead of exploiting mainstream America, mainstream America hates them.



mainstream=/= moderate, besides the middle ages weren't democratic. Regardless of whether stoning women was widely accept it's not moderate to support it.



Because they take a fundamentalist view of their holy books.



If you're defining the extremist position as supporting segregation the moderate position can't be the same as it. If you defining segregation as the moderate position and slavery as the extremist position then slavery is the issue that extremist are pushing on society not segregation. It's an apples and oranges example as their is no racism bible to define moderate and extreme from.



I'd give Europe as an example of moderate religion being widespread without much extremism. Mainstream American Christianity is a bit fundamentalist but it's nothing like the westboro baptists, but the extremism of the westboro baptists is not very popular, yet surely they are using the more moderate mainstream to become popular. The middle east isn't a relevant example because it is a hotbed of extremism, but liberal moderate Islam is not mainstream there.



You've given no examples of extremist using moderate religion as a stepping stone. Your saying the more religious a society is the more fundamentalists it has. Why is that the fault of religious moderates

yes.

no, not necessarily. the moderates might not care for the extremists...call it what you want.

so what? now we have creationist Christians, evolutionary Christians, not sure Christians? Kent hovid want's to male the bible sound credible, he preaches to all Christians. Same as pat robertson.
westboro is hate because they said things like god is punishing our soldiers and other hardly patriotic things. the "god hates fags" probably isn't the main issue why people hate them.

what is your definition of moderate? because it seems this discussion is getting nowhere

 

[Solaris]

Jverina, I know English isn't your first language, but please make more of an effort. It's really hard to understand your posts.

 

[mastag]

I hate the way they try and make it out as if these people are not actually following what the quaran says. Rather they make a loose translation of it becuase they are bigots. This makes the people the problem, rather than the religion.

And it's not, it is the fault of the religion. It is far more bigoted and violent than christianity or any other majour religion.

The problem is Islam, it a stupid, horrible thing. People who believe it should be openly mocked. Mosques where the kind of extremist filth is proffessed as in the video should be raised to the ground. Religious schools banned and all children banned from religious institutions.

Then we should send the SAS to pakistan to shoot every dickhead imam that thinks honour killing is acceptable.

**** cultural relativism - our culture is better than yours.

While I do think Islam is a violent and stupid religion, banning it from being practiced is going far overboard. It is a blatant violation of human rights. Freedom of religion goes both ways. They have a right to believe it and I have the right to think it is absolutely ridiculous.(Religion in general, not just Islam)

The rest of your post is just mind bogglingly evil.

 

[jverne]

Jverina, I know English isn't your first language, but please make more of an effort. It's really hard to understand your posts.

i'll try...i went to read my last post, i found a lot of mistakes. sorry about that

 

[Solaris]

While I do think Islam is a violent and stupid religion, banning it from being practiced is going far overboard. It is a blatant violation of human rights. Freedom of religion goes both ways. They have a right to believe it and I have the right to think it is absolutely ridiculous.(Religion in general, not just Islam)

The rest of your post is just mind bogglingly evil.

I agree, Islam should not be banned. Where did I say it should be?

What 'evil things' did I say?

Do you think we should allow people to promote the killing of homosexuals? Do you realise what honour killing is? How women are buried alive for being infertile? Does this not make you angry?

 

[Solaris]

I have just recieved a 5 point infraction from Evo for the previous post as quoted:

I hate the way they try and make it out as if these people are not actually following what the quaran says. Rather they make a loose translation of it becuase they are bigots. This makes the people the problem, rather than the religion.

And it's not, it is the fault of the religion. It is far more bigoted and violent than christianity or any other majour religion.

The problem is Islam, it a stupid, horrible thing. People who believe it should be openly mocked. Mosques where the kind of extremist filth is proffessed as in the video should be raised to the ground. Religious schools banned and all children banned from religious institutions.

Then we should send the SAS to pakistan to shoot every dickhead imam that thinks honour killing is acceptable.

**** cultural relativism - our culture is better than yours.

I am going to restate and explain it word by word. This serves two purposes:

1: To prevent any misunderstandings of what I wrote
2: If, given explanation, what I wrote is still infraction worthy, then I make no apology for it and reaffirm what I said.

First of all I stated that some people make it out as if terrorists and extremists are not even proper Muslims at all. They say extremists are just biggoted people who lie and twist the scripture to suit their own cause. And that their desire to rule the world has causes other than religious.
I disagree with this and state that the root cause is Islam itself. I stated that Islam is an evil ideology. It commands people to kill non-believers. It is not compatible with a democratic society. I then said that it is worse than other religions being more evil and violent than Christianity or Judaism.

I called for people who believe in Islam to be mocked. As we would flat earthers or astrologists.

Next, religious institutions that call for the murder of all homosexuals should be shut down and destroyed. We need to send a clear message that it will not be tolerated. Promises of an internal review are not enough. Calling for homosexuals to be killed is a crime and must be punished. Mosques have to clean up their act or be shut down.

I then reaffirmed my belief that all religious schools should be shut down and children be banned from religious institutions. Something people like Richard Dawkins would agree with me (as I think he would everything I've posted here).

Next I posted something that in the heat of the moment was a tad excessive, but still very defensible. I stated that the levels of honour killing against women in Pakistan is absolutely abhorrent. It sickens me that any society would treat women like this and murder them in barbaric ways such as burial whilst they are still alive. I do not believe in the death sentance but the fact that there are people in the world who call for infertile wives to be murdered makes me extremely angry and I would find it hard to condem somebody who killed these people, although it would be an immoral act. It would surely help stop the tradition of honour killing in some middle eastern countries.

My last statement was to do with cultural relativism. Some people on the left say that other cultures are different and we have no right to condem honour killing as it is part of another culture that we could not judge with out values.

I disagree, I think any culture that promotes honour killing in abhorent and the democratic culture I was raised up in is infinately greater than it.

So there you go. I challenge anyone to read that and show where I commited a hate crime or anything warranting an infraction. If you still believe I commited an offense, then you will have to ban me, becuase I will repeat my views. I am a prisoner to my intellectual conscience. I will follow the standard set for intellectual honesty set my Martin Luther as he nailed his thesis to the cathedral door.

Hier stehe ich, ich kann nicht anders (Here I stand, I can do no other.)

 

[Tyguy]

i like the new solaris