Yes, a word promulgated by Muslims as a way to falsely cast all criticism as racism.
[quote=âcaze, post:38, topic:49614, full:trueâ]It certainly doesnât have little to do with religion, it has a lot to do with it. If Islam wasnât a religion that promised the reward of heaven for martyrs we wouldnât see anywhere near as many people willing to discard their lives so easily to achieve it.[/quote]Historically, youâll get the same sort of self-sacrifice/martyrdom, and even downright terrorist-style actions, from most religions if the underlying socioeconomic conditions are right. For example, Christianity until recent history was rife with these (and, arguably, even in recent history - see abortion clinic bombings, white supremacy, etc.).
The issue is not truly that the Islamic religion supports martyrdom - I canât think of a religion that doesnât - or that itâs more susceptible to terrorist ideals than other religions. Itâs the fact that the underlying conditions of life in those areas are such that it leads to feelings of severe oppression, which in turn lead to terrorist ideals. The religious angle is more the release valve for these people - if it wasnât religion it would be something else, but in most cases without a concrete target for this aggression (such as a military dictator), a feeling of religious persecution is the easy focus.
2 Likes
Even Scientology doesnât. The religion does make a difference.
yup
I cannot express how much I disagree with you in words.
2 Likes
Then your disagreement probably isnât based in fact and reason.
1 Like
If weâre not specifically talking about Charlie Hebdo, then I can only assume that this:
Is a straw man argument. Youâll have to point out specific examples where this is happening.
Now that weâre back to Charlie Hebdo again, I will re-iterate that I believe they could have poked fun at the muslim with non-racist caricatures and they chose not to.
Quite the opposite, I suspect that no words I say will ever make it through to you.
What you have done here:
Is the equivalent of saying that Feminists invented the term misogyny to falsely cast all criticisms as such.
While I know there are people who believe this to be true, those people are not worth my time to argue with, for they will not see reason in any form.
5 Likes
No, it really isnât, unless you can point me to multiple nations of feminists trying to make criticism of feminism illegal by international law.
Multiple Muslim nations not only think criticism of Islam should be internationally illegal - that Islam should litteraly be exempt from criticism under pain of law -they are actively lobbying the UN to make it so.
Crying âIslamophobia!â has proven an effective way of squashing criticism in the meantime, as weâve seen in multiple cases. Including the case where the UK didnât investigate or crack down on the incursion of hard line Muslims deliberately taking over and violating UK education standards of publically funded âfaithâ schools because regulators didnât want to seem Islamophobic.
1 Like
Pretty sure that advocating assassination of the president is outside the bounds of âsatireâ.
Pretty sure that Charlie Hebdo at no time advocated violence on anyone.
There actually is a distinction between satire and racist death threats.
1 Like
So, most religions then? Ever read Genesis? God smited (smote? ensmooterated?) people for building a tower that was too fucking tall. Either the lesson you take from that is that people who challenge God are to be destroyed, or that God takes zoning and urban planning really fucking seriously.
5 Likes
Wait. In a discussion about religious people who silence their critics, youâre going with Scientology as a moral beacon? Oh how the mighty have fallen if thatâs what you feel you need to resort to.
4 Likes
Ahem, no, itâs an example that even a religion as morally corrupt as Scientology doesnât have martyrs, thus the idea all religions, including good ones, have martyrs is ludicrously false. Instead, which religion you belong to does make a difference in whether or not you believe on martyrdom is acceptable or part of your religion. The idea that thereâs nothing about Islam that leads to martyrs is false.
I get what your saying, but I disagree. The trouble is that satire has become a fig-leaf for anything idiotic, so people who want to yank the fig-leaf off get frustrated by peopleâs insistence that itâs satire. The reason itâs frustrating is because it is satire, by any reasonable definition of the word.
But fundamentally, itâs just marketing. Iâve know plenty of satirical assholes in my day. Satire has become an oddly successful defense for being a jerkwad because people let âsatireâ become this high-minded ideal. Itâs not. Itâs a tool. The people who use it can be tools too.
3 Likes
Martydom has never been exclusively religious. Itâs intensely tribal, possibly evolutionary useful. It is extremely global, or have you not noticed how we glorify fallen soldiers in the United States? As if that glory is something that they (dead people) can enjoy. Arguably the most hated homegrown institution in the United States is the Westboro Baptist Church. Sadly, if all they did was hate gay people, they wouldnât be half as famous. No, they disrespected our martyrs (who I remind you, are dead people incapable of processing the disrespect). Thatâs a far greater crime in America.
3 Likes
Of course most religions have a nutty side to them, and have all at one time or another been guilty of the most horrendous crimes in the name of their ficticious entities
The difference lies in how many radicals they producing now, in 2015, when massive ignorance is no longer an excuse, and how far they are prepared to go to act upon the âwordâ of their particular invisible-man-in-the-sky.
Strict Islamic regimes and the proponents of an Islamic state have in common massive misogeny and intolerance, all in the name of an entirely imaginary being.
A group of people want to believe that Santa Claus is real? - go right ahead, be my guest: just donât oppress and kill my fellow human beings for not going along with your murderous delusion.
1 Like
They look like criticisms that could have been aimed at 19th C. Catholic zealots (or Protestant). The generational churn of developing countries and im-emigrant populations deserves prodding of their Middle-Age foundations.
I take issue with your stance regarding the so-called benefits of recycled compostable vs terracotta plant pots.
The one is hither, the other thither, and neâer the twain shall meet.
Honestly. Some people.
Neither do you. And you are the one ascribing deleterious motives to a religion for which no evidence can be found.
Post citations or GTFO.
