Why do people not like Muslims?

[Az]

Originally posted by MrFun



What's scary is that this describes the religous right in United States, to which part of the Republican party panders to.

Yes, And we hate them, don't we? Now imagine a whole society like that, or at least the majority of it, no matter what Whaleboy says.

[The Mad Viking]

Answer to Whaleboy's Question:

Xenophobia.

Details:

Xenophobia enhanced by state propaganda.

The overwhelming majority of Muslims resemble a CNN Muslim about as much as Mark Tremonti resembles Jesse Helms.

Azazel:

-The society is rigid, and change is painful.
-The society doesn't have humanitarian values.
-The society is extremely self-righteous.
-The society is sexist.
-The society is homophobic.
-The society is against personal freedoms.
-The society is excessively allowing for violence.

#2 does not describe Islam. The remainder apply equally to Judaism. That is, they apply equally to the degree that you are talking about fundies in each case.

whaleboy!

I think prejudice against Muslims is the greatest threat the world faces today.

prejudice!

[our_man]

~~~

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
whaleboy!

Then shut up and stop condemning people because you aren't even attempting to understand the underlying narrative behind their actions.

/me doing his best whaleboy impression

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Answer to Whaleboy's Question:

Xenophobia.

Details:

Xenophobia enhanced by state propaganda.

The overwhelming majority of Muslims resemble a CNN Muslim about as much as Mark Tremonti resembles Jesse Helms.

Azazel:

-The society is rigid, and change is painful.
-The society doesn't have humanitarian values.
-The society is extremely self-righteous.
-The society is sexist.
-The society is homophobic.
-The society is against personal freedoms.
-The society is excessively allowing for violence.

#2 does not describe Islam. The remainder apply equally to Judaism.

the Jewish fundies who are extremely sexist and against personal freedoms, are generally not into violence of any kind. The ones who are into violence are rather moderate on sexism and personal freedoms.

Of course the muslims who are into ALL OF the above dont represent all of Islam either, dont take me the wrong way.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

the Jewish fundies who are extremely sexist and against personal freedoms, are generally not into violence of any kind. The ones who are into violence are rather moderate on sexism and personal freedoms.

Astute and generally accurate observation.

Of course the muslims who are into ALL OF the above dont represent all of Islam either, dont take me the wrong way.

Ditto.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by our_man
Mad Viking, I've often seen you criticize prejudice against Muslims, yet I've never actually seen you condemn them. You take a very one-sided view. Muslims can be quite prejudiced against other religions too;

Please don't take this the wrong way, but here goes:

Martin, I've often seen you criticize prejudice against Negroes, yet I've never actually seen you condemn them. You take a very one-sided view. Negores can be quite prejudiced against other races too.

I don't criticize Muslims because it is a generally a prejudicial generalization to call someone who you are criticizing "Muslim".

Muslims experience less prejudice in most Western countries than Christians do in most Muslim countries.

Have you hear about Shabra & Shatilla?

Muslims in India experience extreme prejudice from many Hindus? Why not have a thread condemning Hindus?

How many 'Christian' countries have Christianity as the state religion? How many Muslim countries have Islam as their state religion?

All of them. Or none of them. The USA acts as if Christianity is their state religion. Italy acts as if RC is their state religion. Actions are what matters.

Why be critical of Muslims because their countries are very new, often artificial constructs of the 1919 Paris Peace Talks or similar Western nation-building?

When the European countries were young, was religious persecution OF CHRISTIANS BY CHRISTIANS not an unholy terror?

[Whaleboy]

Yes, And we hate them, don't we? Now imagine a whole society like that, or at least the majority of it, no matter what Whaleboy says.

1870's Britain? Am I supposed to hate that now? As I have been saying, the issue of hate and love is woefully irrelevant here.

[Whaleboy]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Then shut up and stop condemning people because you aren't even attempting to understand the underlying narrative behind their actions.

* DinoDoc doing his best whaleboy impression

Not bad actually. Now what is the problem with it?

[Whaleboy]

Mad Viking, I've often seen you criticize prejudice against Muslims, yet I've never actually seen you condemn them. You take a very one-sided view. Muslims can be quite prejudiced against other religions too; Muslims experience less prejudice in most Western countries than Christians do in most Muslim countries. How many 'Christian' countries have Christianity as the state religion? How many Muslim countries have Islam as their state religion? You do the math.

This somehow justifies whining at their expense?

[Az]

#2 does not describe Islam. The remainder apply equally to Judaism. That is, they apply equally to the degree that you are talking about fundies in each case.

If you define 'Fundies' as 'serious followers of the religion' , then yes. And I hate them both. The problem is that with the muslims, the percentage of those of the religion is much much higher.

1870's Britain? Am I supposed to hate that now?

Yes, you should hate it! Don't like 'hate'? Ok, let me reword it:
fear, attempt to drive out of existance, attempt to radically change it to the better. Or do you disagree?

[Whaleboy]

Yes, you should hate it! Don't like 'hate'? Ok, let me reword it:
fear, attempt to drive out of existance, attempt to radically change it to the better. Or do you disagree?

I do. Look at all the examples in history when someones decided to **** with another culture. It didn't turn out too pretty did it? The noteable exceptions of course are post WWII Germany and Japan, for two reasons. Firstly both had gone through their renaissance phases and secondly the West had learned from the failure of Versailles. Nonetheless, I don't think that's repeatable with some Islamic societies.

And no, I don't think I should take active action to "make another society better", or in other words, force that help upon another. I can tell them why they should stop what I think they are doing wrong but at the end of the day, it's not my call.

If I could somehow go back in time 130 years and magically change things, I most certainly would not do it! Look what's happened when new ideas and technologies have been introduced into a society that didn't develop them on their own.

[Az]

I do. Look at all the examples in history when someones decided to **** with another culture. It didn't turn out too pretty did it? The noteable exceptions of course are post WWII Germany and Japan, for two reasons. Firstly both had gone through their renaissance phases and secondly the West had learned from the failure of Versailles. Nonetheless, I don't think that's repeatable with some Islamic societies.

Why not? Both of those were completely sure in the rightness of their values. More sure than the muslims are, actually. It took a breakdown of that spirit, to mold them into the successful societies they are today.

And no, I don't think I should take active action to "make another society better", or in other words, force that help upon another. I can tell them why they should stop what I think they are doing wrong but at the end of the day, it's not my call.

So, basically, you're allowing for millions to suffer, just because you don't think it's" your call"?

If I could somehow go back in time 130 years and magically change things, I most certainly would not do it! Look what's happened when new ideas and technologies have been introduced into a society that didn't develop them on their own.

Yes, like the Japanese with electronics, and a free society. Or the Europeans with Mathematics, and the Chinese with comm.. waaait, that one doesn't help my argument.

Seriously, A pov which would be acceptable to me is "look, sure I'd like them to be all kind, and respecting of freedoms, and such, but I have no idea how to do this, and the forceful solutions won't work". I'd argue with you about this, but at least I'll have an understanding of that pov. Your, pov, however, is enraging because it leaves millions to suffer, just because you think it's anti-ethical to interfere.
One would think that a libertarian's claim that it's not necessary to help a person in dire trouble is disgusting, but you're claiming that one MUST NOT Help, which is unthinkable, really.

[our_man]

~~~

[:) Smiley]

The secular world needs to come up with a replacement for religion.