Islamic militia says Mogadishu captured

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Who cares? Honestly. So the Muslim conquered the Hindus. The Hindus got a much better deal than say the pagans ever did from the Christians, or those followers of native religions in the Americas. After all, Hinduism remains a major global religion.....

The difference has at least a little to do with the fact that muslims didnt bring along any germs that the Hindus hadnt already been exposed to.

[lord of the mark]

Back to Somalia - how do we know the somali Islamists will be like the Taliban? IIUC theres no strong tradition a salafi style Islam in Somalia. The new guys in Mogadishu might well be open to a deal, as Mullah Omar was not. Why jump to conclusions?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by aneeshm
Let me put it this way for you , nitpicker : If , for purposes of argument , we assume that X is worse than Y , why is saying to "bigotry" ?

I think bigotry in this case begins the moment someone judges individuals on the basis of a dislike of their religion. Realistically though if you have a low opinion, especially contempt, for someones relgion your'e almost certainly going to end up holding it against them personally as well.


Curiously on this forum at least, when athiests ridicule christianity as worthy of contempt they somehow fail to see that this too is bigotry or at least never get called on it. On the other hand those who ridicule or demonstrate contempt for islam are automatically branded as bigots.

however, I don't think that religious bigotry should be regarded as nearly as bad as ethnic or racial bigotry because you're judging someone for their beliefs rather than for something insignificant that they neither chose nor take any action to maintain.

Still even having said that, religious bigotry is essentially useless for one and potentially immensely harmful for another. Without religious bigotry i wonder if there could ever have been a holocaust?

I think maybe the best approach is to criticize specific beliefs in the religion that you object to rather than the whole belief system. even if it's a long list. that way you may discover that ideas you thought were integral to a religion have no set place in it at all.

[Arrian]

Clearly we were concerned, if one believes the whole "the CIA was active in supporting the other side" stuff. Who knows? Maybe this bunch of Islamic rulers decide to be reasonable, and we decide to be reasonable and we all get along. It's possible, sure.

-Arrian

[Arrian]

Curiously on this forum at least, when athiests ridicule christianity as worthy of contempt they somehow fail to see that this too is bigotry or at least never get called on it.

As one of those atheists, I ridicule all religion. For the most part, the responses on this forum are from Christians (with occasional input from Jews, such as LotM), hence the Atheist vs. Christian pattern you see.

It isn't bigotry. It's irreverance. It may be insensitive at times (ok, it's definitely insensitive at times), but it's not bigotry. Heck, like you say, it's about someone's beliefs, not their heritage. There's a difference.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian
Clearly we were concerned, if one believes the whole "the CIA was active in supporting the other side" stuff. Who knows? Maybe this bunch of Islamic rulers decide to be reasonable, and we decide to be reasonable and we all get along. It's possible, sure.

-Arrian

When it looked like the warlord coalition had as much chance to win as the Islamists, betting on the warlords may have looked reasonable. Im not saying there isnt something to be concerned about.

But the leaders of the movement, from what i can gather, are local merchants in mogadishu. Not a bunch of radical deobandi students from across the border, which was the origin of the Taliban. Now on the whole Id rather they didnt have an Islamist govt, but we've got a lot on our plate right now, and as long as they dont give shelter to AQniks (or other terrrorists) I see no reason we shouldnt try to work out a modus vivendi.

[Arrian]

Agreed.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Arrian


As one of those atheists, I ridicule all religion. For the most part, the responses on this forum are from Christians (with occasional input from Jews, such as LotM), hence the Atheist vs. Christian pattern you see.

It isn't bigotry. It's irreverance. It may be insensitive at times (ok, it's definitely insensitive at times), but it's not bigotry. Heck, like you say, it's about someone's beliefs, not their heritage. There's a difference.

-Arrian

90% of the anti muslim folks one encounters could make the same case, (its irreverance, its insensitive, it not bigotry, its about the beliefs) often with equal justification.

[Arrian]

Irreverance: are those posters also irreverant about their own religion? If not, bah.

As for the rest, yes, that's true.

There is also a distinction to be drawn between, say, ridiculing passages from the Bible and saying "Muslims are bloodthirsty terrorists" or a coded form of that.

For what it's worth, I have no problem with criticizing Islam.

-Arrian

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Arrian


As one of those atheists, I ridicule all religion. For the most part, the responses on this forum are from Christians (with occasional input from Jews, such as LotM), hence the Atheist vs. Christian pattern you see.

It isn't bigotry. It's irreverance. It may be insensitive at times (ok, it's definitely insensitive at times), but it's not bigotry. Heck, like you say, it's about someone's beliefs, not their heritage. There's a difference.

-Arrian

hrmm. if a muslim posted that he wasn't really a bigot because he didn't just hate hinduism, christianty and judaism but rather that he hated all belief systems that were incompatible with islam would he be a bigot? Is it only bigotry if it's directed against only one other belief system but not bigotry when directed against *all* other belief systems?

[Arrian]

Hate is the key there. I don't hate Christians, or Christianity. I think Christianity is silly, and I dislike/disagree with some Christians. I may hate one or two (Roberston types).

edit: with the obvious caveat that Roberston and his ilk may or may not qualify as "really Christian" depending on how you look at it.

-Arrian

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Arrian
Hate is the key there. I don't hate Christians, or Christianity. I think Christianity is silly, and I dislike/disagree with some Christians. I may hate one or two (Roberston types).

edit: with the obvious caveat that Roberston and his ilk may or may not qualify as "really Christian" depending on how you look at it.

-Arrian

i suppose youre right. bigotry deflates to nothing if you remove the hatred and resentment. Avoiding that dangerous emotional baggage may be all that's really necessary to avoid the dangers of bigotry.

[Arrian]

It's surely a key component. The other issue is over-generalizing. To give aneeshm some credit, for instance, he qualifies his posts with the "(orthodox) Muslim" tags. That might still be over-generalizing, but it's closer to the mark.

-Arrian

[lord of the mark]

[QUOTE] Originally posted by Arrian
"Irreverance: are those posters also irreverant about their own religion? If not, bah."

at least some are not religionists, so not really applicable. I presume they have SOMETHING they wouldnt be irreverant about. I presume thats true everyone, present company included.

"s for the rest, yes, that's true.

There is also a distinction to be drawn between, say, ridiculing passages from the Bible and saying "Muslims are bloodthirsty terrorists" or a coded form of that."


The cleverer ones tend to quote passages from the Koran out of context, and use that as a basis for mockery of Islam. Obviously they plenty of self-proclaimed muslims are not terrorists, so the usual line is that said muslims havent really understood the "authentic" Islam, just as liberal Christians and Jews are accused of avoiding what the bible is really about.


"For what it's worth, I have no problem with criticizing Islam"


For my part I think attacks on Islam that miss the vast complexity of that civilization, the long traditions of interpretation and philisophy, but that focus on a few pet passages taken out of context, tend not to show the wit of the attacker, so much as the shallowness and ignorance of the attacker.

And I feel the same way about similar attacks on Christianity and Judaism.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Back to Somalia - how do we know the somali Islamists will be like the Taliban? IIUC theres no strong tradition a salafi style Islam in Somalia. The new guys in Mogadishu might well be open to a deal, as Mullah Omar was not. Why jump to conclusions?

Mullah Omar was principled. The Somali Islamists may well be open to making deals, and may even behead the occasional unlucky pirate and free a foreign merchant crew from time to time to look like nice Islamists. Will they actively monitor and deny support to other Islamists who operate discreetly in and from their territory, because a bunch of western kaffir states want them to?

I wouldn't bet my disability check on it.