Stop being so civil! [Archive] - Straight Dope Message Board

Carnick

01-28-2005, 05:13 AM

I've been following this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=298696) for a few days. It was all going surprisingly well until the OP said this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5761433&postcount=78). She not only marks homosexuality as a sin, but compares it to drug dealing and child abuse in one fell swoop. After reading this, I fully expected the OP to be run out on a rail. Yet much to my disapointment, I see the majority of Dopers praising her for her unique viewpoint and begging her not to leave. When was "it's my religion" a valid excuse at the SDMB? The OP isn't even an Arab Muslim, she's just some girl in her early 20's who decided to "revert" to a belief system that supports intolerance. Has this PC hogwash stuff gone so overboard that certain minorities are allowed to be bigots now?

Come on Dopers, you're asleep at the helm. I know the OP is in GD, but I expect more (less?) from the legion of ignorance fighters. Stop being so level headed and break out the goddamn flame throwers already.

Dunderman

01-28-2005, 05:14 AM

Feel free to pit her if you wish. The rest of us are interested enough in what she has to say to let that bit slide for now. I'd also like to note that some posters did take her to task over that.

By the way, why are you trusting others to handle the flame throwers? Don't you have one of your own?

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 05:47 AM

She is just another example that close-minded religious zealots are all alike, whether they are Muslim, Christian or any other denomination.
I am really starting to feel that religion should be forbidden in an enlightened society.

don't ask

01-28-2005, 05:56 AM

If it is no inconvenience to you would please kindly fuck off. Thank you.

Liberal

01-28-2005, 06:05 AM

Has this PC hogwash stuff gone so overboard that certain minorities are allowed to be bigots now?I don't think it's PC. It's an intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian. Sort of an enemy-of-my-enemy thing. In fact, I would wager that this post — questioning the intellectual honesty of the suck-ups in that thread — will garner far more hysterical drive-bys and retorts than the post you cited that compares gays to drug dealers and child abusers. Further, I believe that a Christian fundamentalist posting the exact same thing would already have been pitted here and run out on a rail.

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 06:07 AM

I have read some more of the thread and I would like to add some insults.
What a stupid, judgemental, ignorant piece of manure !!!
I cannot believe somebody would willingly convert in this way.
I agree with a lot of Muslems on a lot of subjects, but most I know would condemn the stoning of women, the use of burqa's and the lower value of a woman over a man.

This has got to be one sad, sick little puppy.
I don't know what terrible things have happened to her, but I really feel she needs to be committed.

Guinastasia

01-28-2005, 06:57 AM

I figured it was because she was new and we haven't had too many Muslim posters, at least not to my knowledge.

However, I get the feeling she's either pulling our legs, or just a moron. The whole "Oh, I would wear an Afghan burqa if I didn't get harassed", blah blah blah.

And a lot of her answers aren't very clear-she's too vague, or she simply posts with a bunch of terms someone unfamiliar with Islam wouldn't understand.

Brutus

01-28-2005, 07:05 AM

What do you expect? It's GD. Threaten to so much as tack a kitten to a door up there, and the mods get all huffy.

betenoir

01-28-2005, 07:09 AM

Come on Dopers, you're asleep at the helm. I know the OP is in GD, but I expect more (less?) from the legion of ignorance fighters. Stop being so level headed and break out the goddamn flame throwers already.

But exactly. It's in GD. Which is not the place for flamethrowers. And it seems to me people there are doing just what people in GD should do...calling her on some of her more dubious statments rationally. I also note that Eve certainly seemed to be hoping to see it moved to the Pit the better to take on her particuarly bigoted and obnoxious remark.

Finally I would note that (unless Guinstasia is right, which is quite possible) she seems like a remarkably sheltered and naive girl (she's only met ONE Jew in her life!?!) who might bennfit from the SDMB community and is hardly worthy of the full force of the SDMB 1920's style flamthrowers.

No I wouldn't consider this some prejudice that some people (Christains) get attacked for their bigoted ideas and other people (Muslims) get a pass. Yet.

Abbie Carmichael

01-28-2005, 07:12 AM

I am really starting to feel that religion should be forbidden in an enlightened society.

Sounds like an interesting way to preserve freedom.

betenoir

01-28-2005, 07:19 AM

Oh yeah, I would also mention folks seem to be taking advatage of GD not only to learn about Islam and how she thinks but to ask some very pointed (even if civil) questions about the prejudies and dubious ideas that she may accept as part of her religion. Which is a Good Thing.

betenoir

01-28-2005, 07:23 AM

What do you expect? It's GD. Threaten to so much as tack a kitten to a door up there, and the mods get all huffy.

:eek: Brutus tacks kittens to doors!!! Brutus tackes kittens to doors!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

That's just horrible Brutus. The only bad the I would ever do to a kitten is masturbate.

Brutus

01-28-2005, 07:24 AM

That's just horrible Brutus. The only bad the I would ever do to a kitten is masturbate.

While I certainly know what you mean, you do realize how bad that sounds, right?
:D

Rufus Xavier

01-28-2005, 07:26 AM

Any one who thinks "sinners" should not have full and equal rights under the law should be thrown in jail immediately, pending trial at some point in the future.

Ephemera

01-28-2005, 07:32 AM

:eek: Brutus tacks kittens to doors!!! Brutus tackes kittens to doors!!! AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!

That's just horrible Brutus. The only bad the I would ever do to a kitten is masturbate.

I really hope you mean that in the conventional sense and not the way that it came out.

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 07:39 AM

Any one who thinks "sinners" should not have full and equal rights under the law should be thrown in jail immediately, pending trial at some point in the future.

No, we should lock them up without legal presentation or stone them and.... :confused:
Uuuh, nevermind. :D

Lynn Bodoni

01-28-2005, 07:57 AM

What do you expect? It's GD. Threaten to so much as tack a kitten to a door up there, and the mods get all huffy. Threaten to tack up a kitten in the Pit, and I'll get all huffy, too. I LIKE kittens. No, not to eat, either.

Brutus

01-28-2005, 08:03 AM

Threaten to tack up a kitten in the Pit, and I'll get all huffy, too. I LIKE kittens. No, not to eat, either.

Hey, I like kittens too! Have you ever tried tacking a ferret to door?

Guinastasia

01-28-2005, 08:06 AM

I LIKE kittens. No, not to eat, either.

I agree. Not enough meat on them.

I kid, I kid! Although if Maggie doesn't stop using me as a scratching post while I sleep...

D_Odds

01-28-2005, 08:15 AM

Hey, I like kittens too! Have you ever tried tacking a ferret to door?
No, but I've been tacked to a door by a pair of ferrets.

gobear

01-28-2005, 08:17 AM

I don't think it's PC. It's an intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian. Sort of an enemy-of-my-enemy thing. In fact, I would wager that this post — questioning the intellectual honesty of the suck-ups in that thread — will garner far more hysterical drive-bys and retorts than the post you cited that compares gays to drug dealers and child abusers. Further, I believe that a Christian fundamentalist posting the exact same thing would already have been pitted here and run out on a rail.
When Christians stop saying stupid shit, like Spongebob Squarepants is homosexual propaganda aimed at "converting kids to the Evil Gay Conspiracy, then maybe folks like me will stop feeling nervous when you cats are in the room.

But you're spot on in saying that there's a double standard here. This stupid bitch (if she's sincere and not just pulling our legs) is being cut way too much slack just because she claims to be a Muslim. She's not even a real MENA Muslim or an immigrant who could pass on interesting cultural info about Islam and its traditions; she's some dumb white kid who decided it would be cool to wear a burka!

A moronic fundie is a moronic fundie, regardless if she picked up her idiocy in a church or a mosque.

I am really starting to feel that religion should be forbidden in an enlightened society.

And this is the stupidest comment of all; in a free society, one does not allow the government to dictate what forms of expression may be allowed. An "enlightened" society that forbade religion would be an oxymoron--official tyranny exerted over individual freedom of conscience is not in any way enlightened.

People should be free to worship imaginary people in any way they see fit, and I will remain free to laugh at them.

BrotherCadfael

01-28-2005, 08:19 AM

Grey

01-28-2005, 08:23 AM

A fair bit of what she believes is repugnant and and she should be pitted for those things. Stoning and the self satisfied way she would casually strip rights away from people are the two best examples. At the same time the thread is about a Muslim woman’s point of view, and we’ve managed to get Angua to post a bit, yBeayf has chimed in and we have pulled some value out of it.

But I think she’s either hopelessly naïve or pulling our collective legs. She seems too much like a bad high school caricature of a mid-western American woman becoming a Muslim to be real.

Crafter_Man

01-28-2005, 08:25 AM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:

gobear

01-28-2005, 08:28 AM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:
You're a mean-spirited bigot and a genuinely hateful example of the smug Christian asshole who revels in his societally superior status; we know that. Pitting you would be pointless in the "teaching a pig to sing" sort of way.

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 08:29 AM

And this is the stupidest comment of all; in a free society, one does not allow the government to dictate what forms of expression may be allowed.

You are very right.
Upon reading it back and your comments, I can see where you are coming from.
I meant it differently though, but I am a bit of a :wally
What I meant was that in an enlightened society religion shouldn't exist.
.
.
.
.
OK, that also sound really stupid.
You know what : you are right, I am stupid.

Rysler

01-28-2005, 08:33 AM

What I meant was that in an enlightened society religion shouldn't exist.

Perhaps "wouldn't" exist is what you're going for?

Grey is right. Whatever pain we get from engaging in a Born Again zealot is trumped by getting to talk to Angua and yBeayf. That's a very educational thread.

betenoir

01-28-2005, 08:34 AM

While I certainly know what you mean, you do realize how bad that sounds, right?
:D

:o Ah, yeah kinda, but I figured Dopers would know what I meant :D

gobear

01-28-2005, 08:34 AM

I agree that in an enlightened society, intelligent people would abandon the childish idea of an invisible man sitting in the clouds who hands out arbitrary suffering for His own amusement, a sort of celestial Saddam Hussein to whom one must make obeisance in the hope that one may avert His wrath through sufficient toadying.

The crucial point is that each person must come to that realization freely, not through government edict. If people want to believe in the supernatural, I'll mock them but I won't do anything to prevent them. And if there were some sort of persecution of the kind that Crafter_Man and his ilk like to pretend exists, I would be on his side in the fight. People should be free to hold even the most abhorrent of views.

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 08:37 AM

I bow to your words of wisdom, Gobear.
You continually phrase the things the way I wish I could.
I am not a good communicator, but I am trying.

Captain Amazing

01-28-2005, 08:43 AM

Threaten to so much as tack a kitten to a door up there, and the mods get all huffy.

You're this board's very own Martin Luther.

gobear

01-28-2005, 08:45 AM

You're this board's very own Martin Luther.
Wouldn't Brutus have to nail up 99 kittens to qualify?

Polycarp

01-28-2005, 08:48 AM

Hey, I like kittens too! Have you ever tried tacking a ferret to door?

Definite improvement over theses!

(Did you ever wonder whatever happened to the 95 seniors at the University of Wittenberg who had Luther for their major professor? I mean, that was a hell of a thing to do with papers they'd worked for months to prepare! :eek: )

betenoir

01-28-2005, 08:52 AM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:

Seems to me Carnick was specifically pitting her suggestion that because she finds homosexuality was sinful therefore homosexuals do not deserve equal rights. If you agree with that idea then yes, you deserve pitting, no :rolleyes: involved.

Your belief that homosexuality is inherrently wrongand abhorrent does not deserve pitting...perhaps just a wack upside the head with a cluesick. But that's another debate.

Bosda Di'Chi of Tricor

01-28-2005, 08:53 AM

betenoir

01-28-2005, 08:57 AM

No, but I've been tacked to a door by a pair of ferrets.

Your real world name wouldn't be Bucky would it>

Duke

01-28-2005, 08:57 AM

Wouldn't Brutus have to nail up 99 kittens to qualify? Take one down, and pass it around, 98 nailed-up kittens on the door.

Uvula Donor

01-28-2005, 08:59 AM

Some of her answers give me the distinct feeling that we're being strung along for the whoosh.

Polycarp

01-28-2005, 09:00 AM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:

Well, *I* would -- but telling somebody why they ought to practice the stuff that Christ commanded -- you know, like loving others as oneself, not judging lest you be judged, doing unto others as you would have done to you, doing unto "one of the least of these" as you would do unto Him: that kind of stuff -- is supposed to go in Great Debates.

So I'll simply say that "homosexuality" is an abstract concept defining a sexual orientation, often extended to describe practices carried out as a result of that orientation or for other, more reprehensible reasons -- and that Jesus had much more to say about Pharisaism than about homosexuality.

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-28-2005, 09:00 AM

She comes across as a grade-a sanctimonious zealous asshole to me. That good enough for ya, Lib? The willingness to torture women to death for daring to get raped (after all, pregnancy is proof of sin), the willingness to deny people of their civil rights for their sexuality or gender identity, the willingness to murder authors of works she doesn't like--what a fucking tool.

About the best excuse I can offer for her is that it sounds as if she's joined a cult and been brainwashed. Look at how she's severed ties with her family, how she trusts the word of her leaders almost absolutely, how she's full of selfrighteousness--just let us find out that she's "sharing husbands" with the leader of the sect, and we'll pretty much be set with full-on cult status.

Daniel

Captain Amazing

01-28-2005, 09:02 AM

The reason that folks are cutting her slack is one we haven't the guts to fucking admit, even to ourselves.

We feel guilty.

Our troops have killed thousands of her fellow Muslims in Iraq, for no good reason at all!

I dunno. I didn't go around being especially nice to Christians when we bombed Serbia.

Crafter_Man

01-28-2005, 09:03 AM

You're a mean-spirited bigot and a genuinely hateful example of the smug Christian asshole who revels in his societally superior status; we know that. Pitting you would be pointless in the "teaching a pig to sing" sort of way.Tisk, tisk, tisk. I thought liberals were supposed to be open-minded and tolerant?

And if there were some sort of persecution of the kind that Crafter_Man and his ilk like to pretend existsWhen did I say I was being persecuted?

Seems to me Carnick was specifically pitting her suggestion that because she finds homosexuality was sinful therefore homosexuals do not deserve equal rights.Sure, they deserve equal rights under the law. But they do not deserve special rights.

Grey

01-28-2005, 09:04 AM

Our troops have killed thousands of her fellow Muslims in Iraq, for no good reason at all!

We had a poster, Aldeberan , who objected to this horrible crime, & we banned him.

So, we're putting up with this twerp to salve our collective feelings.

And it's crap.

Aldeberan was worth 10 of her.

That's my feelings on the matter.
My troops aren't killing anyone in Iraq. Alde's signal to noise ration was so low you had to dig to find the fuckin thing.
But maybe you're right, maybe Aldebaran was worth two of her.

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-28-2005, 09:05 AM

I mean, that was a hell of a thing to do with papers they'd worked for months to prepare!
Yeah, really tacky.

Bosda, while I agree that Aldebaran was worth ten of her, I disagree that the US has killed her fellow Muslims, any more than the Inquisition killed Starhawk's fellow witches. She appears to be part of a nasty cult masquerading as Muslim, appears to share very little in common with the civilian victims of the US invasion.

Daniel

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 09:08 AM

Sure, they deserve equal rights under the law. But they do not deserve special rights.
And what special rights might that be?
The right not to be ridiculed, abused and to create a legal bond with the love of your life.
Ilk, indeed. :wally

gobear

01-28-2005, 09:10 AM

Tisk, tisk, tisk. I thought liberals were supposed to be open-minded and tolerant?

A. Where on earth did you get the idea that I'm a liberal?
B. "Open-minded and tolerant" means allowing everyone to have their say freely, not that one must approve of what is said. I totally support your right to freedom of expression, while at the same time noting that what you say is stupid and bigoted.

When did I say I was being persecuted?

Hmm, I don't know if you have, but your sort (i.e. brainless fundies) certainly makes that claim in ther tracts and their amicus briefs against equal rights for gay people.

Sure, they deserve equal rights under the law. But they do not deserve special rights.
We don't want any "special rights", just the same ones you enjoy. So can I mark you down as being for marriage rights for gay people?

Loopydude

01-28-2005, 09:12 AM

It's an intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian.

This is, well, bullshit. I read that thread, and tried really hard to find a "legal" way of telling her what I really thought about her. Impossible, I decided. I'd get myself banned. Perhaps some of us bother to debate other theists we encounter here because, despite it all, we don't find them beneath contempt.

treis

01-28-2005, 09:12 AM

Cut the crap, you stupid shitheads.

The reason that folks are cutting her slack is one we haven't the guts to fucking admit, even to ourselves.

We feel guilty.

Our troops have killed thousands of her fellow Muslims in Iraq, for no good reason at all!

We had a poster, Aldeberan , who objected to this horrible crime, & we banned him.

So, we're putting up with this twerp to salve our collective feelings.

And it's crap.

Aldeberan was worth 10 of her.

That's my feelings on the matter.

Does EVERY fucking thread need to involve Iraq?

Is Aldebaran some sort of fucking martyr the man posted blatantly anti-semetic lies from his 'files'. A board fighting ignorance does not have a place for someone with made up bigotted quotes in their files. This is exactly what Liberal is talking about he got a pass for his lies and beligerant behavior becuase he offered a 'unique' viewpoint. The man is a bigot and this board is better off without him.

clairobscur

01-28-2005, 09:17 AM

We're sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims, on this board. So I wouldn't want to scare her away before she could answer posters' questions, if she were genuine.

However, I'm not really convinced she's genuine. And that's another reason why I do not intend to attack her comments. I wouldn't want to feed the..thread.

And by the way...Aldebaran got banned?????

Guinastasia

01-28-2005, 09:18 AM

Scoundrel Swanswater

01-28-2005, 09:19 AM

The man is a bigot and this board is better off without him.
Then why on earth, isn't Sarah W banned?
I think she is much more dangerous than Aldebaran ever was.
I thought he actually had some good points, and didn't agree with his banning at all.

Guinastasia

01-28-2005, 09:22 AM

Sure, they deserve equal rights under the law. But they do not deserve special rights.

Who the hell said they did, fucktard?

SlyFrog

01-28-2005, 09:23 AM

We're sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims, on this board. So I wouldn't want to scare her away before she could answer posters' questions, if she were genuine.

"Sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims"? Are we short on 88ers too? Perhaps we could throw up a big broad welcome to all groups of hate filled murderers, so long as they are not white men or christians.

Grey

01-28-2005, 09:28 AM

Not true, we've tarred and feathered some bigoted white women too.

Frank

01-28-2005, 09:34 AM

And by the way...Aldebaran got banned?????
Read here (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=294554).

lno

01-28-2005, 09:42 AM

I wonder what Aldebaran would have had to say to her. I suspect it would have been less than kind.

Bibliovore

01-28-2005, 09:43 AM

Crafter_Man

01-28-2005, 09:46 AM

your sort (i.e. brainless fundies) certainly makes that claim in ther tracts and their amicus briefs against equal rights for gay people.My ilk? And now I’m brainless? And I’m brainless – why? Because I don’t agree with your opinions?

We don't want any "special rights", just the same ones you enjoy. So can I mark you down as being for marriage rights for gay people?Sure, I couldn’t care less if gays get married. And while we’re on the subject, I don’t think the government should issue marriage licenses. The government should have nothing to do with marriage.[QUOTE=vinryk]

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-28-2005, 09:48 AM

As a (fairly) devout Muslim myself, I actually winced when I read some of her posts. I honestly don't know if she's for real, or if she's just a disillusioned kid who turned to an extreme branch of the faith in her search for anwers. Maybe the whole thing is a hoax, maybe not, but please let it be duly notred for the record that I don't share many of her views.

Heh. I do this little "yessss!" fist-pump whenever some tweaker comes on and they're not an atheist, or a Democrat, or a gamer, or whatever. I understand, and sympathize.

But I think she's for real: she knows too much about Islam to be fakin it, I think. If she's a hoax, she's one of the more brilliant hoaxes I've seen. Looks far more like the disillusioned kid you talked about who's been sucked into a nasty cult.

Daniel

Bibliovore

01-28-2005, 09:55 AM

Then it's a shame. All my life I've grown up around successful, educated, confident and moderate Muslim women (my fiancee included), but it's people like Sarah W who end up posting here and inviting everyone to examine her extreme views. :rolleyes: I'm glad she converted, but I really hope she starts hanging around with less scary people and finds her way to a happier, warmer version of Islam.

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-28-2005, 09:58 AM

Then it's a shame. All my life I've grown up around successful, educated, confident and moderate Muslim women (my fiancee included), but it's people like Sarah W who end up posting here and inviting everyone to examine her extreme views. :rolleyes:

FWIW, I doubt too many people think she's representative. Angua's been doing a pretty great job; I wonder if she'd consider starting a thread called "Ask the sane Muslim Woman"?

Daniel

Bibliovore

01-28-2005, 10:02 AM

Heh. I've met Angua several times, and while she's an utterly lovely lady, no-one can accuse her of being entirely sane. :D

The Devil's Grandmother

01-28-2005, 10:54 AM

But you're spot on in saying that there's a double standard here. This stupid bitch (if she's sincere and not just pulling our legs) is being cut way too much slack just because she claims to be a Muslim. She's not even a real MENA Muslim or an immigrant who could pass on interesting cultural info about Islam and its traditions; she's some dumb white kid who decided it would be cool to wear a burka!

and

Some of her answers give me the distinct feeling that we're being strung along for the whoosh.

I'm not getting the feeling of an elaborate whoosh, but of a person who has been taken in by a cult based on an extremist Muslim sect. Much of what she posts sounds sheltered and misogynistic. The bits about separating from her family and adopting the family of her house of worship, the now-dissolved group marriage, and the earnest belief without detailed knowledge also screams "Cult Member" to me.

Guinastasia

01-28-2005, 11:09 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a type of temporary marriage in Islam?

She basically doesn't sound too different from a new convert to some extreme fundie Christian church-who got "saved" at a new church by all her friends.

I agree, she's a nutter, but I'm still interested in what she has to say, if only for the "oh my GOD!" factor!

The Devil's Grandmother

01-28-2005, 11:18 AM

One article on temporary marriage in Islam (http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/muta/). I fear if I tried to summarize it I would get it wrong, so please read the link.

betenoir

01-28-2005, 11:44 AM

Sure, they deserve equal rights under the law. But they do not deserve special rights.

Yeah but it was was about equal rights that Eve asked Susan, and it was equal rights that Susan confirmed they were not entitled to. And of course that was what I was repondind to. This "special rights" is something you pulled entirely out of your ass. All the more so because homosexuals havve never asked for specia rights.

Clear enough?

Crafter_Man

01-28-2005, 12:12 PM

Yeah but it was was about equal rights that Eve asked Susan, and it was equal rights that Susan confirmed they were not entitled to. And of course that was what I was repondind to. This "special rights" is something you pulled entirely out of your ass. All the more so because homosexuals havve never asked for specia rights.

Clear enough?Sure. As long as we both agree homosexuals should never request special treatment under the law (e.g. demanding a convicted perpetrator be given a tougher sentence under "hate crime legislation"), then we're on the same page.

yBeayf

01-28-2005, 12:15 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't there a type of temporary marriage in Islam?
Mut`ah, which is a marriage contracted for a fixed period of time. It was originally allowed for all Muslims, and was mainly used to give menfolk who were off at war a release, while still ensuring that the women they temporarily took up with wouldn't be exploited (as much). Sunnis universally believe that its permissibility was abrogated, and that it is no longer permissible under any circumstances, whilst many Shi'ites still allow it and continue to use it.

The link that was posted by The Devil's Grandmother is from a Twelver Shi'ite site, and so it will give the current regulations for those groups that still practice it.

Miller

01-28-2005, 12:22 PM

Sure. As long as we both agree homosexuals should never request special treatment under the law (e.g. demanding a convicted perpetrator be given a tougher sentence under "hate crime legislation"), then we're on the same page.

Except, of course, that homosexuals are not the only group protected by hate crime legislation. Which. once again, moves it from "special rights" to "equal rights," which, once again, is the only thing anyone in the gay rights movement is asking for.

tomndebb

01-28-2005, 12:30 PM

This stupid bitch (if she's sincere and not just pulling our legs) is being cut way too much slack just because she claims to be a Muslim. Having finally read the whole thing, I don't get the feeling she's being cut that much slack, to begin with, and the slack she has been cut is a result of her clearly being a naïf. (Note that she did not storm into anyone else's thread, condemning them for violating Muslim tenets, as has frequently been the opening salvo of some of the Fundamentalist Christians who have been savaged.) The way that she handled those questions clearly indicated that she was way over her head and I suspect that some folks were just not that eager to go ripping out her guts. Now that she has demonstrated that she is, indeed, a member of one of the more "fundamentalist" groups and is perfectly willing to spout off the "party line" with the typical enthusiasm of the undereducated new convert, people are going after her more harshly.

Was there some initial "holding back" based on her professed religion? Proabably some. On the other hand, it seemed to me more a matter of "wait until she really puts her foot in it" rather than any deference toward non-Christian religions.

Gary "Wombat" Robson

01-28-2005, 12:55 PM

Come on Dopers, you're asleep at the helm. I know the OP is in GD, but I expect more (less?) from the legion of ignorance fighters. Stop being so level headed and break out the goddamn flame throwers already.
So, let me get this straight: fighting ignorance just won't work if we're level-headed, calm and rational? The only way to do it is by being a bunch of obnoxious asses? Gee, I'll bet you're a hoot at parties, Carnick.

When Christians stop saying stupid shit [...] then maybe folks like me will stop feeling nervous when you cats are in the room.
And we all know that atheists, agnostics, Muslims, Buddhists, and Frisbeeterians never say any "stupid shit" (of course, you just killed that assumption with your ridiculous generality).

Believe it or not, gobear, there are some fine, intelligent, Christians who have never handed out tracts, who have no problem with gay marriage, and who really couldn't care less about SpongeBob Squarepants. Most of those Christians seem to be a lot more tolerant of bigoted idiots than the bigoted idiots are of them.

Crafter_Man

01-28-2005, 01:11 PM

Except, of course, that homosexuals are not the only group protected by hate crime legislation. Which. once again, moves it from "special rights" to "equal rights," which, once again, is the only thing anyone in the gay rights movement is asking for.
Let’s say a bad guy assaults me, and he ends up getting 3 years in prison. And let’s say a bad guy assaults a homosexual (while screaming “I hate gays” while doing it), and he gets 5 years in prison. I am protected from this guy for 3 years, and the homosexual is protected from this guy for 5 years. That’s equal protection under the law? :confused:

Bippy the Beardless

01-28-2005, 01:17 PM

As someone who was trying to do a lot of the holding back I'll give my thoughts.

She sounds like someone who has been taught by very bad 'Muslims', and she seems to repeat much of what they say. We don't yet know if she is incapable of looking at what she is saying here and realising how evil and obnoxious it is. I would rather she tries that than having her run off the ranch straight away. The reasons I give her the benifit of doubt is that she is a recent convert and so probably has had little time for self analysis of what she has learnt, and that she seems to be isolated within a tight community of extremists so unlikely to hear decenting views, and that though her views are odnoxious she has been polite in communication and has not shown hostility others for their differing views.

gobear

01-28-2005, 01:20 PM

Sure. As long as we both agree homosexuals should never request special treatment under the law (e.g. demanding a convicted perpetrator be given a tougher sentence under "hate crime legislation"), then we're on the same page.
I agree with you on that. Hate crime laws are a ridiculous overweighting of the victim's status. I don't if you kill me because I'm gay or you just weanted my wallet--I'm just as dead either way.

Believe it or not, gobear, there are some fine, intelligent, Christians who have never handed out tracts, who have no problem with gay marriage, and who really couldn't care less about SpongeBob Squarepants. Most of those Christians seem to be a lot more tolerant of bigoted idiots than the bigoted idiots are of them.

So what? In my state, the rational Christians (if they exist) are silent as the fundie
Christians get bills passed that enact legal discrimination against gay people.

gum

01-28-2005, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by gobearPeople should be free to hold even the most abhorrent of views.. Correct. Unless they act upon it, right?

And I agree with SlyFrog Sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims"? Are we short on 88ers too? Perhaps we could throw up a big broad welcome to all groups of hate filled murderers, so long as they are not white men or christians. I'm really not all that thrilled to have posters condoning people getting stoned to death. But hey. That's just me. The atheïst.

Maeglin

01-28-2005, 01:27 PM

"Sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims"? Are we short on 88ers too? Perhaps we could throw up a big broad welcome to all groups of hate filled murderers, so long as they are not white men or christians.

Yes, because Lord knows, there are no while male Christians around here already. Damned if I ever heard one of them articulate his point of view.

Miller

01-28-2005, 01:40 PM

Let’s say a bad guy assaults me, and he ends up getting 3 years in prison. And let’s say a bad guy assaults a homosexual (while screaming “I hate gays” while doing it), and he gets 5 years in prison. I am protected from this guy for 3 years, and the homosexual is protected from this guy for 5 years. That’s equal protection under the law? :confused:

And if a black guy is attacked by someone screaming "I hate black people," he gets a longer sentence. And if a Jew is attack by someone screaming "I hate Jews," he gets a longer sentence. And if you got attacked by a guy screaming "I hate white people," or "I hate Christians," I suspect he would also get a longer sentence, although I confess that I'm not certain about that. Even if that's not the case, it's not an example of gays asking for special rights, but of whites/Christians being denied equal protection. Which is wrong, but that's not what you're complaining about.

Mind you, I'm not actually in favor of hate crime legislation. But to call them "special rights for gays" is flat-out wrong.

gobear

01-28-2005, 01:41 PM

Originally posted by gobear. Correct. Unless they act upon it, right?

Quite so. I have no problem with being told I'm going to Hell, but I would take exception to someone taking it upon himself to help send me there.

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-28-2005, 01:43 PM

And if you got attacked by a guy screaming "I hate white people," or "I hate Christians," I suspect he would also get a longer sentence, although I confess that I'm not certain about that.

He definitely would--and I remember reading that at least early attempts at race-hate-crimes legislation were activated more often when white folks were the victims than when nonwhite folks were the victims.

Daniel

Liberal

01-28-2005, 04:13 PM

bashere

01-28-2005, 04:46 PM

Brief hijack:

Let’s say a bad guy assaults me, and he ends up getting 3 years in prison. And let’s say a bad guy assaults a homosexual (while screaming “I hate gays” while doing it), and he gets 5 years in prison. I am protected from this guy for 3 years, and the homosexual is protected from this guy for 5 years. That’s equal protection under the law? :confused:

You should let the FBI know your little theory. The Hate Crime Statistics (http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hatecm.htm) published by the FBI report (for 1995; I didn't want to spend more than 10 seconds on the research) report 17 incidents motivated because the victim was striaght, and 1,226 where the victim was white. You may disagree with the idea of hate crimes in general, you may feel that the legal system is inherently flawed because it penalizes crimes with certain motives more heavily than arbitrary crimes of opportunity, but the idea that they do not protect white christian males to exactly the same extent as they protect black gay druids is simply incorrect.

Sorry for the hijack.

I read the thread in question, and figured that there was a certain sick fascination that kept people polite. Sort of a "Tell us again how if your husband beats you it's okay. Oh, and you joined this religion voluntarily?" The "Ask the Muslim guy" thread made for a particularly fascinating contrast.

Carnick

01-28-2005, 05:17 PM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:

Wow, I think you win the prize for completely missing the point of the OP. Read it again trail mix, and this time post a reply that's on topic. In the mean time I'm going to consider you a troll.

Carnick

01-28-2005, 05:20 PM

SolGrundy

01-28-2005, 05:22 PM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:
Let’s say a bad guy assaults me, and he ends up getting 3 years in prison. And let’s say a bad guy assaults a homosexual (while screaming “I hate gays” while doing it), and he gets 5 years in prison. I am protected from this guy for 3 years, and the homosexual is protected from this guy for 5 years. That’s equal protection under the law?
Hell no that ain't fair! Faggot had it coming, right? Homo knows it's abnormal and immoral and sinful, and he still wouldn't fuckin' stop doin' it! Gotta knock some sense into the little fucker. Are you with me, guys?

What the fuck, dude? Are you seriously trying to say that the most salient point in the whole discussion of gay rights is equal treatment for the knuckle-draggers who are beating people up on the street? Yeah, great point. Why are you so uptight about ensuring fair treatment of the violent?

You want to talk about equal rights, you twat? How's about we get a list of some of your rights:
1) You can marry someone you're in love with.
2) You can marry someone you're not in love with.
3) You can adopt a child.
4) You're guaranteed that if you're fired from your job, it's because of incompetence, not because of who you have sex with.

Why don't we try and make sure that everybody gets that -- here's a hint: I don't have 3 of those, because of my whole abnormality and sinful behavior -- and then we can start worrying about the rights of the people who go smearing queers or nigger-hunting or taking back the streets from the Yellow Menace or the fucking towelheads.

I don't know about you, but I'd prefer it if nobody had to worry about getting assualted when they go out on the street. Whether the people that do that get 3 years or 5 years doesn't make a bit of difference to me.

And once we get that kind of society to happen, then you're perfectly free to keep on calling me immoral and sinful, and I'm perfectly free to keep calling you a fucking idiot homophobe and wonder why the hell you're so concerned about who I have sex with, when I don't give a rat's ass about what you do with your dick. And that sounds like equal treatment to me.

Jillyvn

01-28-2005, 07:06 PM

<snip>

You want to talk about equal rights, you twat? How's about we get a list of some of your rights:
1) You can marry someone you're in love with.
2) You can marry someone you're not in love with.
3) You can adopt a child.
4) You're guaranteed that if you're fired from your job, it's because of incompetence, not because of who you have sex with.

Why don't we try and make sure that everybody gets that -- here's a hint: I don't have 3 of those, because of my whole abnormality and sinful behavior -- and then we can start worrying about the rights of the people who go smearing queers or nigger-hunting or taking back the streets from the Yellow Menace or the fucking towelheads.

I don't know about you, but I'd prefer it if nobody had to worry about getting assualted when they go out on the street. Whether the people that do that get 3 years or 5 years doesn't make a bit of difference to me.

And once we get that kind of society to happen, then you're perfectly free to keep on calling me immoral and sinful, and I'm perfectly free to keep calling you a fucking idiot homophobe and wonder why the hell you're so concerned about who I have sex with, when I don't give a rat's ass about what you do with your dick. And that sounds like equal treatment to me.

I have witnessed first hand the violence against some of my friends who been gay/lesbian. I hope I've interpreted your comments properly.

I agree with you that the foundation of equal rights would go a long way into establishing an equal application of the law. Until the point in time, I think hate crimes legislation is important. The level of bigotry I've seen against my glbt friends and, lately, muslim friends, continues to astound me and seems to be in a special case of its own.

Until one of your friends has had his ass kicked for being a fag, I don't think you can say that the three vs. five years argument makes any sense.

iampunha

01-28-2005, 07:37 PM

Carnick: I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now? :rolleyes:

We pitted you by proxy some years ago. I remember being underwhelmed by your ability to present a cogent argument. However, some good did come of it; we got word from a researcher of child molestation indicating that, contrary to what is ignorant belief in some places, pedophiles are much, much, much more likely to be straight than gay.

It's so hard to be wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral and sinful all in the same day ... good thing I only need to average 12 hours of each.

SteveG1

01-28-2005, 08:33 PM

I stayed out of the thread that I thought was bing discussed here. I figured she's new and naive. I got bored quickly.

Now we are on another tangent, that being who gets to bash who and how "unfair" the punishment is. Here's the thing. Some of us don't really care what you think, until you act on it. When you try to pass laws and resolutions that tell us we are second class citizens, outsiders in our own land, we get "concerned". When you complain about the "harshness" of hate crime laws, we get "concerned". There was a kid in Wyoming (?) who was beat to death because the local good ole boys thought he was gay. Not for money, not for revenge, not even out of fear, just for spite. Beat to death. Is that sort of thing OK with you? If you really want to run around smashing gays, blacks, Iraqis, Jews, midgets, crosseyed folks, whatever, have the fucking gonads to pay the penalty. Of course that is not likely, since the knuckle draggers who do these things have no balls unless they are in a group. No stomach for any one on one. They usually need to drink up a lot of bottled courage too. Fuck them all.

Zoe

01-28-2005, 08:58 PM

gobear: In my state, the rational Christians (if they exist) are silent as the fundie
Christians get bills passed that enact legal discrimination against gay people.

Nyah! They are just more likely not to make a big production of their religious beliefs, but they work through organizations such as People for the American Way (http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oid=77) and the American Civil Liberties Union.

I did look to see what Unity churches in Virginia I could locate and just picked one at random in Chesapeake, Virginia. By an eery coincidence, I think that the man who wrote
this newsletter (http://www.unityrenaissance.org/Dec_04.pdf) may have been the most gifted minister I ever had here in Nashville. The first column gives you his and the church's attitude about inclusiveness in general.

I must confess that my brief googling of Christian activist organizations in Virginia was not a pleasant experience. I hope that you are working with an organization that does give you a sense of empowerment. Doing something positive about your feelings of frustration is cathartic.

Miller

01-29-2005, 06:40 PM

Sol, unless I'm misreading Crafter_Man, I don't think he' saying that the attacker in his hypothetical does not have equal protection under the law, but that the victim does not have equal protection under the law. If beating up a gay guy gets you five years in prison, but beating up a straight guy only gets you three years, than gays are "more protected" than straights.

The flaw in his argument, obviously, is that his hypothetical bears no actual resemblence to real life. Hate crime legislation does not protect gays any more than members of any other recognizable minority/religion/ethnicity. The validity of hate crime legislation aside, as written they protect all citizens equally.

Excalibre

01-29-2005, 08:53 PM

I also believe homosexuality is wrong, abnormal, abhorrent, immoral, and sinful. So are you going to pit me now?
What would be the point? I suspect you're one of those dirtbags who'd repeat the quote and then claim you don't hate gay people - and get mad at the folks who said you did. Let's face it, you're pretty much a waste of flesh - why would anyone bother to open a whole thread over you?

Sure. As long as we both agree homosexuals should never request special treatment under the law (e.g. demanding a convicted perpetrator be given a tougher sentence under "hate crime legislation"), then we're on the same page.
And I can understand that, while I support hate crime laws, many people don't. I can see where they're coming from (since I used to agree with them) and I'd be happy to debate it with you, if it wasn't so clear that you're not interested in any open discussion of the subject. Too bad you've got such an axe to grind that you'd jump in, out of nowhere, to say what you said above.

I don't think it's PC. It's an intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian. Sort of an enemy-of-my-enemy thing. In fact, I would wager that this post — questioning the intellectual honesty of the suck-ups in that thread — will garner far more hysterical drive-bys and retorts than the post you cited that compares gays to drug dealers and child abusers. Further, I believe that a Christian fundamentalist posting the exact same thing would already have been pitted here and run out on a rail.
:rolleyes: Yeah, because look at Polycarp - Christian through and through, and as such, perhaps the most hated figure on the boards. Every post of his inspires a pile-on; the threads pitting him for his beliefs are a daily occurence.

Though I gotta say, compared to the scumbag I quoted above, or the pathetic moron who inspired this thread, you're seeming downright reasonable, Liberal.

You are very right.
Upon reading it back and your comments, I can see where you are coming from.
I meant it differently though, but I am a bit of a :wally
What I meant was that in an enlightened society religion shouldn't exist.
.
.
.
.
OK, that also sound really stupid.
You know what : you are right, I am stupid.
Looks like you got it right, after several tries!

And this is the stupidest comment of all; in a free society, one does not allow the government to dictate what forms of expression may be allowed. An "enlightened" society that forbade religion would be an oxymoron--official tyranny exerted over individual freedom of conscience is not in any way enlightened.

People should be free to worship imaginary people in any way they see fit, and I will remain free to laugh at them.
Gobear, the folks like you who try to ensure that beliefs they don't share (or sometimes even hate) remain protected are vital to the survival of enlightened society. Thank you.

Bryan Ekers

01-30-2005, 01:07 AM

Well, Sarah W strikes me a goof and a doof and a stooge and a typically overzealous convert, but calling her or Aldeberan "dangerous" is ridiculous. They're just.... dumb, and happy to turn off the thinking parts of the brains.

Liberal

01-30-2005, 05:10 AM

Yeah, because look at Polycarp - Christian through and through, and as such, perhaps the most hated figure on the boards. Every post of his inspires a pile-on; the threads pitting him for his beliefs are a daily occurence.I don't normally think of Poly as a fundamentalist — which is what I wrote about and what you responded to — though your mileage may vary. If you do think of him that way, then you should discourage usage of the pejorative "fundie" out of respect to such a revered board figure. If you do not think of him that way, then you should apologize to me for misrepresenting my remarks.

Eleusis

01-30-2005, 05:52 AM

Yeah, because look at Polycarp - Christian through and through, and as such, perhaps the most hated figure on the boards. Every post of his inspires a pile-on; the threads pitting him for his beliefs are a daily occurence.

Quite to the contrary, Polycarp is one of the most respected dopers.

I never even knew he was a fundy.

And that says a lot.

99% of his posts are valid, yet never even mention religion.

Liberal

01-30-2005, 05:58 AM

Excalibre was being sarcastic, Eleusis. I believe that Poly calls himself a "liberal Christian".

MEBuckner

01-30-2005, 06:19 AM

I don't normally think of Poly as a fundamentalist — which is what I wrote about and what you responded to — though your mileage may vary.
But that's not all you wrote about. You originally referred to an "intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian"; although you also talked about a "Christian fundamentalist" posting the same things that Sarah W posted, it's not clear from your first post in this thread that you are writing only about fundamentalist Christianity. (Emphasis added in both quotations.)

Eleusis

01-30-2005, 06:23 AM

Excalibre was being sarcastic, Eleusis. I believe that Poly calls himself a "liberal Christian".
OK, whoosh.

Thanks, bro.

Liberal

01-30-2005, 11:36 AM

But that's not all you wrote about. You originally referred to an "intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian"; although you also talked about a "Christian fundamentalist" posting the same things that Sarah W posted, it's not clear from your first post in this thread that you are writing only about fundamentalist Christianity. (Emphasis added in both quotations.)The portion to which Exclibre directly responded was the portion about pitting: "Every post of his inspires a pile-on; the threads pitting him for his beliefs are a daily occurence." (Emphasis added.) That was the portion that specified fundamentalists — as you yourself noted.

Polycarp

01-30-2005, 12:24 PM

Of course I'm a Fundamentalist -- I hold to the fundamentals of Christianity as defined by Jesus of Nazareth, as opposed to the TULIP points defined by that guy back in 1910.

Liberal

01-30-2005, 01:53 PM

Of course I'm a Fundamentalist -- I hold to the fundamentals of Christianity as defined by Jesus of Nazareth, as opposed to the TULIP points defined by that guy back in 1910.:D Beautifully said. Is it any wonder that Edlyn and I adore you and your wonderful wife? Please tell her that we hope she is well. Y'all need to come see us sometime.

MEBuckner

01-30-2005, 08:14 PM

The portion to which Exclibre directly responded was the portion about pitting: "Every post of his inspires a pile-on; the threads pitting him for his beliefs are a daily occurence." (Emphasis added.) That was the portion that specified fundamentalists — as you yourself noted.
Now it looks to me like you're misrepresenting Excalibre's remarks. He quoted your entire post, not just the part about "a Christian fundamentalist" getting pitted, and he doesn't just talk about people opening Pit threads, but also about "pile ons", which can happen in any forum.

You talked about "an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian" on the boards; mentioning the general reputation of Polycarp (or tomndebb, or Siege) is a reasonable come back to that, and rather than addressing the point, you are trying to make everyone think Excalibre said something other than what he plainly said.

celestina

01-30-2005, 09:36 PM

Well, I do declare. I suppose I’m one of the folks what were being too civil to SarahW. Well, excuse me for trying to fight ignorance--I'd like to think I know what I'm doing since I am a teacher IRL--without calling someone a dumb bitch and such like. I personally don’t think that’s necessary, and it detracts from the discussion. I reckon that if anyone should have been uncivil it should have been me since she ignored my questions. I didn’t think my questions were that difficult to understand. :confused: Now while I don’t agree with her views, I do respect her right to have them because it’s her life and she can think what she wants to. We don't have all the details of her life--personally I'm wondering about what was really going on with her father--so if she finds the restrictions and harsh sexism in Salafism to suit her, well whatever.

My sense of SarahW is that perhaps she started that thread as a call for help. Though she's made some unfortunate and idiotic decisions in her life, I don't think she's a moron. I mean, if she lived on the streets turning tricks and selling drugs, then she must have developed quite a survival instinct since I imagine you don’t survive long in that type of life, and she had sense enough to seek help and get out of that life. And, though she's spouting off Salafist stuff, I have to wonder if in the back of her mind, she’s wondering just how much of that stuff really is true. She admits she don’t speak Arabic so I’d have to guess she’d have to wonder what them Salafist folks be sayin’ when they get to talkin’ in Arabic. Yes, she’s vulnerable and is grateful to the lady that saved her, but after awhile, if something ain’t adding up right, folks usually do seek out other opinions. She's already had a warning signal what with witnessin' that Muslim asshole what beat his wife in public.

I have to wonder how SarahW found the SDMB and why she started that thread on this message board dedicated to fightin’ ignorance. At any rate, I don’t think we ought to be running off folks like [B]SarahW[]/B because she’s the very type of person the board is designed to help. And, whether we like to think of it or not, she does represent a perspective of Islam, however warped it is. She does represent many Muslimas who live under that warped sect, even if she can’t tell us about MENA culture and customs. I would hope that SarahW learns from this board, and more importantly I would hope that she learns that outside of any religion, she has the power to forgive herself for the mistakes she’s made and not let anyone or any religion exploit the guilt she may feel for those mistakes.

Excalibre

01-30-2005, 11:31 PM

I don't normally think of Poly as a fundamentalist — which is what I wrote about and what you responded to — though your mileage may vary. If you do think of him that way, then you should discourage usage of the pejorative "fundie" out of respect to such a revered board figure. If you do not think of him that way, then you should apologize to me for misrepresenting my remarks.
I don't think it's PC. It's an intellectual immaturity, born of an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian. Sort of an enemy-of-my-enemy thing. In fact, I would wager that this post — questioning the intellectual honesty of the suck-ups in that thread — will garner far more hysterical drive-bys and retorts than the post you cited that compares gays to drug dealers and child abusers.
Sweetie pie, you said that we dopers hate "almost anything Christian". Your later mention of fundies in the same post doesn't do anything to change your claim that dopers hate "almost anything Christian." Polycarp is assuredly Christian, and quite the model of dedication to Christian ideals at that. We don't hate him. Therefore, your statement that dopers possess a "zealous hatred of almost anything Christian" appears to be completely invalid. I didn't limit my discussion to fundies because you didn't.

We've already discussed whether the term "fundie" is a pejorative, and we've discovered that we don't disagree on the topic (if you recall the discussion, I also informed you that (as a homo myself) I don't consider the term "homo" offensive, after you attempted to use it as an analogy.) We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue, but know that I have a good deal of respect for quite a few fundies (using the term in reference to the Fundamentalist Christian social/political movement in the United States) including quite a bit of my own family and a goodly number of my friends. As for you, my opinion of you didn't change one iota (note the reference to the early Christian argument) when I realized you were a staunch Christian, because my feelings about you are motivated by other things.

Excalibre was being sarcastic, Eleusis. I believe that Poly calls himself a "liberal Christian".
Poly, like a number of people I've had the immense pleasure to know, follows the teachings of Jesus as much as he can, and as such, he certainly doesn't follow the "Five Fundamentals" or other such dogma invented far later for less worthy purposes. Sharing Jesus's views on how to treat humanity does pretty much make one a liberal, it seems. He also possesses an abiding faith, and a knowledge of Christian theological issues that could put virtually anyone else to shame. He has not yet, as far as I've seen, been condemned for sharing this knowledge. I suppose perhaps dopers are more discriminating than your quote (the one that claimed we hated "almost anything Christian", remember?) suggests.

Far be it from me to deny a man his pleasures, especially when, as in your case, they seem to be so rare. But all on your own you've managed to show that the persecution complex you share with an unfortunate number of fellow Christians is simply not justifiable. You might benefit from less ideological self-indulgence and more hard examination of yourself and your own beliefs, Liberal.

Liberal

01-31-2005, 04:09 AM

Now it looks to me like you're misrepresenting Excalibre's remarks. He quoted your entire post, not just the part about "a Christian fundamentalist" getting pitted, and he doesn't just talk about people opening Pit threads, but also about "pile ons", which can happen in any forum.But he did not parse the post, as I am doing here, in order to respond to the whole thing. See, this part of my response has little to do with the next part. In any case, he did in fact mention pitting — I even highlighted it for you.

You talked about "an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian" on the boards; mentioning the general reputation of Polycarp (or tomndebb, or Siege) is a reasonable come back to that, and rather than addressing the point, you are trying to make everyone think Excalibre said something other than what he plainly said.It seems to me that that is what you're doing with my post.

Liberal

01-31-2005, 04:21 AM

Sweetie pie, you said that we dopers hate "almost anything Christian". Your later mention of fundies in the same post doesn't do anything to change your claim that dopers hate "almost anything Christian." Polycarp is assuredly Christian, and quite the model of dedication to Christian ideals at that. We don't hate him. Therefore, your statement that dopers possess a "zealous hatred of almost anything Christian" appears to be completely invalid. I didn't limit my discussion to fundies because you didn't.

We've already discussed whether the term "fundie" is a pejorative, and we've discovered that we don't disagree on the topic (if you recall the discussion, I also informed you that (as a homo myself) I don't consider the term "homo" offensive, after you attempted to use it as an analogy.) We'll have to agree to disagree on the issue, but know that I have a good deal of respect for quite a few fundies (using the term in reference to the Fundamentalist Christian social/political movement in the United States) including quite a bit of my own family and a goodly number of my friends. As for you, my opinion of you didn't change one iota (note the reference to the early Christian argument) when I realized you were a staunch Christian, because my feelings about you are motivated by other things

Poly, like a number of people I've had the immense pleasure to know, follows the teachings of Jesus as much as he can, and as such, he certainly doesn't follow the "Five Fundamentals" or other such dogma invented far later for less worthy purposes. Sharing Jesus's views on how to treat humanity does pretty much make one a liberal, it seems. He also possesses an abiding faith, and a knowledge of Christian theological issues that could put virtually anyone else to shame. He has not yet, as far as I've seen, been condemned for sharing this knowledge. I suppose perhaps dopers are more discriminating than your quote (the one that claimed we hated "almost anything Christian", remember?) suggests.

Far be it from me to deny a man his pleasures, especially when, as in your case, they seem to be so rare. But all on your own you've managed to show that the persecution complex you share with an unfortunate number of fellow Christians is simply not justifiable. You might benefit from less ideological self-indulgence and more hard examination of yourself and your own beliefs, Liberal.I wrote neither about the whole board nor about all Christians. Speaking to the OP, in reference to those who cut the Muslim bigot so much slack, I said that I believed it was born of an aversion to almost anything Christian. Despite however many times and with what paraphrases you and Buck rewrite my post, it stands as is until and unless a moderator edits it.

HMS Irruncible

01-31-2005, 04:36 AM

If you enjoyed this pit, you might enjoy my pit related to this original pitted thread as well as others like it (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=299821) . Or not.

Rune

01-31-2005, 08:24 AM

Come on Dopers, you're asleep at the helm. I know the OP is in GD, but I expect more (less?) from the legion of ignorance fighters. Stop being so level headed and break out the goddamn flame throwers already.She’s a sad woman, no harm or danger to anyone. I congratulate her on turning her life around. I’m no sucker for Islam in any form to put it mildly, but if Islam helped her out of her former sad life, good for her and my best wishes. Even the life as a downtrodden third wife of a crazy Wahhabist is to be preferred over that of a drug addicted prostitute.

Also she can consider homosexuality a sin for all I care. So what? You censure her for a religious belief? She can believe what she wants as long as she doesn’t do anything about it.

Also I agree. It could be interesting to have some hard-core Muslim fanatics around. SarahW isn’t it though. Neither was Aldebaran. Pity he left. Now we have to make do with the hardcore fanatic liberals.

Excalibre

01-31-2005, 08:32 AM

I wrote neither about the whole board nor about all Christians. Speaking to the OP, in reference to those who cut the Muslim bigot so much slack, I said that I believed it was born of an aversion to almost anything Christian. Despite however many times and with what paraphrases you and Buck rewrite my post, it stands as is until and unless a moderator edits it.
Oh, no, I wouldn't want it to change. I encourage you to take responsibility for what you say by leaving it there for all the world to see. You're attempting to backpedal in some way by trying to make some truly incomprehensible point about Christians or Fundamentalists or about how everyone is mean to you all the time, and people won't realize how ridiculous your later posts are if they don't see the entire exchange.

The fact is, you haven't shown that anyone at all on the boards has an "aversion to almost anything Christian" except perhaps our beloved old crank gobear, and he hates every other religion as well. Why you feel such a need to jump to the defense of the worst sort of "Christians" I couldn't say, but feel free to continue. It just makes your own character clearer.

Eleusis

01-31-2005, 08:37 AM

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=299845

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-31-2005, 08:39 AM

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=299845
Well, it was a clever one, wasn't it?

Daniel

Liberal

01-31-2005, 08:41 AM

Polycarp

01-31-2005, 08:55 AM

Oh, no, I wouldn't want it to change. I encourage you to take responsibility for what you say by leaving it there for all the world to see. You're attempting to backpedal in some way by trying to make some truly incomprehensible point about Christians or Fundamentalists or about how everyone is mean to you all the time, and people won't realize how ridiculous your later posts are if they don't see the entire exchange.

The fact is, you haven't shown that anyone at all on the boards has an "aversion to almost anything Christian" except perhaps our beloved old crank gobear, and he hates every other religion as well. Why you feel such a need to jump to the defense of the worst sort of "Christians" I couldn't say, but feel free to continue. It just makes your own character clearer.

gobear and I share a dislike for the sort of "Christianity" that would ostracize him for his sexuality and me for my lack of social standing. I cannot blame him for being mad that some people would deny him any legal rights and insult his commitment to his partner in the name of Jesus -- it pisses me off too, because that's my Lord whose Name they're taking in vain.

And, when not so mad that he cannot see straight, gobear is quite quick to specify that it's the hatemongers-in-the-name-of-Christ whom he pillories, not those of us who think that what He said about how to treat your fellow man is worth paying attention to.

clairobscur

01-31-2005, 08:56 AM

"Sorely lacking fundamentalist muslims"? .

Yes. We had a large number of fundamentalist christians, and I don't remember many people demanding that they would be banned, even when they condemned homosexuality or made similar comments.

We also had many, many, people posting strongly prejudicied comments about muslims, that would never had flown if they had been made about other groups (this double standard has already been mentionned a number of time) up to and including stating that various muslims countries should be nuked out of existence. They generally weren't banned simply because they said so (something I regret, by the way).

And indeed, in the current international situation, being offered the point of view of an actual fundamentalist muslim would be interesting.

Clothahump

01-31-2005, 10:36 AM

Cut the crap, you stupid shitheads.

The reason that folks are cutting her slack is one we haven't the guts to fucking admit, even to ourselves.

We feel guilty.

Our troops have killed thousands of her fellow Muslims in Iraq, for no good reason at all!

Free elections in Iraq last weekend. That's a pretty damn good reason.

We had a poster, Aldeberan , who objected to this horrible crime, & we banned him.

So, we're putting up with this twerp to salve our collective feelings.

And it's crap.

Aldeberan was worth 10 of her.

That's my feelings on the matter.

There's only one minor little teensy problem with that.

What we have done, and are doing, in Iraq is NOT a crime. But, hey, why let facts get in the way of a good rant?

SlyFrog

01-31-2005, 10:54 AM

Yes. We had a large number of fundamentalist christians, and I don't remember many people demanding that they would be banned, even when they condemned homosexuality or made similar comments.

Someone demanded that she be banned?

We also had many, many, people posting strongly prejudicied comments about muslims, that would never had flown if they had been made about other groups (this double standard has already been mentionned a number of time) up to and including stating that various muslims countries should be nuked out of existence. They generally weren't banned simply because they said so (something I regret, by the way).

Could you find one where someone actually advocated nuking muslim countries? That would be interesting to see.

And indeed, in the current international situation, being offered the point of view of an actual fundamentalist muslim would be interesting.

Why? What is so interesting about wanting to murder anyone who disagrees with you or insults your god? I've certainly had enough of that viewpoint to last me a lifetime; I don't think people should be banned for presenting it here, but I'm not sure why it would be any more valued than the neo-nazi viewpoint. I know I'm not desperate to get a bunch more of them in here.

gobear

01-31-2005, 11:08 AM

The fact is, you haven't shown that anyone at all on the boards has an "aversion to almost anything Christian" except perhaps our beloved old crank gobear, and he hates every other religion as well. Why you feel such a need to jump to the defense of the worst sort of "Christians" I couldn't say, but feel free to continue. It just makes your own character clearer.

I have little to add to Polycarp's post except, "beloved old crank"? Dude, I'm only 43, I'm hardly "old"!

As for religion, meh, I'm ambivalent towards it. OTOH, the religious impulse has driven humans to create works of haunting beauty, like Chartres Cathedral, the temple carvings at Khajuraho, Angkor Wat, the St. Matthew's Passion, the Upanishads, and has fueled many of humanity's early scientific and social achievements. Egyptian priests developed mathematics to calculate the Nile annual flood, and Mayan priests created the most intirciate and accurate calendar of the pre-scientific era.

OTOH, it's high time, IMO, for people to wake up and realize that there is zero evidence to support the proposition that gods exist, and there's a great deal of evidence against. Still, people need to come to that understanding on their own, and so I'm prepared to put up with a world that relies on magical thinking. As Pterry puts it, prayer is just another word for pleading with thunderstorms. Still, as long as faith in God motivates good people like Poly to love others as themselves and to practice virtue, who am I to argue that they're wrong?

But I have nothing but contmept for the small-minded hatemiongers who pervert their faith into a weapon of sadism and hatred. Fundamentalists are ignorant, hateful, barbarians who are trying to reverse every advance humanity has made, so they can drag us back to the caves of ignorance and fear. To hell with them and their sheep-like followers.

Loopydude

01-31-2005, 11:19 AM

But I have nothing but contmept for the small-minded hatemiongers who pervert their faith into a weapon of sadism and hatred.

Bolding mine, of course. Since they usually can find some (no matter how tenuous) scriptural justification for their barbarism, I prefer "alternative rendering" to "perversion".

Iridium

01-31-2005, 11:28 AM

I was hoping she'd be one of those really sharp fundies who could quote endlessly (with precision) from the Qur'an and had some familiarity with neo-Salafist politics. Turned out to be a bit of a mushhead, but there were some interesting side discussions.

Guinastasia

01-31-2005, 11:42 AM

So wait-is she a Muslim, or isn't she? Was it her roommate the whole time before she even had a chance to post?

Weird.

badbadrubberpiggy

01-31-2005, 11:52 AM

So wait-is she a Muslim, or isn't she? Was it her roommate the whole time before she even had a chance to post?

Weird.

Apparently, it was a public computer in the library, and she didn't lock it when she left, and her neighbor used it. I'm not sure I buy that b/c the thread went on for days, so the guy would either have had to leave her logged in at all times and return to the same computer every time, or know her password, neither of which seems very likely. Oh well, maybe we'll get a clearer explanation from her at some point.

Trunk

01-31-2005, 12:10 PM

Apparently, it was a public computer in the library, and she didn't lock it when she left, and her neighbor used it. I'm not sure I buy that b/c the thread went on for days, so the guy would either have had to leave her logged in at all times and return to the same computer every time, or know her password, neither of which seems very likely. Oh well, maybe we'll get a clearer explanation from her at some point.
A little google sleuthing turned up this. (http://www.nanowrimo.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=10370&forum=168#forumpost173116)

I didn't read the original thread, but it looks like the girl started this "ask the muslim" thread, got in over her head, and then decided to lie that she didn't actually create the original thread.

Guinastasia

01-31-2005, 12:14 PM

A little google sleuthing turned up this. (http://www.nanowrimo.org/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?topic_id=10370&forum=168#forumpost173116)

I didn't read the original thread, but it looks like the girl started this "ask the muslim" thread, got in over her head, and then decided to lie that she didn't actually create the original thread.

Hmmmm...might wanna forward that to the Mods, just in case. (Although it's possible some of the last answers weren't her, but I doubt it.)

clairobscur

01-31-2005, 12:41 PM

Someone demanded that she be banned?

I'll grant you nobody did.

Could you find one where someone actually advocated nuking muslim countries? That would be interesting to see.

Yes. The ill famed Wild Bill did so. And so did Paul Filtzroy some months ago in the pit. And though both have been banned since, they didn't even get a warning for these utterances. I repeat, in case it would be unclear : they called for a genocide and it went unoticed.

Attacks against muslims and arabs are commonplace on this board. Nobody batted an eye when the same Paul Filtzroy stated that french people were rightfully pissed of at muslims because they build so many mosques. Imagine the pile on if, in the same statement, "muslim" and "mosques" had been replaced by "jews" and "synagogues". there's a constant flow on this board of prejudiced, racist and inflammatory comments made about arab and muslim people. Some posters do protest. Not much. Most of the time, they fall under the collective radar of the dopers, and seem to be considered as valid points for debate, and even gather support, while once again, the same comments made about blacks, for instance, would result in a massive pile-on.

I currently don't visit the board often enough to do so, but I should indeed have kept a record of such posts and comments.

This double standard has been noticed by other dopers. In the thread that followed Aldebaran's banning that I recently read, several expressed the same concern. I remember that zombiesatemybrains made the same point, for instance.

Why? What is so interesting about wanting to murder anyone who disagrees with you or insults your god? I've certainly had enough of that viewpoint to last me a lifetime; I don't think people should be banned for presenting it here, but I'm not sure why it would be any more valued than the neo-nazi viewpoint. I know I'm not desperate to get a bunch more of them in here.

I didn't read the last posts made in the thread currently pitted. When I read it,there was no mention of murdering anyone. Only a violent condemnation of homosexuals, and I've seen this done by many a christian fundamentalist on this board.

clairobscur

01-31-2005, 12:49 PM

Bolding mine, of course. Since they usually can find some (no matter how tenuous) scriptural justification for their barbarism, I prefer "alternative rendering" to "perversion".

Amen to that. Polycarp interpretation of the scriptures isn't a better one. It's only a *nicer* one.

All the stuff needed to suport any barbaric action is contained in these "holy" books. Slavery is justified. Mass murder warranted (and several straightdope christian litteralists justified it in various past threads). Stoning ordered (and when a couple *nice* Jewish traditionnalists are called on it, they oppose it only on the basis of technicalities, like "no sanhedrim", but never on moral grounds).

SlyFrog

01-31-2005, 02:24 PM

Yes. The ill famed Wild Bill did so. And so did Paul Filtzroy some months ago in the pit. And though both have been banned since, they didn't even get a warning for these utterances. I repeat, in case it would be unclear : they called for a genocide and it went unoticed.

How do we know they did not get a warning? With no offense to you, the fact that they were banned makes me tend to view with suspicion the theory that there were no repercussion to their statements.

Attacks against muslims and arabs are commonplace on this board. Nobody batted an eye when the same Paul Filtzroy stated that french people were rightfully pissed of at muslims because they build so many mosques. Imagine the pile on if, in the same statement, "muslim" and "mosques" had been replaced by "jews" and "synagogues". there's a constant flow on this board of prejudiced, racist and inflammatory comments made about arab and muslim people. Some posters do protest. Not much. Most of the time, they fall under the collective radar of the dopers, and seem to be considered as valid points for debate, and even gather support, while once again, the same comments made about blacks, for instance, would result in a massive pile-on.

I don't know. I guess this is just a matter of opinion; I haven't seen nearly the level of attacks on muslims on this board as I have on "fundie christians" and whatever other groups are the convenient strawmen of liberals. But again, that type of "what pops to the eye" analysis is in the eye of the beholder I guess.

I didn't read the last posts made in the thread currently pitted. When I read it,there was no mention of murdering anyone. Only a violent condemnation of homosexuals, and I've seen this done by many a christian fundamentalist on this board.

I'm not saying there were in that post, I'm saying I'm not sure why we desperately need more fundamentalist muslim viewpoints around here. Fundamentalist muslims, based on my understanding of the Koran, believe that I and everyone who does not agree with them, are apostates who should either convert or be killed. Perhaps there is some room for the dhimi to not be slaughtered but merely subjugated or beaten, I don't know. In the end, however, I'll stand by not necessarily feeling left out because I'm not getting more of the viewpoint of that group, any more than I would feel left out not getting the viewpoint of some other nihilistic cult.

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-31-2005, 02:50 PM

I don't know. I guess this is just a matter of opinion; I haven't seen nearly the level of attacks on muslims on this board as I have on "fundie christians" and whatever other groups are the convenient strawmen of liberals.
Sure, and I doubt you've seen the same level of attacks on Orthodox Jews, or on Hare Krishnas, or on Dianic Wiccans. Similarly, I bet you've not seen the same level of attacks from Orthodox Jews, or Hare Krishnas, or Dianic Wiccans. Maybe there's a relationship here?

Daniel

Bibliovore

01-31-2005, 02:56 PM

there's a constant flow on this board of prejudiced, racist and inflammatory comments made about arab and muslim people. Some posters do protest. Not much. Most of the time, they fall under the collective radar of the dopers, and seem to be considered as valid points for debate, and even gather support, while once again, the same comments made about blacks, for instance, would result in a massive pile-on.

I currently don't visit the board often enough to do so, but I should indeed have kept a record of such posts and comments.

This double standard has been noticed by other dopers. In the thread that followed Aldebaran's banning that I recently read, several expressed the same concern. I remember that zombiesatemybrains made the same point, for instance.
.

Amen to that. I've noticed it myself, and once I even started an "Ask the Arab Guy" thread to try to fight the ignorance in approved SDMB fashion. I agree that there are far too many comments thrown around here that are largely ignored because they are made about Arabs and/or Muslims.

KellyM

01-31-2005, 02:59 PM

So wait-is she a Muslim, or isn't she? Was it her roommate the whole time before she even had a chance to post?

Weird.I'm quite convinced that she's lying.

There's a woman named Sarah Wagner living in Peoria, Illinois who, in an article (http://www.belleville.com/mld/belleville/9402475.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp) dated in August 2004, reportedly converted from Lutheranism to Islam in 2002. Sounds a great deal like what our very own Sarah_W claimed about herself in the now-disappeared thread.

As far as I'm concerned, the whole story about the "public computer" is a load of horseshit; I think Trunk has it exactly right: she got in over her head and used that convenient lie to try to avoid the consequences.

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 03:17 PM

Angua

01-31-2005, 03:24 PM

Heh. I've met Angua several times, and while she's an utterly lovely lady, no-one can accuse her of being entirely sane. :D

Hey! I'm not that bad! :p ;)

I have to agree with what Bibliovore's said, the views expressed in that thread are very extreme, and made me wince to read them. I'm in the process of starting (am writing an OP at the moment) an "Ask the Shi`a Nizari Ismaili Woman" thread in GD, and I will try and answer questions in there.

badbadrubberpiggy

01-31-2005, 03:27 PM

Hey, I never denied my Muslimhood. And why the heck would a rape survivor call rape the fault of the women and say they oughta to be stoned? But yeah, okay, whatever. KellyM and everyone else, you can think what you want.

I'm leaving this board. This isn't what I signed up for.

Actually, it's exactly what you signed up for. A controversial thread gets created in your name, and you deny it claiming it was started by someone else. However, the circumstances under which you claim it was started aren't very convincing for your story.

You signed up for a board dedicated to fighting ignorance. People here will question everything and demand cites and reason for such things. If you don't like it, then don't stay, but don't claim you never signed up for this. Perhaps if you could provide a coherent explanation for what happened w/ the original thread, people would not be so harsh, but you can't even do that.

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 03:39 PM

Liberal

01-31-2005, 03:44 PM

Okay, all right.

I wasn't ever a prostitute or drug-dealer. Sure, I did stuff I shouldn't have, but I never crossed the line like that. My dad was never neglectful. He's the best dad in the world.

I knew people could be hateful, but I've never experienced anything like this. It brings tears to my eyes, reading your opinions of me. I want to change your minds about me, but I know that'll never happen now. And it's all because of one stupid mistake.

At least I got something out of it, sort of.
I forgive you, and I'm sure others will too. We've all made stupid mistakes.

Iridium

01-31-2005, 03:53 PM

I'm in the process of starting (am writing an OP at the moment) an "Ask the Shi`a Nizari Ismaili Woman" thread in GD, and I will try and answer questions in there.

Cool! I wanted to finish a couple of conversations, but never got the chance :(

Sarah W, there are unfortunately some credibility issues here, but the thread did lead to some interesting topics and managed to bring a lot of Muslims, former Muslims and bored MENA experts (incl. ones who no longer frequent SDMB) out of the woodwork. That counts for something.

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 03:54 PM

I forgive you, and I'm sure others will too. We've all made stupid mistakes.

I ran across these boards, and I thought, "Hey, this is neat! These people have neat ideas! I wanna be part of this!"

What was going on with the computer, to the best of my knowledge, is this: I don't have a computer at home. I come to the library to use the public computers. Lots of homeless men also use the computers. Some of these guys aren't all there. I definitely shouldn't have left the computer unattended. I'm sorry for that, and I don't know what else to say here.

I really would like it if people here gave me the chance to tell what I'm like as a human being. I want to say what I think about stuff and to know what other people think about the same stuff. THAT's what I signed up for. Will the Dopers please give me that chance?

Captain Amazing

01-31-2005, 03:54 PM

Sarah, there are a number of people here who got started on the wrong foot, so to speak. This doesn't mean that you can't have an enjoyable time here. And, even in the thread that didn't go very well, there were people who were interested in what you had to say. They didn't neccesarily agree with it, but they were interested. It's up to you of course, but I think if you stay, you'll find that this isn't such a terrible place and that you're not hated.

Loopydude

01-31-2005, 03:55 PM

And it's all because of one stupid mistake.

Just one?

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 03:58 PM

Cool! I wanted to finish a couple of conversations, but never got the chance :(

Sarah W, there are unfortunately some credibility issues here, but the thread did lead to some interesting topics and managed to bring a lot of Muslims, former Muslims and bored MENA experts (incl. ones who no longer frequent SDMB) out of the woodwork. That counts for something.

Sure, go ahead, ask me anything. I can't tell you stuff about MENA (that stands for Middle East/North Africa, right?) but I CAN tell you what it's to be a 'white Muslim' in America.

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 03:59 PM

Oh yeah, another thing, Iridium. I'm not the best girl to explain things, and I'm sure not the best talker.

Iridium

01-31-2005, 04:07 PM

Oh yeah, another thing, Iridium. I'm not the best girl to explain things, and I'm sure not the best talker.

I'm not expecting a sharia scholar (okay, maybe I was hoping for one with a Salafist bent, but they're rare and likely too paranoid to hang around US boards), if you're genuine it would still be interesting to hear your impressions.

Angua

01-31-2005, 04:08 PM

Cool! I wanted to finish a couple of conversations, but never got the chance :(

Well, here you go (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=299927). :)

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-31-2005, 04:10 PM

Sarah, how about you tell us at what point you claim you stopped posting and the homeless guy took over?

I think asking for forgiveness is a little premature. Let us be clear on what you're saying happened first. Did you start that thread? Did you write any of the responses to it?

Daniel

Sarah W

01-31-2005, 04:18 PM

Nope, I didn't start that thread. I've been tied up lately and barely had any free time.

Liberal

01-31-2005, 04:20 PM

I think asking for forgiveness is a little premature. I don't agree. Forgiveness and exhoneration are not the same. Forgiveness, by its very nature, is unconditional. Why wait to ask for forgiveness?

Left Hand of Dorkness

01-31-2005, 04:27 PM

Nope, I didn't start that thread. I've been tied up lately and barely had any free time.

So why did you even register on the boards? You have no other posts anywhere.

Daniel

KellyM

01-31-2005, 04:42 PM

Nope, I didn't start that thread. I've been tied up lately and barely had any free time.You will have to excuse me, but I don't believe you yet. Whoever wrote that thread knows you very well; specifically, he or she is very aware of how you feel about clothing, for example. Much of what was posted in that thread is consistent with what you posted over on that writer's board that was linked earlier in this thread. I still am extremely distrustful of your claim that the entire thread was perpetrated by a random homeless dude.

You still aren't telling us the entire truth; I'm still not even sure you're telling us any of it.

Mdm. President

01-31-2005, 04:45 PM

Okay, all right.

I wasn't ever a prostitute or drug-dealer. Sure, I did stuff I shouldn't have, but I never crossed the line like that. My dad was never neglectful. He's the best dad in the world.

I knew people could be hateful, but I've never experienced anything like this. It brings tears to my eyes, reading your opinions of me. I want to change your minds about me, but I know that'll never happen now. And it's all because of one stupid mistake.

At least I got something out of it, sort of.

If you didn't start the thread then surly you didn't post in it (don't even try to say you just 'went with it'). Which makes the above statement 'weird'.
Your running out of opportunities to be taken seriously.
So come clean right now or shut the fuck up.

If you want my humble opinion...

Excalibre

01-31-2005, 04:46 PM

gobear and I share a dislike for the sort of "Christianity" that would ostracize him for his sexuality and me for my lack of social standing.
I know gobear doesn't hate Christians - he's not that sort. But he's expressed pretty naked contempt for religion of all stripes (calling it silly at very least), always without saying anything of the sort about their adherents.

I have little to add to Polycarp's post except, "beloved old crank"? Dude, I'm only 43, I'm hardly "old"!
Sit down, grampa. Don't get overexcited; you don't need any extra stress at your age. Shhh, it'll be okay. :)

I don't agree. Forgiveness and exhoneration are not the same. Forgiveness, by its very nature, is unconditional. Why wait to ask for forgiveness?
I don't think she merits forgiveness until she more honestly comes forward - I for one and many other folks around here (I suspect) would be happy to write the incident off completely if she would acknowledge that she posted the thread (or, alternatively, explain how and why the homeless gentleman in question managed to engage in a several day long discussion on the unique issues facing a young Muslim woman in the U.S.)

Until she actually owns up to what she did, I don't see why we ought to forgive her or welcome her to the boards at all; after all, while I doubt perfect honesty is the norm here, I don't like to think I belong to a community of naked dissimulators, since I don't see how it's a community at all. (The naked part would be okay if they were cute, though.) A community of people who make mistakes is fine, since that describes every community in existence.

Sarah W, memories are short and the thread in question is gone. I think a lot of folks here would be inclined to forgive you (and the few who are still pissed would be obligated per the rules not to bring it up) if you just owned up. It was a bad idea, you said some stuff without thinking, and (frankly) the pile-on of folks who appeared to be trying to trip you up by demanding knowledge of esoteric issues was somewhat unpleasant. Shit happens, and we'd understand.

Liberal

01-31-2005, 04:58 PM

I suppose we just look at forgiveness differently. Had Jesus told the woman, "Admit to me your adultery, and I will not condemn you," I would still be an atheist.

Excalibre

01-31-2005, 05:17 PM

I suppose we just look at forgiveness differently. Had Jesus told the woman, "Admit to me your adultery, and I will not condemn you," I would still be an atheist.
Did she claim not to be one - in spite of evidence to the contrary? Liberal, your smug platitudes don't match the personality that's shone through on the boards.

Guinastasia

01-31-2005, 05:26 PM

Sarah, it's not that we don't want to believe you, but the thing is-how do we know you're not someone just having a lark and now laughing because you managed to convince us?

It's not you-it's that people have tried this before. How did that person manage to stay logged in to your user name and password-if you're using a public computer?

Sorry, but we're skeptics, and your story has a few holes in it.

Excalibre

01-31-2005, 05:27 PM

I suppose we just look at forgiveness differently.
We? Southerners? Libertarians? People taking Prednisone for medical conditions?

Had Jesus told the woman, "Admit to me your adultery, and I will not condemn you," I would still be an atheist.
Oh, Christians! I get it, you're faulting me here for being a godless heathen, eh?

In fact, this statement contains the subtle implication that I'm demanding she somehow publicly 'repent' in some sense for her crimes, and if you read my post, you'd see that it's clearly not what I said. I made it quite clear why I don't think that sort of pretending is conducive to what he have here on the boards.

Besides, Christian doctrine, to my knowledge, does indeed require one to admit, and even repent, ones sins. Apparently Jesus's forgiveness is slightly more demanding than you make it out to be. You might be confusing Jesus with some of the more palatable new-age icons.

Lib, when dealing with me, in the future, please either avoid the veiled insults or state them honestly. The intellectual cowardice of trying to make statements without admitting them saddens me. See, for instance, your repeated misspelling of my name, even after I alerted you to it. Do you do that when you bring me up in threads in hopes that I won't stumble across your discussions of me? Because it's not necessary. I don't do vanity searches. I don't mind if you insult me; this is the Pit. I'd just rather you were honest about it.

KellyM

01-31-2005, 05:31 PM

I suppose we just look at forgiveness differently. Had Jesus told the woman, "Admit to me your adultery, and I will not condemn you," I would still be an atheist.Sarah_W has yet to admit anything to us; at the moment she is blaming everything on a random homeless loony.

Polycarp

01-31-2005, 06:29 PM

We? Southerners? Libertarians? People taking Prednisone for medical conditions?

Oh, Christians! I get it, you're faulting me here for being a godless heathen, eh?

In fact, this statement contains the subtle implication that I'm demanding she somehow publicly 'repent' in some sense for her crimes, and if you read my post, you'd see that it's clearly not what I said. I made it quite clear why I don't think that sort of pretending is conducive to what he have here on the boards.

Besides, Christian doctrine, to my knowledge, does indeed require one to admit, and even repent, ones sins. Apparently Jesus's forgiveness is slightly more demanding than you make it out to be. You might be confusing Jesus with some of the more palatable new-age icons.

No -- Lib is saying what he regards as God's capacity for unconditional forgiveness. With which I agree.

Some people's "Christian doctrine... does indeed require one to admit... one's sins. Apparently Jesus's forgiveness ," according to them, "...is slightly more demanding than you make it out to be. "

While Lib can be more than a trifle prickly at times, I don't think he intended insult, veiled or otherwise, at you, but was rather stating his own convictions. And, as someone who shares his on this matter, it can be very annoying to be told that "we're not real Christians" because we stand on Jesus's own words, rather than the legalist twist put on them by some conservative Protestants and Catholics. If there was ire in his post, I see it directed at your echoing that perspective, not at you personally.

Nuff said -- I don't have a dog in the fight between you and him, but I thought that perhaps a third party without strong emotional involvement in the argument might be able to mediate peace. If I have, good. If not, or if I've misrepresented Lib in stating my understanding of what he was saying, then my apologies for butting in.

roger thornhill

01-31-2005, 06:49 PM

You talked about "an almost zealous hatred of anything Christian" on the boards; mentioning the general reputation of Polycarp (or tomndebb, or Siege) is a reasonable come back to that...
It should be pointed out that having a good reputation with one's fellow men is not necessarily something that should be taken at face value, or as an indicator of probity. As Jesus said, "Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their fathers treated the prophets...[But] woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets."

look!ninjas

01-31-2005, 07:33 PM

With no offense to you, the fact that they were banned makes me tend to view with suspicion the theory that there were no repercussion to their statements.

I'm not sure what the circumstances were for Wild Bill (in fact, I'm not totally sure I've heard of that poster before), but IIRC, PaulFitzroy bit the dust over this (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5633873&postcount=16) post, and not his "Bomb 'em all!" rantings. Granted, what killed him in the end was the overall pattern of behavior, and some of his more... extreme foreign policy views probably contributed to the banning, but I wouldn't say for certain how much weight they had. I can't say that there were no repercussions at all, but I can't say that the mods cracked down with an iron fist, either.

It seems to me that there certainly was a time, particularly before the war in Iraq began, where there were a lot of posts saying "All Muslims hate America" and "Religion of peace, my ass" and things like that. And while many Dopers argued against those particular displays of ignorance, it didn't seem like there were as many arguments or that the arguments were as vehement as they might have been if another religious or ethnic group were singled out.

After a time, I got so frustrated reading those threads that I stopped reading them entirely - it seems like there are fewer now than there were, but perhaps that's only because I'm shunning them. But I have gotten the impression that it's more okay to generalize about Muslims based on the actions of their lunatic fringe than it is okay to make similar generalizations about other religious groups. And that bothers me. It doesn't bother me enough that I'd run around shrieking "Racism! Discrimination! Bias!" But it bothers me.

hajario

01-31-2005, 08:13 PM

Sarah_W, your story makes no sense and for now I don't believe it.

For starters, how would some random guy know enough about this board to even start an "Ask the...." thread in the correct place? How would he keep it running for days? Why would he even think to go the the SDMB in the first place on the off chance that you conveniently just made an account there so he could spoof you?

Come clean.

Haj

Qadgop the Mercotan

01-31-2005, 08:51 PM

I agree with hajario. How would a random homeless guy know so much about Islam, also?

The story does not add up.

Johanna

01-31-2005, 09:42 PM

None of this makes any sense to me. I didn't even know the thread had been deleted. I thought something had gone wrong with the SDMB server when I couldn't find it. Until I looked in Angua's new "Ask the" thread (Anguarocks! I read everything by her), and she said something about Sarah W's thread being deleted. WTF? Who ever heard of a thread being deleted? Is there an explanation somewhere? You who have internet access at work, you have the luxury of keeping up with SDMB developments minute by minute. I, on the other hand, though I always check in during breakfast, I then have to go to work where there's no internet access. Then after work I schlep my butt clear over to Old Town Alexandria to see my TG counselor. By the time I get home, have dinner, and collapse wearily into my computer chair, whole sagas and epics have been born, died, and buried before I even get to find out about it.

Sarah W., if that is indeed your name, it looks like you've been having us on. Either when you started, or recently. The inconsistencies in your posts just do not add up. It doesn't even read like the same person posting. You can have fringe ideas and as long as you're real it's OK. But do not pull any phony stuff here. This is a community of people who trust one another to be real with each other, and phonies don't stay long. If you honestly come clean and give us the whole story, I think you have a good chance of staying Otherwise, ma‘a salâmah.

gum

01-31-2005, 11:41 PM

Johanna, This: (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5784959&postcount=2) is what Tuba Diva said about the thread.

It doesn't explain why the thread was removed instead of merely closed.
I expect it has something to do with the fear of the mods/admins of not being seen as PC enough.
One has to admit that islam - as a whole - didn't come out as a very peaceful religion in that thread.
Now we can't have that, can we?
Why admit there are people willing to stone other people to death? See women as second-hand citizens? Or are teaching their kids to throw homo-sexuals of off high buildings?

Nah. Muslims are good people. And we - on the SDMB - will keep on repeating that, until it's our turn to get a taste of their bigotry.

*Disclaimer: Like gobear, I'm against all religion, but as long as people don't hurt other people with their believes, I'm fine with it.
The sad truth is: That all terrorists are muslim [ by Abd al-Rahman al-Rashid]
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1941.cfm
And we [in the Netherlands - and I don't mean decades, or even ages ago] have more crimes; thefts, rape, murder, commited by muslims than by people of any other faith.

Guinastasia

01-31-2005, 11:46 PM

Gary "Wombat" Robson

01-31-2005, 11:47 PM

Gary "Wombat" Robson

01-31-2005, 11:51 PM

I see there were a couple of responses between the time I viewed this thread and the time I hit "Post." Was that the whole story? No explanation in the thread itself at all, just *poof*?

Guinastasia

01-31-2005, 11:51 PM

I'm with you, Johanna. The last time I checked that thread, there wasn't anything in there about homeless people or spoofs. Now it's gone, and I have no idea what happened.

Wasn't there another thread in the last few weeks that got very heated, and the object of the heat claimed his roommate (or somebody) had been posting under his name? This all sounds vaguely familiar.

She posted a thread in MPSIMS saying that the original thread was not started by her.

And you're thinking of Kel Varnsen - Latex Division. I'm not sure WHAT to think of him.

Leaper

01-31-2005, 11:58 PM

gum

02-01-2005, 12:05 AM

Uh, why would they care? Who'd call them on it? Are they expecting a pile-on from the governments of Iran and Egypt or something?hehehe, cute :)
But I think you know exactly what I mean.

(And "the liberal masses who control the SDMB" don't count, because I don't think you really believe that anything would come out of it from anyone important if the thread remained accessible.)Mmmm. Depends who[m] you call important, huh.

recurriman

02-01-2005, 02:35 AM

Tell you what Sarah. Why don't you start a new "Ask a muslim woman" thread and give us the straight dope about yourself this time?

If you really want to start again with a clean slate (without changing your handle), it's the only way to clear up all the (justified) suspicion.

Carnick

02-01-2005, 02:50 AM

The OP disavows that the postings under her name were indeed made by her and requested closure, mentioning a potential breach in computer security on her part. We are investigating the situation and in the meantime have removed the thread from public view.

She's a terrorist! :eek:

Nightime

02-01-2005, 03:31 AM

I have to come clean:

I'm the homeless man who pretended to be Sarah W. What happened was that I saw her sign up for the Straight Dope, then leave herself logged in when she left the library. After doing some impromptu research on her (through other web sites in which she wrote about her religion), I felt I had enough information to do an impersonation.

I thought it would all end there, but as I was lying in wait the next day she came back, logged in, and left again without reading any of the site. I could not resist the temptation to continue my impersonation, though given my incomplete information about her it seems I made her seem worse than she really is.

As you can guess, this pattern continued, until she finally discovered what was going on.

I do apologize. I just wanted to be someone else for a while. Things have been going really badly ever since I had an affair with Kel Varnsen's girlfriend.

SolGrundy

02-01-2005, 03:42 AM

I do apologize. I just wanted to be someone else for a while. Things have been going really badly ever since I had an affair with Kel Varnsen's girlfriend.
The flaming liberal anti-religious homosexual masses of the SDMB forgive you, Nightime. As long as you're not a heterosexual conservative white American male, of course.

Siege

02-01-2005, 04:27 AM

It should be pointed out that having a good reputation with one's fellow men is not necessarily something that should be taken at face value, or as an indicator of probity. As Jesus said, "Blessed are you when men hate you, when they exclude you and insult you and reject your name as evil, because of the Son of Man. Rejoice in that day and leap for joy, because great is your reward in heaven. For that is how their fathers treated the prophets...[But] woe to you when all men speak well of you, for that is how their fathers treated the false prophets."
Just a brief warning. I spent my youth choosing what was Right over what was popular and I do not regret doing so. I'm still suspicious of what's popular. If I've become popular or well-liked here, it's not because I was trying to be; it's simply happened. I've spoken my mind and asked my questions and I know full well that some of my opinions, not to mention real-life friends, have made me very unpopular with some Christians. I won't change my views to please them, either. Other people have accused me of watering down the Gospel for the sake of popularity. I find that accusation highly insulting, not to mention about as likely as suggesting that, say, a homeless man broke into my home and posted on this message board under my id.

As for Sarahw, I'm afraid I also have my doubts, although I will point out that she didn't post to that thread on Sunday. Still, the thread went on too long and I didn't pick up a change in tone or language at any point in that thread which would suggest a second person was posting in it under her name. Mind you, I'm not an expert at that. I'm afraid I'm having a hard time buying her story.

CJ
(or some homeless guy sitting at her computer;))

Liberal

02-01-2005, 04:34 AM

We? Southerners? Libertarians? People taking Prednisone for medical conditions?We. You and I. The two people having this discussion. I said that I think forgiveness ought to be unconditional. You said, "I don't think she merits forgiveness until she more honestly comes forward...". I don't think forgiveness is something that one merits, other than by being human.

Oh, Christians! I get it, you're faulting me here for being a godless heathen, eh?Not hardly. I'm probably a more godless heathen than you are. I certainly merit nothing, least of all any moral position above yours.

In fact, this statement contains the subtle implication that I'm demanding she somehow publicly 'repent' in some sense for her crimes, and if you read my post, you'd see that it's clearly not what I said. I made it quite clear why I don't think that sort of pretending is conducive to what he have here on the boards.I think what you demanded is "merit". She has to somehow earn her forgiveness. At least that's how I read what you said.

Besides, Christian doctrine, to my knowledge, does indeed require one to admit, and even repent, ones sins. Apparently Jesus's forgiveness is slightly more demanding than you make it out to be. You might be confusing Jesus with some of the more palatable new-age icons.Palatable? I think your version is more palatable. We all want the pound of flesh to appease our indignation. It is far more difficult to forgive without condition than to pardon upon admission.

Lib, when dealing with me, in the future, please either avoid the veiled insults or state them honestly. The intellectual cowardice of trying to make statements without admitting them saddens me. See, for instance, your repeated misspelling of my name, even after I alerted you to it. Do you do that when you bring me up in threads in hopes that I won't stumble across your discussions of me? Because it's not necessary. I don't do vanity searches. I don't mind if you insult me; this is the Pit. I'd just rather you were honest about it.Misspellnig your name? Repeatedly? What the...? When dealing with me in the future, read the lines, not the interstices.

FinnAgain

02-01-2005, 04:35 AM

Naw, it was karl using her computer after kicking some homeless scum, who is an expert at posting in other people's styles, in the teeth.

Eleusis

02-01-2005, 06:13 AM

I'm probably a more godless heathen than you are.
Probably not me though ;)

Where's the beer and a joint smiley?

robertliguori

02-01-2005, 06:24 AM

Probably not me though ;)

Where's the beer and a joint smiley?

Definitely not me. I'm the athiest one of all.

You don't know how long I've wanted to be able to use that one.

roger thornhill

02-01-2005, 06:37 AM

Just a brief warning. I spent my youth choosing what was Right over what was popular and I do not regret doing so. I'm still suspicious of what's popular. If I've become popular or well-liked here, it's not because I was trying to be; it's simply happened. I've spoken my mind and asked my questions and I know full well that some of my opinions, not to mention real-life friends, have made me very unpopular with some Christians. I won't change my views to please them, either. Other people have accused me of watering down the Gospel for the sake of popularity. I find that accusation highly insulting, not to mention about as likely as suggesting that, say, a homeless man broke into my home and posted on this message board under my id.
I was aware when I wrote what I wrote that it would appear to be a dig at you, Poly and Tom. Or even more so at ME Buckner. I took the risk not just does the Bible talk about being excluded and derided, but it happens in life. If it's true as, I think, Paul wrote that "He who lives a Godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted", then it doesn't of course necessarily mean that anyone who doesn't get persecuted is not doing so. But it rings true to me.

Excalibre

02-01-2005, 09:15 AM

Misspellnig your name? Repeatedly? What the...? When dealing with me in the future, read the lines, not the interstices.
Oh? How about in this thread?
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=288914&highlight=excalibur
You were awfully clever to confine it to links and the quote box - heck, when quoting my messages in order to respond, you changed the spelling of my name - there can't be much doubt that this is a deliberate action. Especially since you continued doing it in the same thread after I asked you to stop. Remember? That's the thread that you hijacked, bringing me up when it was irrelevant to the situation. That thread won't come up now even if you search for "Excalibur" since you were clever enough to conceal each reference to me in a link. However, using the web browser's "search this page" function will find it, or just examining the thread for the red highlights.

Then you did it again when you posted this short-lived thread:
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=289086&highlight=excalibur
My assumption, in regards to this thread, is that the misspelled name was an effort to discuss me without it coming up, in case I did a vanity search. Now, I can't claim for certain that you did this in order to talk about me without alerting me. It's possible that it was just your more typical back-handed insult (you did, after all, continue it after I requested that you stop.) The thread seemed to be an effort to drag out the discussion again, after your hijack killed the first thread.

So you do all that. Now you're lying about it. You know, after your consistent strings of backhanded insults to me in other threads, I'm having a hard time accepting the veracity of your current burst of piety.

I know you don't like me - you've demonstrated it clearly before. It's not a concern of mine, since I suspect you can guess my feelings towards you aren't all that warm either. But the cowardice of hiding your insults from the "search forums" option and than lying about them later, all while clinging to your claims about your religious beliefs, disgusts me. I just wish you'd own up, quit with the guru act, and stop with the proclamations of religious faith while acting in a manner that contradicts them. Some people call folks like that "Pharisees" - I just call 'em "hypocrites".

Hamlet

02-01-2005, 10:39 AM

Nah. Muslims are good people. And we - on the SDMB - will keep on repeating that, until it's our turn to get a taste of their bigotry.The fact is that there are good and bad people affiliated with any religion, or with atheism. There are bigoted Muslims. There are tolerant atheists. There are bigoted atheists. There are tolerant Christians. There are bigoted people and tolerant people.

*Disclaimer: Like gobear, I'm against all religion, but as long as people don't hurt other people with their believes, I'm fine with it.
The sad truth is: That all terrorists are muslim [ by Abd al-Rahman al-Rashid]
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1941.cfmTim McVeigh. The IRA. Spanish Basques. Abortion clinic bombers. The KKK. Bad people.

And we [in the Netherlands - and I don't mean decades, or even ages ago] have more crimes; thefts, rape, murder, commited by muslims than by people of any other faith.Cite?

Siege

02-01-2005, 10:40 AM

I was aware when I wrote what I wrote that it would appear to be a dig at you, Poly and Tom. Or even more so at ME Buckner. I took the risk not just does the Bible talk about being excluded and derided, but it happens in life. If it's true as, I think, Paul wrote that "He who lives a Godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted", then it doesn't of course necessarily mean that anyone who doesn't get persecuted is not doing so. But it rings true to me.
My point is, I have been persecuted already, thank you, which is why I dislike the implication that I haven't been. Indeed, the verses about being persecuted for righteousness' sake were one of the thin threads that kept me Christian and convinced me I was doing the Right thing. Mind you, I didn't need much at the time; I was a teenager, after all. ;)

CJ

Miller

02-01-2005, 11:06 AM

hehehe, cute :)
But I think you know exactly what I mean.

Well, I sure as hell don't know what you mean. Care to fill me in?

roger thornhill

02-01-2005, 05:27 PM

My point is, I have been persecuted already, thank you, which is why I dislike the implication that I haven't been. Indeed, the verses about being persecuted for righteousness' sake were one of the thin threads that kept me Christian and convinced me I was doing the Right thing. Mind you, I didn't need much at the time; I was a teenager, after all. ;)

CJ
Okay, but it wasn't meant to be an implication. There is so much depth to Jesus' teachings, which can be glossed over by focusing only on love God and love thy neighbour. And that is to our detriment, I believe.

look!ninjas

02-01-2005, 06:07 PM

Nah. Muslims are good people. And we - on the SDMB - will keep on repeating that, until it's our turn to get a taste of their bigotry.

Why don't you prove that they're not, gum? Where are your statistics? I want you to prove to me that all Muslims are homophobic, mysoginistic, America-hating, wicked, evil, bad, bad people. I don't want one or two incidents, here but actual proof that the vast majority of the 1.3 billion Muslims in the world hate God and women and gay people and everything else. Until you can prove it, I'm going to assume that this is bullshit and that you're a bigoted asshole.

The sad truth is: That all terrorists are muslim [ by Abd al-Rahman al-Rashid]
http://www.worldpress.org/Mideast/1941.cfm

Hamlet has already given you a nice little list of non-Muslim terrorist groups. I'd just like to add to it a little bit, if I may: Aum Shinrikyo, Communist Party of the Philippines, Dev Sol, Kach (and Kahane Chai), 17 November, Shining Path... I'm sure they'd all be very surprised to hear that they're Muslim organizations. Your own cite doesn't even say that all terrorists are Muslims - it says that the majority of terrorists are Muslim. The cite itself is little better than an editorial exhorting moderate and liberal Muslims to distance themselves from extremists. It offers no statistics and proves only that ordinary Muslims have a real problem with what extremists do in the name of Allah.

And we [in the Netherlands - and I don't mean decades, or even ages ago] have more crimes; thefts, rape, murder, commited by muslims than by people of any other faith.

Like Hamlet said - Cite? And while you're at it, I'd like to see the poverty statistics of Muslims as compared to non-Muslims, and how many Muslims live in urban areas as compared to non-Muslims. Crime has a lot of causes, gum. Religion is not usually one of those causes.

You've made a lot of extraordinary claims here, gum. Unless you want to look like an extraordinary jackass, maybe you should try backing those claims up for a change.

celestina

02-01-2005, 07:28 PM

I turn my back for one minute, and all hell breaks loose, and now invisible homeless folks just croppin' up everywhichawhere causin' mischief that they can't defend themselves against since they imaginary. Now, I really try to be patient with folks and give them the benefit of the doubt and stuff, but when folks get to tryin' to give a homeless fella a bad name and insult a rational thinkin' person's intelligence, then I must say the line has been crossed.

SarahW, you ought to be ashamed of yourself! :mad: Do you really think these folks on this board goin' to buy that lame excuse about a homeless man? Really, child. Why would a homeless man want to impersonate any Muslim woman on a message board for over a week? I'd think that he'd be more concerned with keeping warm and finding food, or dodging the library security guard that the librarians will no doubt set on them to make them vacate the premises. And since folks can initially register as guests for a limited amount of time, the homeless fella had no excuse not to come up with his own name. Why's he got to hide since he ain't got no home, no ISP, and no computer for the Mods to track him down?

You said earlier that you've learned something from your brief time here, but you haven't shared what it was, and I begin to suspect you haven't learned a thing, which is a shame. Nor have you addressed the concerns folks have raised here about your loss of credibility. This is not the way that responsible adults comport themselves. Now get in here and confess so that folks will stop making fun of you and runnin' rampant with all these invisible nameless homeless male scapegoats that are fixin' to stampede at any moment. [giggle]

Loopydude

02-01-2005, 10:52 PM

She's go-o-o-o-on! Oh-ahh! What went wrong??

Xamatix

02-02-2005, 01:09 PM

Hey slanderers of the banned, having a great time? He can't defend himself against your fucking lies huh?

Aldebaran is banned because of what Bosda said. The lies in that banning thread add to the shame of this message board.
What's got him banned is the American jingoism of membership and mods. The fucking double standards in moderating. The fucking posse that trashed him from the start. Crazy Mehitabel with her fucking obsession and the support of the admins she got with that.
You wanna know what's in my mailbox? A mod's mail to warn me that I can't talk about Aldebaran again. Hey, I don't take that SDMB Patriot Act. Eat your your double standards raw with a sauce of your bloody censorship.
Fucking bigots can trash him with the repetition of your lies huh? Here I am to trash you for it. Ask and you will receive.

It would be better if admins and mods came out of the dark and talk about it. I've got mails enough of members who saw what they've done. Tell you what, blind moles. There's a shared feeling that this board spirals downwards thanks to its double standards in moderating.
Here's my feeling about it: You're so trapped in American jingoism that you're no different anymore then anywhere else on American message boards. I used to love this board. You're not lovable now.
Belgian speaking here. For me and all I talk to America is doomed to go down by its own jingoism and its reckless refusal to learn from the past.

You wanna Fight Ignorance here? Such ambitious goal.
You've just banned your first and only Middle Eastern Islamic Scholar, and that's much more then a simple American Phd. He wasn't all that pleased with what Americans did in his region and to his friends huh? He slammed the truth of America's wars and what it did to him in your faces huh? That's what did it for you, isn't it.
Heartfelt congratulations for your firm stand on this. Killing of the messengers of truth is the best to fight ignorance. Last week he said he sent you mail to ask for deletion of all his posts. Hey, that's not unreasonable of him to ask for. You delete all posts of trolls. What's holding you back then? That there are more then 3200 trolling posts of Aldebaran? That's no reason, a troll is a troll is a troll. No double standards 'bout that. Wipe him out, I say.

I'll tell you a secret, moles. It's nice to see a website that tells its members it's to fight ignorance. More credit to you if the admins and mods would be our example. Let us know when you've seen the light. I hope it's not so far away as I think it is.

Greetings.

hajario

02-02-2005, 01:14 PM

Hey slanderers of the banned, having a great time? He can't defend himself against your fucking lies huh?

Dude, this is not a thread about Aldebaran. WTF are you talking about?

Haj

Polycarp

02-02-2005, 01:14 PM

Definitely not me. I'm the athiest one of all.

You don't know how long I've wanted to be able to use that one.

As opposed to our bisexual members, who are of course athy-deethy! ;)

Mehitabel

02-02-2005, 01:26 PM

The mods found the homeless library-posting guy and banned him?

Wow. Now that's impressive.

Guinastasia

02-02-2005, 01:26 PM

Xamatix, would you let it the fuck go already? Jesus Christ, do you EVER post about anything else other than Aldebaran being banned?

tomndebb

02-02-2005, 03:06 PM

You've just banned your first and only Middle Eastern Islamic Scholar, and that's much more then a simple American Phd. He wasn't all that pleased with what Americans did in his region and to his friends huh? He slammed the truth of America's wars and what it did to him in your faces huh? That's what did it for you, isn't it. No, what got Aldebaran banned was a series of direct attacks on other posters and specific lies posted for the purpose of angering people. This is the same reason that several other well-known (and much argued over) posters have been banned.

I was not a Mod when the decisions (and warnings) leading to his banning were discussed, so I have no "inside" information, but from the perspective of a long-time poster, I would say that he earned his banning the old-fashioned way, he worked for it.

Now, as to the charge that it is simply bias against either Islam or MENA: nonsense. To that claim, I will respond with the same observation that I have made regarding the bitter feuds (and purported staff biases) when the American Left and Right attack each other or the theists and non-theists attack each other and everyone cries that the staff is "favoring" their opponents: when watching an ox fight, it depends on whose ox is being gored.

For all the claims that attacks on Islam are allowed, I have seen a lot of (pointless) complaining that Aldebaran was allowed to break the rules longer than any "American" or "Christian" or "Western" poster would have been permitted. There are quite a few posters who have claimed that Aldebaran would have been banned months earlier had he not been a Middle Eastern Muslim. (I think the earliest claims that he should have been banned (or that he would be banned) began in early July, 2003, just a couple of weeks after his first posts.) It is always easier to see the insults directed at one's own side than the insults that are directed at one's opponents (or at some third party for whom one does not have any emotional attachment). Certainly, if someone wanted to invest the energy to examine the entire history of the SDMB, one would probably find that more snarky comments were allowed against religion or atheism or against Islam or Christianity or secularism or against "liberal" or "conservative" values. The odds that every snide remark has been met with perfectly equal responses is probably rather low. However, as long as all sides are screaming that they are unjustly abused, I figure that probably everyone is getting more or less equal treatment.

.
Last week he said he sent you mail to ask for deletion of all his posts. Hey, that's not unreasonable of him to ask for. You delete all posts of trolls. What's holding you back then? That there are more then 3200 trolling posts of Aldebaran? That's no reason, a troll is a troll is a troll. No double standards 'bout that. Wipe him out, I say.Actually, you are entirely wrong on this subject. The policy has long been to delete the threads begun by trolls if they are caught soon enough that they have not generated any serious discussions. Long-time posters who have been banned for falling into a later habit of trolling do not have their threads deleted (and certainly not their individual posts), the absence of which would tear the flow out of many discussions, rendering other posts meaningless. You can, today, still find the posts and threads of John John, Phaedrus, Mark Serlin (and even his sockpuppet Sentinel), peace and a host of others. (Besides, I believe Aldebaran was banned for being a jerk, not for being a troll, although I could be wrong on that technical point.)