Not sure why you had to link to a study to simply rebut “There are no Muslim democracies” but whatever floats your boat.
Not sure it was worth eight posts to clear up a blazingly obvious post, but I guess it happens.
As a few of you may remember, I come from a moderate malekite muslim background.
I’m guessing that back in the day, christians and jews (from whom mohammed pretty much plagiarized the koran) thought homosexuality was a choice and the height of obscenity or wrongly compounded it with man-boy pedophilia (the ancient greeks and current afghans instances of homosexuality involve young boys) which is indeed morally wrong as children cannot consent and is effectively rape by modern standards.
Whatever the reasons, Islam holds antiquated and harmful views of homosexuality that are not compatible with a free society and are unequivocally wrong. Gay rights are CLEARLY a subset of inalienable human rights, and are sacred.
Now all this stuff also applies to traditional christianity throughout history but my biggest worry concerning Islam is that considering the Qoran the literal, perfect word of god, means it cannot be sufficiently altered to fit the new world, and I’m not sure how much leeway muslims will have going the whole “it’s an allegory, it’s a metaphor” way, whereas the bible is accepted as the word of men, and while many people believe it’s the perfect word of God, there actually are christian churches who accept same-sex relations.
They’re definitely a tiny minority, but at least they exist. Credit where credit is due…
Oh yeah, that guy. “I support Hamas, except the bad ones.” “Israel is the greatest threat to world peace and security.” Love that guy!!!1!
He’s also the same guy in one of the above videos NEVER said “gay” or “LGBT.” But I guess he says it on paper. Wee!
“We stand shoulder to shoulder with gays and Jews.”
Why do I not believe him? I sure as hell wouldn’t put my gay Jew-lovin’ ass in that guy’s hands.
Why indeed?
Indeed, why?
The difference between the Christian world and the Muslim world, is that in Christian countries, people got fed up with Christian bullshit and confronted it. There were philosophical movements that tried to put religion in its place – we call this secularism. I do recognize that there are some places where secularism coexists with Islam – modern Turkey for instance. However, that does not appear to be as widespread in the Muslim world as it is in the Christian world or in regions influenced by other religions. If Muslim countries were to embrace secularism, then we’d probably have few problems, other than nationalism in response to Western imperial / neo-colonial aggression.
Nobody’s asking you or Valteron or anyone else to pretend your feelings don’t exist.
But if you’re offering your feelings as a contribution to a Great Debates thread, you can’t expect not to get called on whatever bigotry and/or illogic they express.
Then call me bigoted and illogical. I don’t give a rat’s ass.
And yet CAIR were among the first to call for blood donations for victims, which are needed because gay men aren’t allowed to donate blood thanks to good old-fashioned Christian homophobia.
No, because increasing the donor pool by 3-5% isn’t a big enough payoff for accepting donations from a group more prone to certain incurable blood-borne diseases.
You don’t even really need to treat it as an allegory. All it really takes is an acknowledgement that we live in a fallen world, that secular authorities must be respected, and that you fight sin by identifying sin. I have no problem with religious people criticizing homosexuality, or fornication, or eating pork, or working on Sabbath. It only crosses the line when they try to use force.
I’m not sure about religion that accepts what their god or gods says is sinful. Seems that if you have a problem with what your god says, you either salute and obey or decide he doesn’t exist. Gods aren’t the kind of beings where you just say, “Yeah, I’ll take commandments 1-5, but I gotta veto 6, that just ain’t right, and it seems to me that 7 and 9 should be negotiable.”
But really, it’s all about violence. Violence to enforce religious norms has no place in the 21st century.
Some beliefs, in and of themselves, are aggressive beliefs. Some beliefs in and of themselves tend to incite aggression, even if only among those with compromised reasoning capabilities and mental stability. Maybe we need to acknowledge that, in the 21st century, some beliefs simply have no valid reason for existence and are based on nothing more than ancient legends or superstitions.
Fine. These attitudes are bigoted and illogical.
Nobody is saying that you shouldn’t be scared by the prospect of violent oppressive Muslims knowing where you live, or violent oppressive anybody else, for that matter. But refusing to make any distinction between those dangerous people and all Muslims of every kind is classic bigotry and illogic.
I don’t think that’s really the case, becuase no one is shooting up pork shops anymore, or beating people who work on Sabbath. But there was a time when that kind of things did actually happen. It’s not the beliefs about what is right and wrong that get people into trouble, it’s their visceral hatred for things that borders on violence.
I know ISIS and the Taliban are geographically restricted, but they do exist, so I wouldn’t say that these aggressive acts are a thing of the past – they’re happening now in areas controlled by extremists. Yes, they’re extreme, but ideologies based on strict interpretations of dogma and religious doctrines are inevitably going to cause aggression at some point. When people have strict beliefs that their behavior is sanctioned or countenanced by some sort of super-human authority, then they’re leaving the realm of what all educated people agree upon and we entering the world in which believers are segregated from non-believers. And the non-believers aren’t part of the club, which inevitably leads to their denigration, even if only in subtle and seemingly harmless ways.
“Pork shops”?
It’s just come to light that Omar Mateen was a regular at the Pulse nightclub.
Does this mean his behaviour may have been partly due to religion induced guilt of his lifestyle?
It’s possible. Wouldn’t be the first time. He could also have been staking the place out. If he wanted to do this right he needed to know the place inside and out.
And how many gay (or gay-friendly) Southern Baptist churches are there in Mississippi? (And they’re pretty big on the ‘literal Word of God’ down there too.)
Conservative traditionalists in all of the Abrahamic faiths aren’t exactly noted for tolerance.