And also understanding it in relation to “Islam as it exists in the modern world”, which, as you say, “has a relatively high severity of homophobia problems and violence problems”. As mentioned in the title of the OP.
Regards,
Shodan
I don’t think right and left are particularly useful when talking about groups like ISIL, which seem to fall pretty far outside the American left-right political dynamic.
You should take that up with Pew Research. They lumped Muslims together on their views about SSM. They also lumped Jews together. I guess that’s meaningless too. Good to know. And Muslims who go on the news and say things like “that’s not real Islam” are also not broken down by branch or sect so I guess that’s meaningless. Yes, we always must know the branch or sect, or it’s meaningless!
Sheppard wasn’t killed because he was gay according to further investigation
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing that.
Agreed. Nor does the distinction between foreign-born vs. domestic terrorism. Likewise for neo-Nazis, and especially, for outright crazies. The Orlando shooter was a nut with anger issues, and possibly a closeted gay. He claimed allegiance to ISIL. The guy who shot up a PP clinic was diagnosed as mentally ill. Does his claim to have done it for “the babies” mean anything?
Regards,
Shodan
Thank god for the Wiki-Theologians to tell us from their deep learning of wiki-and-hate-site googling.
It is more effective to be sure to use the foreign words to make the assertions more scary. *Jus canonicum *not specific laws… The foreign words are more scary and foreign (of course foreign = scary).
Zut alors!
Novelty Bobble
Certainly.
Challenging and criticising religious ideologies is one of my routine activities.
I’m not saying you can’t criticisize Islam. I’m saying, don’t turn a blind eye to pernicious activities in other ideologies, too.
What I’m saying is, if you want to argue that Islam is unusually dangerous, you need to address the fact that other ideologies, including Christian ideologies, are responsible for most of America’s recent terror attacks.
Shodan -
Yes. Omar Mateen was a closeted homophobe who was freaked out about seeing two men kissing in public. Homophobia and anger at public gay displays of affection are right-wing behaviors.
Mateen might also have been an Islamic terrorist. The evidence that he was connected to Daesh is pretty thin but it’s possible. But it wasn’t Islamic terrorism that made him choose to shoot up the night club where he’d been flirting with men on the regular for months previously.
I don’t know the reason why British Muslims are so much more extreme in their homophobia than Muslims in France. There may well be many different causes. I suspect, however, that Islamists may be more prevalent in Britain than in France, and may receive less opposition. By Islamist, I mean people like this asshole.
I implore you to watch the entire video. It’s only 3 and a half minutes long. It’s difficult to avoid the conclusion that sincere belief in this guy’s message is, alone, enough to make someone homophobic.
Wow, with that background music I totally wanted to put on my goth makeup and start going to mosque.
Scarey sermon though.
The Southern Poverty Law Center is notorious for listing groups as “hate groups” for more or less any reason, or for no reason at all, in order to inflate their statistics and try to make people terrified of the supposed tidal wave of right-wing terrorism.
In fact, while there’s no reason to believe that the SPLC has ever prevented any hate crime, they’ve certainly caused one. They listed the conservative organization Family Research Council as a “hate group” solely because the FRC was opposed to gay marriage. In Feb. 2013, a man named Floyd Lee Corkins entered FRC headquarters with determination to kill as many of their employees as possible, then move on commit massacres at other conservative groups. He chose the planned targets based on what the SPLC said. Corkins was less competent than Omar Mateen, and inflicted only a minor injury before security guards stopped him.
Perhaps SPLC should put itself on its own list of hate groups.
Unsurprisingly, this turns out to not be even remotely true.
The Family Research Council does a lot more than simply oppose gay marriage. They opposed the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. They oppose any sort of legal protections for LGBT people. In their rhetoric, they regularly associated homosexuality with pedophilia, and explicitly argue that the gay rights are a stalking horse for legalizing sexual predation of children. They use “research” that they know has been thoroughly discredited, and don’t care. They are an organization that exists purely to disparage and discriminate against homosexuals. They are every inch a hate group, no less so than the Aryan Nation.
Okay, to clarify something, to the OP and those who agree: you have your feelings. Fine. What exactly do you want to do about and with them? Are you going to get nervous around brown skinned people? What do you want the government to do, exactly?
I’m curious, and for some reason I couldn’t get that link to work right now. Is there more detail than just “should homosexuality be accepted by society”? That wording seems vague, where “No” could mean anything from “Homosexuals are the greatest evil the world has ever seen and should all be quarantined and executed so they don’t spread it to the rest of us!” to “Well, no, it’s a sin, so we shouldn’t accept it completely, but we shouldn’t discriminate against gays in any way, and it’s absolutely unacceptable to use threats or violence against anybody, including gay people.” Both of which I would disagree with, but I’d find the former a lot scarier than the latter.
I gave a cite specific to the topic. You’re invited to cite Mohammad did not consider homosexuality a sin. Then you can explain why all the islamic nations mentioned above enforce this as law and punish homosexuals up to and including death.
And this poll shows the breakout among a wider range of religions.
Now take into consideration this wasn’t a poll about killing people for the sin of being gay. It was a poll on gay marriage.
Nope.
Valteron did not express fear that Islamic based homophobia would encourage more terrorist acts–a point with which I would not have disagreed. He claimed that he feared immigration and Sharia. There is no evidence that immigration is going to cause his country to change its overall attitudes (and plenty of evidence to refute the idiots that promote the nonsense that Europe is already being overrun and overwhelmed), and his fear of Sharia is silly.
Of course, on this continent, there is a good chance that you have as much to fear by going to work where some nutcase hates the boss or a co-worker, attending a Batman movie, or being an elementary school student living near a psychotic kid as you do by being homosexual. (In Canada, it seems that being the member of a family is one’s biggest threat, followed by being a member of a police force.)
I have allowed this latest rant to remain in Great Debates for the purpose of allowing discussion, but the OP is little more than one more rant and my post explicitly addressed a specific paragraph that was, indeed, paranoid hand-wringing.
If you think they’re a bunch of nasty idiots, you’ve got my full agreement.
But the point Merneith was making by citing the SPLC “data” was that we should be more focused on domestic terrorism, as opposed to foreign. The SPLC numbers don’t justify that because they’re not in any way counting terrorist groups, or even groups that have a small possibility of becoming such, in their definition of “hate groups”.