I’m afraid you haven’t solved the problem. Other words which are also debated as subjective would include “influenced” and “different”. Probably “race”, too, as it happens.
I am not sure that Muslims themselves would recognize their religion as being divided into radical, moderate and liberal. A basic underlying theme of Islam from its very inception has been that the entire world must eventually brought into submission (Islam means submission) to the doctrines preached by Mohammed and the Koran. To be a sincere Muslim is essentially to want this.
There are *de facto *extremist and moderate Muslims, to be sure. As one wit put it, the extremist wants to kill infidels. The moderate (like the Ground Zero Imam) patiently explains what the west has done to make the extremist want to kill them.
To a large extent, what people in the west interpret as “liberal” Muslims are lapsed Muslims who keep quiet about their position since apostasy is punishable by death, even in Western countries. I am not saying that every lapsed Muslim in Boston or Toronto, for example, has been marked for death. I am saying that making a big deal about the fact that you have rejected Islam may be hazardous to your health in many situations.
By the way, at the end of WWII there were eight million members of the Nazi party. I find it impossible to believe that every single one of the eight million were genocidal, racist, brutal, inhuman monsters. Many were school teachers and civil servants trying to hold onto their jobs, for example. But oddly enough, that does not change my opinion of Naziism one iota.
Have you ever stopped to wonder how many Muslim women wearing head scarves, veils and burqas are really doing so of their own free will without any social/family pressure? In Muslim ghettos across the free world, spineless governments are accepting the installation of Sharia Courts (there are 85 in Britain). Do you honestkly think the “moderates” and the “liberals” living in the ghettos really get to stand up and oppose the extremists? Do you not think I care about the rights of such people?
I sniggered. (I mean, I safricanamericaned) I am a bad person.
Semi-relevant link to last night’s Daily Show episode. Larry Wilmore is great.
Objective and measurable? No. That doesn’t mean it’s impossible to make a determination. You can do that by applying reason. There are rational reasons to support or oppose capital punishment or spending measures. There is no rational reasoning behind “AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH THE MUSLIMS ARE COMING SAVE MEEEEEEEEEE!” or “OH GOD THERE’S A BIIIIIBLE IN MY HOTEL ROOOMM HEEEEEELP!”
Your posts are always absurdum, Valteron.
Seriously: shut the fuck up, you miserable bigoted shit.
I’m sorry. You just said its use added “subjective elements.”
Actually, no they don’t. Moreover, I’m not going to sift through your endless history of screeds about how Islam and Western religions are essentially unalike, or about your deep-seated suspicion that even Muslims who flatly deny their desire to put an end to infidels are secret terrorists, or at least terrorist sympathizers.
I most certainly have, and have done the same many other insane, oppressive customs of other religions.
How did I get sucked into this thread? I think the hilarious thread title got me.
which part?
The heart, duh.
:rimshot:
I think his story is his great-grandmother was a runaway slave or something. No, seriously. Too lazy to search, so don’t “CITE!!” me, but it’s there. Maybe it was a great aunt, I don’t remember.
Funny, I think there’s already too much use of “Conservatives are bad and here are some (incorrect or dishonest) reasons why” going on around here. Certainly much more than I engage in coming from the other side.
Fact-checking? Who said I was fact-checking? I rattled off a pretty damn good recitation of why people like Blank Slate and probably you are full of shit when you call Republicans racists. I rattled a few examples off the top of my head illustrating how well women and minorities have done under Republican administrations and with Republican electorates.
You and certain other posters, panicked that I might be making headway in showing up liberals for the liars they are in this regard, are desperate to come up with some way to neutralize what I said. So you pretend that because I omitted “black” when I talked about Condoleeza Rice becoming the first black female Secretary of State, or forgot about Thurgood Marshall - who let’s face it, has been dead for almost twenty years and doesn’t come to mind nearly as readily as Clarence Thomas - it negates the entire point about how well women and minorities have done with Republicans.
Pretty weak sauce, chum.
Apparently not, given that I have a virtually unlimited number of opponents around here - each with his or her own educational background, computer and internet access, typing away furiously trying to find something…anything…to negate what I said - have so far only been able to call me on having forgotten to write “black” in mentioning Condoleeza Rice (which is particularly amusing in light of the fact that everyone here knows it anyway), and to mention Thurgood Marshall as the first black Supreme Court justice.
Now perhaps you could explain to me how these two minor omissions negate the substance of my post? Did not a Republican president appoint the first female Supreme Court justice? Did not a Republican president appoint the second black Supreme Court justice in history? Did not a Republican president name a black female as his national security advisor and later his secretary of state? Did not a Republican president appoint the first Hispanic Attorney General? Have not a goodly number of women and blacks been elected to congressional and gubernatorial and state seats by Republicans? Is not the head of the Republican party himself black?
Liberals have been dining out on this “Pubbies are racists” meme for forty years, and it’s becoming more and more laughable each passing day and as more and more Repubican women and minorities are being elected with every new election cycle.
What I’m not clear on is why should anyone even give a shit. How the fuck is that even relevant to him being a bigoted asshole today? And yet he keeps bringing it up.
I think it’s similar to the idiocy about how blacks can’t be racists, they might just happen to hate white people, or Asians, or Jews, or what have you.
Well black people can’t be racist… or bigoted, or whatever. Fuck, I hate Jews. Not bigoted because I’m black!
Bullshit, you’re doing it right now. You, Starving Artist, posted in this thread and people are responding to what you said. Don’t fall back on claiming that anyone disagreeing with you is an attack against all conservatives anywhere.
You did no such thing. You just said women and minorities do well under Republican administrations. And then to “prove” your point, you offered one piece of evidence. Which other people pointed out was wrong.
You’re giving yourself too much credit. Nobody was “panicking” over your argument - it was non-existent. All anyone had to do was breathe on it and it fell apart.
And it was all your argument. Nobody else came in here making claims about Supreme Court justices. You were the one who said that a Republican appointed the first black justice and that was all the proof that was needed. And then someone pointed out that it was a Democrat not a Republican who appointed the first black justice. And now you’re saying that proves nothing and asking who ever said it did.
Since 1900 there have been three black Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives, and one Senator. (In fairness, two black Republicans will take seats in the House in January. That makes five.) There have been no black Republican governors of any of the fifty states since Reconstruction.
Five in 110 years! That’s a pretty goodly number. I mean, there’s only what, 435 members of the House of Reps at any given time, right? Very good percentage.
P.S. MeanOldLady, I hate blacks, but I’m a Jew, so I’m not a bigot! Gotcha ya!
I guess it’s time for SA to whip out the “Your demonstration that I have no idea what I’m talking about just proves how panicked I’ve made you” argument again.
See, I avoid problems like this by simply hating everybody.
Also, saves time.
I’m intrigued by the Japanese who are exploring bloodtype-based prejudice. It makes our race, religion, and sexual orientation based bigotry seem so … twentieth century. The kind of the thing a Type B would do.