I’ve been patient in explaining. And lesser member? I’ve been here less than a year. I’ve hardly had time to make a place in the pack and I won’t if I keep going against pack behavior. So I won’t. I would rather speak my mind. At least I think rather than spouting assertions of no merit because I consider my belief system challenged as you do. I’m willing to listen to reason the moment you begin to speak it.
People aren’t ruled by their instincts and least of all me. We think. We change the direction of that first thought and consider other aspects. That has nothing to do with a first fleeting thought. You truely are incapable of shaking your prejudice enough to listen to the reason in my arguments and cease projecting what you think I say rather than what I do aren’t you? I guess I am the fool for continuing then. Be happy for that victory then. It is your only one.
When I hear “muslim” it gets more complicated. I served two tours in Iraq, and many memories come to mind, mostly negative, but also some positives. The hospitality we were sometimes showed, despite being an invading force. Hanging out with an IP colonel in Ishaki, watching MBC2 english language action movies and smoking a hookah. Learning about chaldeans from an interpreter we had.
Also though, rocket attacks, mortar attacks, dead friends, dead in general.
When I hear “violence” though, the first thing I thought of was “a history of violence” because I like the movie.
While I agree with a lot of what you said I think you understate the influence of the hardline religious in affecting events. It’s not what you said so much as all that is left out such as the more secular and tolerant Pakistan against the northern zealots who executed a politician (by his own bodyguard no less) for saying a foreign teacher should not be jailed for mentioning Christianity and that sort of influence on law and the military. You seem intelligent so I assume you simplified and left off mention of Afghanistans warlords who seek to impose a harsh religious rule via Taliban to make your point free of the more muddy distinctions too. Overall I agree but with a less generous view of religious extremists. Then again I don’t see much reason to be generous with US religious nuts either so that may color my view.
That may be so, but compared to more enlightened ideologies she is less likely to be fully free to live her life in her own way, to live and love in a way and with a person of her choosing.
Not that it would be impossible, (and the world is full of alternate examples), but let’s not pretend that women in an Islamic culture are as free as in the secular west.
The largest conflict since World War II, with 5.5 million plus dead and endless destruction and ruined lives, is the Second Congo War. While I guess Libya did weigh in, it was almost entirely a Christian conflict. Very Christian Rwanda decided to invade very Christian DRC, with the backing of a number of other (mostly Christian) African nations.
Likewise, I’m not seeing the role of Islam in Latin American instability.
As I said upthread in response to a similar question
And I stick to that, it doesn’t have to be a religion. I’d be against 17th century Catholic expansionism, Russian communism circa 1922 or indeed any political ideology that fits my criteria above.
As for the Hindu? Outside of the Dalit I don’t know enough about the life chances of such children to feel one way or the other.
Religion may not be the root cause of the terrible conditions for those populations at large but it certainly can be a key factor in the gender inequalities within those societies. I see that as a “Bad Thing” and not something to be indulged or encouraged.
It fits into a wider narrative of tribalism. The (probably minimal) differences between Hutu and Tutsi were encouraged by the europeans and tragedy ensued.
Religion is also a very handy way of establishing such divisions and some religions are more apt to setting their societies in that way given the chance. I think that is harmful and potentially very dangerous.
I don’t feel any anger towards you - I don’t have to be angry with you to disagree with you. And I won’t disparage you for saying that terrorism is the first thing that springs to mind for you - as others have pointed out, you weren’t the only one to say that or something else negative, and nobody said anything to them. Please stop claiming that people are angry with you for thinking of terrorism - nobody’s doing that.
But I won’t praise you for your ‘honesty’ because I think the other people are being honest too. If your sole or main exposure to Islam is hearing about terrorist attacks then fair enough, you think of terrorism first. But not everyone lives your life, you know.
And there aren’t daily reports of Islamic terrorism. - I suppose if you searched every day you could find a report about terrorism, same as for almost any subject, but they’re not in the nightly news.
Nobody said there was ‘a conspiracy to report on violence in the middle east.’ Once again, you’re making up points to argue against.
What if the woman wearing the niqab saw a little girl run into her western mothers arms, and her heart just sunk, in the superior knowledge of what horrors await the child? Believe it of not, everyone does not automatically bow down to the superiority of the west, and the woman in this post reminds me of missionaries sadly witnessing the children of a Native American mothers, and making the same superior judgement. But forgive me for bringing up Native Americans as this is about Islam.
There is no “pack behaviour” going on. People are answering the question, some with positive impressions of Islam, some with negative ones. Not one person has been criticised for expressing any kind of first thought about terrorism or the oppression of women. The only criticism being expressed is you calling people liars. Why is it that you can’t accept that not everyone thinks as you do? Why should your opinion be the only possible honest one? I live around the corner from a mosque. I meet people going to and from it every day - quite a crowd on Fridays, when we often have a merry chat as I buy a spit-roasted chicken from the halal shop on the other side of the road. Many of my neighbours, friends and students are Muslim. Why on earth would it be more natural for me to think of something removed from my life than something which is of immediate interest and import to it?
For the record, despite having grown up in an atmosphere of fear, under genuine and immediate (not distant and media-manufactured) threat, and actually having been caught in an IRA explosion as a child, I do not think of terrorism first when I hear “Ireland” either. Would you like to call me a liar again? Different people have different thoughts and different thought processes. We don’t all jump away from snakes; some of us are fascinated, or find them beautiful, or whatever. This is because we are not animals. Welcome to the world of intelligent thought.
What does that niqab wearing woman get sad about? You didn’t say.[/QUOTE
Check out the National domestic violence statistics, domestic violence and emergency room statistics, bureau of justice and FBI statistics…I am not saying that everyone abuses women in America, only that the poster may want to look into her own backyard before she decides that horror awaits the little girl with a mid eastern mom. It is an attitude that disrespects other cultures and assumes the worst about them. It is racist, and hate mongering is part of war mongering.
I don’t buy that it’s racist to think that other peoples values, when very much in opposition to your own, are scary. If I didn’t think my values were better, why would I hold them?
