the flag is a pseudo flag, sometimes used by the Chleuh identity activists, the usage of the republican tricouleur is a hint… Not that I am an activist.
Neither benevolent racism or hostile racism are kind. Your actions aren’t “reparations”, because you aren’t treating your tenants as equals and defining their identity based on the non-scientific categorization of race. You are taking your implicit biases and taking explicit actions.
At least you admit that you are explicitly racist now, which is a forward step. But you are not a progressive, hell you aren’t even a liberal in the classic sense as you don’t seem to believe protecting and enhancing the freedom of the individual is the central problem of politics.
It sounds like you wear the “progressive” label as a badge or a brand like wearing Prada more than actually believing in the world view. While we all are imperfect and often hypocrites, your above posts are truly antithetical to “progressive” politics.
Look, I’m perfectly willing to concede that at this current period in time Muslims have significantly more than their fair share of violent religious extremists, and that and also more than their fair share of intolerant regimes. Theocracy bad m’kay. But there is no reason to believe that this is something specific the the Muslim religion and even less reason to believe that it is related to the genetic ancestry of its adherents.
There have been theocratic regimes in pretty much every religion, and in all of those saying bad things about whatever prevailing theory about the divine is floating around could get you into pretty hot water (or boliing oil). Even the old US of A is not immune toviolent religious suppression.
However due to guns, germs, steel and a bit of luck, us white folk have come out on top and have developed a largely secular Democracy. Yeah us! We can afford to be tolerant of all sorts of difference because we know that none of them are a threat to our way of life (although the rise of secularism and multicultrualism is causing some to question this, hence Trump). But for those we pushed down on our way to the top its not quite so clear, and when you are down trodden, beaten up, humiliated and utterly outclassed militarily it is natural to find solace in a higher power that can lay some whoop ass on your oppressors. But again this is far more related to Geopolitical history and happenstance, and oppression of minorities then it is to the specifics of the higher power in question.
I have never said it is something genetic causing this difference in the way Muslims act. A few hundred years ago, the ancestors of today’s Westerners, with the same genes today’s Westerners have, were doing the same shit or worse. In a few more centuries, I’m hopeful that Muslim countries will also have joined the modern, secular world. But right now in 2019 it is what it is, and that’s the period of history I have to live in.
Rat avatar, are you seriously maintaining that it is equally unethical to be biased toward offering black people extra help as it is to try to deny them equal opportunity in education, housing and employment? That’s insane.
“Koran” is a perfectly cromulent, although somewhat old-fashioned, alternative spelling of “Qur’an”, so feel free to use it if the more modern transliteration is too difficult for you.
If you just want help remembering how to spell “Qur’an”, though, it might be useful to note that the apostrophe represents the Arabic hamza or glottal-stop sound, like what you hear at the beginning of the syllables of “uh-oh”. Putting the glottal stop right after the initial qaf or “q” consonant would be pretty much unpronounceable: it would sound sort of like “Q. Uran”. The correct spelling represents the glottal stop correctly dividing the word at the syllable break, sort of like “Qur. An”.
That just makes your comparison look even more silly and cherry-picked. You (and Sam Harris) are clearly just shoehorning two entirely different religious histories into the oversimplified category of “minority culture”.
The point is not to focus on the LDS church: it’s just a convenient example because that musical happens to exist. The larger point is that you could produce a musical (or TV show, or movie, etc.) poking fun at any religion’s origins; and as long as there was nothing completely obscene and ahistorical about it (like, say, presenting Jesus as a pedophile—note that describing Mohammed as such is not so ahistorical), the most you would likely get in opposition is pickets and a lot of griping on cable news. Whereas we all know that Islam uniquely has made it clear they are “not to be trifled with” (this, BTW, does not come from Sam but is my contribution, and one I’m pleased with). It’s the only religion cartoonists, even in the West, take a serious mortal risk by lampooning. “South Park” even had their Mohammed episode withdrawn from circulation. “South Park”! A show with no sacred cows does, it turns out, have one sacred cow after all.
(BTW, if you look closely at some of the languages of East Africa, I suspect you might find some of them “unpronounceable” by your standards, and yet they are pronounced. But that’s neither here nor there.)
And I call myself “progressive” because I support and celebrate every item on this list:
If that’s not progressive, what is it?
A bigot that agrees with me is still a bigot.
Maybe so, but the question was why I was supposedly not a progressive.
A) This false claim completely ignores the fact that plenty of fictional depictions of Jesus, for example, have provoked not just “pickets and griping” but actual violence and death threats from American Christians.
B) Yes, it is in fact completely ahistorical to describe Muhammad as “a pedophile” based on historical accounts of his having entered into a marital contract with a young girl in his widowerhood. Millions of medieval people worldwide accepted official forms of marriage between adult men and pre-adult girls, even prepubescent ones. Generally it was considered inappropriate to consummate a marriage (or have extramarital sex) with a girl who hadn’t reached puberty, but there is no historical evidence that Muhammad ever did or condoned any such thing.
So if you’re going to call Muhammad a “pedophile”, for accuracy’s sake you need to make it clear that what you’re calling his “pedophilia” was regarded at the time by most Muslims, Christians, and others as completely normal and responsible marital behavior (and would also have been so regarded by Jesus and Moses before him).
Nope. Just because you can’t tell the difference between “exotic” but phonetically normal linguistic features, such as East African click consonants, and outright erroneous misrepresentations that violate laws of phonetics, such as your misspelling “Q’uran”, doesn’t mean that I can’t.
“Progressive” is not a synonym for “Democrat” but note the complete lack of surprise from other posters that you don’t know your basic logic or syllogisms.
Not all progressives are Democrats, not all Democrats are progressive.
Hell the terms aren’t even well defined, but it is damn clear that being a self admitted racist you don’t care about economic and social equality.
Why are you so reluctant to own your beliefs?
Related to your twitter avatar BTW, which is from the Grateful Dead Obama show log, I have actually had the pleasure of knowing Bob Weir, he would think you are an asshole.
While you will dismiss this as “religion” here is a video.
Your hatred and intolerance is the same. You may pull it from different podcast, but it’s the same.
Cite? Something from this millennium, please, and involving actual violence and not just “death threats” (I received the latter on the IMDb boards, for chrissakes—they are a dime a dozen).
And how about if instead of “pedophile”, I just say “Mohammed fucked prepubescent girls who were essentially sex slaves that became part of his harem without any meaningful consent”. Is that accurate enough for you? :dubious:
Indeed not, but I’m not asking “If I call myself a Democrat, how can I not be a progressive?” I’m asking “If I strongly support every item on that list, how can I not be a progressive?” And I still have not gotten an answer.
Well, Bobby songs suck and deflate the psychedelic energy every time they pop up in an otherwise dank live set, so I don’t really give a shit.
All students carry backpacks.
My grandfather carries a backpack.
Therefore, my grandfather is a student.
How hard is it to understand that “progressive” and “Democrat” are two different words.
“America is still mostly xenophobic and racist.” - Jerry
Sure, they elected Trump—but not with my help!
It is so funny he thinks this is a hard claim.
No it is inaccurate on the multiple levels you stupid vile bigot asshole, but you’re such a stupid pathetic attention whore that who cares…
Yes, in fact Mohammed was married to only Khadija - and by all the accounts happily in a business partnership of equals - for a full 25 years, an equalitarian relationship that is certainly a healthier example of the gender balance than almost anything in the contemporary christian world (sadly of course the male chauvinists scholars of the later eras try to minimize or gloss over). Only after her death was the polygamy practised - and the records show clearly it was heavily oriented to the marrying of the widows and the allies as part of the typical dynastic politics of marriage that have held in the leadership world - royals, tribal, whatever - throughout to the modern era. The Dynastic alliance marriages.
Of these, one girl, Aicha, is young and some traditions claim very young although other internal textual evidence from unbiased hadith (the cross references of ages of her family, cousins, etc) show the youngest ages claimed for Aicha are chronologically impossible.
Indeed
Indeed, but bigots only want to throw around insults and provocations, of course this dim person parrots bigotted podcasts he has heard, trying to flatter himself with a pretended intelligence (failing of course badly).
You don’t understand how corollaries work, do you?
The real conclusion is “All students are my grandfather.”
I do not, and likely never will, have time enough to listen to a podcast over 3 minutes long.
I have never clicked any hotlinks to YouTube that are not on YouTube already. (Not since 2005 and Rick Astley).
Podcasts and YouTube snorefests are too low in information/ time ratio and entertainment value/ time to bother with. TV ones have higher production values and are made by professionals; this is probably why I will watch, say, Blue Planet.
Got a transcript? I might read that quickly, but if the beginning is crap I am not likely to read to the end.
This is a slight hijack but you really should give podcasts another chance! The one referenced in this thread may be a crock of shit, but there are some very, very good podcasts putting out great info nowadays.