Judging by your previous post I think you probably mean the same thing regardless of the way you phrase it. Personally I feel the distinction is clear and very important. One is an attack on thoughts and beliefs, the other is an attack on people.
I don’t personally fear being called a bigot. As for a direct criticism of Islam that is pretty simple to do. Just read the book or listen to the teachings and when something is said that seems at odds with your own views…criticise. It really is just the same as criticising anything else.
That is where we fundamentally disagree. The cause and effect relationship you paint is simplistic and unhelpful.
Not particularly, but in terms of a source of bad ideas I do think we should treat it no differently to any other religious or political ideology, worldview or set of beliefs.
It’s not what I am thinking that matters, but what the people who hear me think. The approach I favor unambiguously communicates a message concerning my stance on the poor support of gender equality, LGBTQ rights, anti-science claptrap, etc.
The approach I prefer to avoid does not unambiguously communicate such a message and stupidly risks an ‘us vs them’ mentality.
Give me an example. I sincerely have not a clue what I would want to criticize about Islam. Just an example if you will.
It’s nearly universal in human social interactions to respond defensively to criticism of a part of your identity from a perceived outsider.
So don’t criticise it, I’m not going to tell you how to think.
And there is no need to get bogged down in specific individual criticism of elements of Islam. Any I raise would be arguable (and that’s the point) and irrelevant to my wider of point of there needing to be a willingness to criticise and accept criticism.
You however, seem to be tacitly accepting the point that Islam is a perfect ideology, a perfect way of life, a perfect teaching supported by a perfect text.
Now, either it is perfect or there are, in theory, legitimate things to criticise…which is it?
Firstly, it is not the criticism itself that makes people defensive, it is always the context, the style and intent.
Secondly, it is incredibly patronising to assume on behalf of the muslims that they are incapable of handling criticism of their faith.
The relevant context is an outsider making the criticism and the normal human response to such criticisms found everywhere on the planet where human beings roam.
You seem to be the one holding Muslims to an unfairly high standard. I was identifying a general pattern of human social behavior. I wouldn’t expect any particular group to behave differently. And I believe Muslims, like everyone else, handle such criticisms the best way imaginable: to tell the uninvited critic to take a hike. Or to take a long walk off a short pier. Or to make like a tree and leave. Or just to simply fuck off.
I have been reading along but not posting very much, mostly because Novelty Bobble has said everything I wanted to. But there are a few things I want to add.
Because I put the original findings in a quote tag, I can’t requote them, but I did copy&paste them:
43% support the introduction of some forms of Sharia law.
44% believe schools should be able to insist on “a hijab or niqab” as part of the uniform.
15% believe art or music should not be taught in school (artistic representations of humans are regarded as idolatry in some forms of Islamic belief).
10% would not ban tutoring that “promotes extreme views or is deemed incompatible with fundamental British values.”
But the biggest point survey results show that more UK Muslims believe Jews perpetrated the 9/11 attacks than believe Al Qaeda planned it
These are large percentages. I’m not too concerned about the “sharia law” one, because again that can be interpreted broadly and currently is used more for arbitration (as is my understanding). Also I would not be surprised if 43% of Christians in America thought that are laws should directly stem from the Bible (not that “what Christians in America think” is the best standard for reasonability, but just to point out that this is not as extreme a belief as it would be on first blush). Also the 10% and 15% numbers I’m not too concerned by, for the same reasons.
But the other ones . . . almost half believe schools should be able to “insist” on a hijab? That seems pretty out there (to the point where I am questioning the validity of the study, and will hunt around a bit to see what I can find)
Also more than half thought that 9/11 was perpetrated by Jews? That’s pretty out-there.
Now again the question is . . . is this a problem that we should “do something about?” Or should we just sort of assume that this view will peter out with time? Which again brings me to my broader question of, is it just a matter of time before Muslims integrate into the mainstream like everybody else? Or is this a different situation? Tomndebb has made his stance clear, and I’m inclined to agree with him . . . while I don’t think this is “okay,” I don’t really see much that we can do about it without further alienating people.
Although I do think there is a point to be made about “liberal European values” around which we base much of our laws and culture. At some point we may have to let some of these go for the sake of societal harmony . . . like I can easily forsee a situation in which a Muslim community wishes for the local government to enact some kind of legal penalty if a Muslim burns the Quran (like a small fine, community service). This would violate both the idea of free speech and that all people should be treated equally by the law.
For a better current example (outside of the UK), in India (and other countries), polygamy is illegal . . .except for Muslims, for whom it’s legal. Legality of polygamy - Wikipedia
India is, in theory, a secular liberal democracy (again, in theory) whose culture of law is based largely on the British. But what would Western European countries think of such an arrangement? I imagine in the US it would be unconstitutional.
What about this? Is Sam’s daughter, or her Bengali classmates, missing out on something by schooling in such a homogenous environment? This is a problem we face in the US too . . . to solve it for a while we tried bussing kids to schools outside their neighborhood, which didn’t really work, AFAIK. Might it work here? Again, I think probably not, especially given the evidence that many Muslim families would rather home school than expose their children to an environment they deemed too secular (or whatever–I’m not sure what problem the Muslim parents had with the new Trojan Horse schools).
BTW, Sam, whatever happened with the IT class taught in Bengali? Did that change?
If your general point is that you catch more flies with honey than vinegar, then yes, I agree. But ultimately if the reason that people are opposed to LGBT rights is their religion, that’s going to factor into the debate, otherwise it’s impossible to have a discussion if one side isn’t going to say why they feel the way they feel.
And overall also I agree with Novelty that while criticizing a religion may make practitioners feel insulted, marginalized and dehumanized, it doesn’t have to. Obviously the critics should use as fair and neutral phrasing as possible, but the religionists also have a responsibility to gauge the validity of the criticism, not immediately retreat behind a veil of “they’re bigoted racists to say bad things about our religion. They hate Islam and Muslims! Let’s not listen.”
Hector, that’s interesting and something I wasn’t aware of. It makes sense given that Indians and Pakistani immigrants seem to be equally successful in the US. Do you have any cites for that? Not that I disbelieve you, I was just wondering if this was a phenomenon you had observed or if someone had actually studied it.
I think Mr. Obama is very wise and is an extremely effective communicator and unifier, so I suspect that his reluctance to more directly address this issue and his sensitivity to the concerns of the Muslim community is well-founded. Like I said above, this discussion has convinced me that the best way to address concerns we have about terrorism, extremist views and segregation is to provide outlets for communities to address this on their own, but not insist upon it. I maintain that the unwillingness of people to face criticisms of their community is irrational, but I’m not going to change any hearts or minds by screaming at the owners of said hearts and minds that they are being hysterical and irrational.
We’ve already done what we can about it. Sharia Law is not going to be our law. It’s silly to believe this can ever happen in the USA or UK. Hijabs and Niqabs will not be a part of school uniforms. Give me one plausible pathway to that becoming reality. Education handles the rest. The something we need to do is already done.
This question of “What to do about Muslim immigrants’ beliefs” reminds me of Rand Paul filibustering until Obama addressed using drones to kill US citizens inside our borders. It was never a problem because there are already laws against such behavior and it’s ridiculous to worry about it.
No, that’s not what I am saying at all. I am saying you solve problems by addressing the problems. If your concern is gender equality but you want to only discuss FGM among certain groups of Muslim immigrants, then you aren’t really addressing gender equality. By approaching gender equality in such a way, you:
Miss tackling far bigger problems in gender equality that need to be worked on.
Enable bigots to take your well-meaning campaign and focus it more on the “problem” of these immigrants than the problem of FGM.
Protect FGM by 3a) creating mistrust between communities so the topic cannot be easily discussed, and 3b) reducing immigration from a part of the world that generally accepts FGM to a part of the world that does not.
No, you present reasons for LGBT rights, you support those rights strongly, you enforce education of children to accept LGBT rights, you consistently prosecute when LGBT rights are violated. Eventually, the adherents to this or that religion will re-interpret their religion to match their cultural support for LGBT rights.
Go after peoples’ faith, and you do nothing for LGBT rights. So I am not discussing vinegar and honey at all. I am discussing respecting people, earning their trust, and accomplishing your goals.
Let me talk once again about the Hmong, who started coming into the USA in the mid 70’s, and their cultural tradition of marrying 12-14 year old girls to men in their 30’s.
When they continued to do this in the USA, they were prosecuted for it, rightfully so. Many of them tried to claim that this was just their culture and they should be allowed to continue doing it. We in the USA said No, this is the law, and no one gets any kind of exemption for cultural reasons.
We continued to prosecute the offenders each time, we held the line, and eventually, they stopped doing it and it stopped being a part of the Hmong-American culture.
At no point did we attack their culture.
So the same with LGBT rights. We hold the line, we prosecute violations. When they claim religious exemption, we say ‘NO, this is the LAW’ and continue to prosecute them.
So how’s it going with the Mormon’s and polygamy. A friend posted some photos from a Salt Lake carpark the other day; two ladies identically dressed. Very nce.
I’m not a Muslim, but I think schools should be able to insist on a hijab. Not public schools, obviously, but private schools? If a bunch of Jews can set up a private school and insist students wear yarmulkes, or a bunch of Mormons can set up a private school and insist students dress like “Little House on the Prairie,” a bunch of Muslims should be able to set up a private school and insist students wear hijabs.
Very successfully. There are people who violate the law. I’m completely unsure if the picture you saw has anything to do with Mormons who still attempt to practice polygamy.
Poligamy should be legal as long as the parties are of age and enter willingly. There is no way the government should interfere in consensual non violent actions between adults.
If you are sincere in wanting to communicate with others and discuss issues, you should drop the hyperbole and nonsense statements like this and come at others in a less hostile style.
Oh yes, agreed on the private schools, I was referring to public schools.
My understanding is that in the UK, what we call private schools here are called public schools, and what we call public schools are called . . . government schools? I don’t know. But I also thought the “private” (i.e. non-state-run) school industry in the UK wasn’t as robust as in the US, and relatively few students went to those kind of schools.