quote:
quote:
Well, Tom, if I may speak for him,
I’m sure Tom would like to speak for himself.
Oh will he! With some sparkling generalizations, followed quickly by indignant demands that others not speak in generalities.
Rmat, as I am not the one who is trying to defame an entire religion and culture based on fairly poorly assembled generalizations, I do not see where it is incumbent on me to do your research. Those who choose to argue the affirmative in a debate have the burden of proving their point.
I have already noted several large and politically powerful nations who do not engage in the Taleban-like harrassment or repression of women of which Islam has been accused. If you truly believe that every Islamic nation is messing around with the passports of adherents to Judaism, then it should not be a problem to provide a citation.
Look here, pal, have you lost your mind? Try reading what people actually write before you go off the deep end. I have a hunch that with a little effort you might actually have it within your power to make occasional sense, but that would require that you actually consider what others say, not simply try to impress the world with how clever you think you. Where, for example, did I ever “try to defame an entire religion and culture based on fairly poorly assembled generalizations” or state that “every Islamic nation is messing around with the passports of adherents to Judaism.” And by the way, it was YOU who advanced the affirmative proposition that “not every” country followed a particular practice, and directed others to research the point and discover the identity of the “exceptions” to the general rule that you denied exist. I suggested that you might advance the dialogue a tad if you were less preachy and simply revealed the very information that you implicitly claimed to be aware of. You still haven’t done so, and that alone speaks volumes about your true purpose in posting as much as you do. Share knowledge? Not a chance. Flap your gums about shit you know nothing about? It’s looking more like that every day. Prove to the world that you are an insufferable pain in the ass? If so, you’re doing a great job. Take a deep breath, stop worrying about how smart you sound, and just express you views. No need to hide the ball, no need to score points.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Collounsbury *
**
Both explicitely and implicitely you’ve implied that the extreme the idiocies of extremists are the yardstick for Islam.**
How does one explicitly imply something?
I refer you to your denial above. How about learning as to whether there are physical, legally sanctioned punishments in countries other than Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia and say Yemen?
Oh, Ok, it only happens in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and say Yemen. Yep, (rewind to the late 30’s and early 40’s) it’s OK to kill Jews because it only happens in Germany, Poland, and say France.
>>Oh, Ok, it only happens in Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and say Yemen. Yep, (rewind to the late 30’s and early 40’s) it’s OK to kill Jews because it only happens in Germany, Poland, and say France.<<
Good point, except that’s not the stance you’ve taken so far in this thread. A better analogy for the views you presented earlier in this thread would be “All Europeans kill Jews! Look at Germany, Poland and France!”
I have not accused you of holding any particular position regarding the defamation of Islam, since you have not actually contributed to the discussion in this thread. The remark concerning defamation was clearly an observation regarding the point sugested by the OP and explicitly put forward by Neurodoc.
I did state that “not every” Islamic country engages in particular practices identified by Neurodoc and further suggested that Neurodoc take the time to discover the extent of the practices mentioned. This is not an affirmative proposition, it is (1) a standard tactic of debate, noting that Neurodoc has failed to prove the affirmative and (2) a suggestion that Neurodoc take the time to learn the specifics, (thus supporting the philosophy of The Straight Dope to fight ignorance).
Some subsequent contributions to this thread have repeated the pattern of broad-brush swipes at Islam unsupported by evidence that all Islam (or even a majority of Muslims) embrace the actions charged.
It is not incumbent on me to prove that a broad assertion is false. It is the responsibility of the proponent of an idea to prove that it is true. A general denial is quite adequate to a general and unsubstantiated assertion. As it happens, I have pointed out several specific problems with the broad assertions and have provided evidence for a few of them. Were this General Questions, I might have spent more energy digging up massive amounts of relevant material (if Muslim Guy had not been there before me to do it better). As this appears to be more of a Pit rant against Islam disguised as a debate, I have no requirement to do more than follow the general protocols of debate.
I see you have moved beyond scoring points.
Re-read your post that opens “Rmat,” in which you express indignation about doing my “reserarch” and speculate about what I “really believe.” You’ll forgive me if I got the impression you were talking to me.
Oh yes, the protocols of debate. Not that it matters, Jacko, but “Not every country does something” is an affirmative proposition. You advanced it. Presumably you would not have done so unless you were aware of at least one country that comported it itself in a mannner demonstrating the correctness of your observation. A fair-minded person genuinely interested in advancing intelligent discourse wouldn’t invoke artificial semantic distinctions (“John is tall” versus “John isn’t short”) or otherwise attempt to hide the ball. No, those are the tactics of someone who is a bullshit artist, a putz, or both.
I hereby invite you, Tom, Collunsbury, or anyone else to point out where I said “All of Islam is guilty of X” on this thread or any other. I will retract said statement forthwith.
You are correct, I misspoke. I had thought from your post that you were actually joining this thread and I erroneously included you among those who opposed my position.
I now formally apologize to you for including you among those who are debating the issues.
I will also now amend my earlier statement:
[quote]
Rmat, as I am not the one who is trying to defame an entire religion and culture based on fairly poorly assembled generalizations, I do not see where it is incumbent on me to do research for those affirming that position.
[quote]
You are familiar with conjunctions, yes? Separate, yet associated actions?
Ah the appeal to Nazis smear — first bub, I never said it was okay. I was pointing out the factual * deficiencies * in your line of argument, that is Islam qua Islam or governments acting in the religion’s name legally sanctioned beating women for violations of dress code. Your smear is as contemptible as it is inaccurate. Second, it is not logically comparable, as another poster has pointed out.
As to pointing out where you have made the argument that all Islam does X, why don’t you reread your own bloody comments? It’s precisely the only logic one can discern behind, for example, your yammering on about violence against Muslim women or the burqah as a general point against Tom’s observations.
All religions teach intolerance for other religions.
Every sundayschool class has all the fine points of who is saved and who isn’t, how your sect differs from the one across the street, and how we should tolerate the Catholics even though they are wrong and going straight to hell because the really is no pergatory.
That’s what’s known as bullshit. You, perhaps, have heard of Buddhism? I daresay that’s not the only religion which doesn’t decry other religions, but it is sufficient with merely one example to disprove your assertion.
If calling out evil where it exists is “yammering”, then I’ll remain comfortable in doing so.
So you’re ignoring human rights violations in Palestine, Algeria, Egypt, Iraq, Tunisia, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, and Libya?
http://web.amnesty.org/web/ar2001.nsf/regMDE/regMDE?OpenDocument
Sigh.
I don’t see much of a great debate any more? Nazi smears, but no debate. So your argument returns to imputing human rights violations extent in Muslims countries unto the religion en grosso modo. Of course one could never play the same game with say… Catholic nations. Hypocrisy.
Sometimes ignorance just fights right back.
For the last time, I never equated the Taliban with Islam.
BTW, you asked for examples of government-sanctioned abuse outside of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen. I provided a partial listing.
What exactly is your beef, anyway?
My beef? My beef is with sloppy thinking.
Let me run down the conversation again. Tom posts a message noting the complexity of women’s position both in the Muslim and non-Muslim worlds including instances where some Muslim majority countries granted civil rights to women earlier than some Xtian countries.
You come in with a rant about status of Muslim women – generally it reads – citing practices which are largely confined to places like Saudi Arabia, Yemen and Afghanistan – rural backwaters. The explicit statement is these are worse abuses than … any Xtian country? The implicit statement is Islam is responsible for this. (That conjuction thing). Subsequently you cite to “beating of women” as a problem for Islam. Tom and I draw attention to the fact this is not a general issue, but again specific.
You now shift the goal posts and come up with Amnesty report on political repression in the named countries. I am sure that someone capable of logical thought can see this is not relevant to the question of women, legally sanction violence in Islam and the question of comparisions between Xtian women status and Muslim women status. That at least appears to have been the debate, such as it was.
Frankly, I see little reward in continuing to beat my head against illogic.
Agreed.
**
once again, if pointing out evil where it exists is “ranting”, I’ll continue to do so.
**
Finally, you’ve got the point. Please give one contemporary cite where the treatment of Christian women is as bad as, or worse than, that of Muslim women.
**
Are you a mind-reader? If not, please be quiet.
One more thing, your continued use of the word “Xtian” is insulting to me. It is highly disrespectful, and I request that you stop, or risk being determined a jerk.
Thanks for confirming my criticisms. No Great Debate left here, just ill-informed rants.
As for Xtian, it is simply an abbreviation. Fraid I shall have to condemned to your “jerkdom” but I rather value clear-headedness over blind prejudice, so frankly, no loss.
C
I’ll stand by my “rants”, thank you very much. You have not answered a single question on this whole thread.
For about the 50th time, where, when, and how have Christian women been treated as poorly as Muslim women in Afghanistan? Cite please? No really, do you have any proof?
Given your criteria, may I now call Muslims A(llah)-heads, as an abbreviation?