Where are the Muslims on SDMB?

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Those who are in favour of throwing my thread into the pit are simply admitting that they would prefer to throw excrement at me than debate. In fact, I do not intend to even go and see this thread if it is moved to the Pit. You can fling your dung by yourselves.

I prefer reason.
[/QUOTE]

You just can’t help yourself, can you? You can’t even bring yourself to post the debate question by itself without throwing in something insulting everyone else and saying that they are afraid to debate you. The reason people are flinging shit at you is because your posts contained a debate question buried in a pile of prejudice and abuse. Try again: post your debate question (a) without making abusive comments about Muslims and (b) without making false accusations about the motivations of your fellow posters. Then, perhaps, people will take you seriously.

ETA–And don’t assume that we won’t accept criticism of Muslims. For example, I just started reading Sam Harris’s The End of Faith, which is quite critical of Islam. But there is a difference between unreasoning abuse and reasoned criticism.

[QUOTE=Valteron]

My contention is that we see very few Muslims jumping into the debates about Islam, and that the principal reason for this may well be that Islamic culture and history are based on authoritarian demands for submission (which is what Islam means).

I believe our western concepts of freedom and democracy, so clearly illustrated by the free-wheeling and passionate debates on this SDMB, are simply weird to a person raised in Islamic culture.
[/QUOTE]

No, actually, I don’t think you want to debate these points. Rather I am quite firmly convinced that you want to use the above as a cover for you to elucidate in great detail as to exactly why you believe Islam is un-western and barbaric. Or in other words I believe airing your talking points are much more important to you than actual debate.

Liberal is far more charitable of your motives than I am. But I guess we all have our personality flaws and one of mine is a suspicious nature.

The reason few Muslims have engaged in religious debate on the SDMB has already been explained:
1.) It is a tiny minority religion in the English speaking countries that make up 99.9% ( or whatever ) of the membership here. Hence there have been few Muslim posters, period.

2.) Not every poster has a burning need to debate/defend their personal faith on a message board. I’m sure there are more than a few devout Christians on the SDMB that have no great interest in participated in Christian-oriented debates either. Others are simply not equipped to do so - they have sincere beliefs, but don’t have a host of cites handy and thus aren’t armed for debate.

3.) Most folks get tired of being in the constant defensive position a Muslim on the SDMB would have to assume in the face of continual attacks and ‘No True Scotsmen’ arguments.

There you have it.

[QUOTE=Liberal]
Islamic culture is different from Western culture. There’s no point in pretending otherwise.
[/quote]

There is no such thing universal “Islamic” or “Western” culture in such broad terms and there is no pretending otherwise. Are Bosnian Muslims “Western” or “Islamic”?

[QUOTE=Liberal]
Knees are jerking so hard that skulls are cracking, and there’s no point in it.
[/QUOTE]

Yeah, well, like I said you’re a charitable person in this regard. I’m not. We’ll leave aside the fact that I think the very notion that our few Muslim posters don’t feel called upon to continuously interject themselves in relgious debates on the SDMB because they are inherently different in mindset, what with their notions that freedom and democracy being weird and their inherent submission to authoritarian beliefs, is both ridiculous and insulting as hell. Might as well just spit in the face of every Muslim member of the SDMB, past and present.

The simple fact is that while Valteron may be a perfectly decent person in other respects, IMO this a well-documented blind spot of his. Am I making assumptions about where he is headed with this? Yep. But I feel pretty comfortable doing so.

[QUOTE=Liberal]
That’s what their 2nd law argument has always been based on, that it began with the fall of man. If they no longer tie it to man’s fall from grace, then it is of no use to them.
[/QUOTE]

And yet, at the very same site that you linked to (on a page linked to in the page that you linked to), they still seem to want to use what is essentially the 2nd law argument with some added squirming.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Maybe I am bad at expressing myself. I have been told I write too much in each post and tend to water down my message…
[/QUOTE]

Your posts do tend to be quite long. But rather than watering down your message, they concentrate it.

[QUOTE=Bridget Burke]
Your posts do tend to be quite long. But rather than watering down your message, they concentrate it.
[/QUOTE]

Is this sarcasm or are you agreeing with me? Believe it or not, I am asking sincerely.

You musn’t be too subtle with someone like me who, as many other posters will tell you, is a moron, jerk, etc. :smiley:

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
However, that argument loses a bit of its persuasive power when one notes that on alternating weeks the poster in question also fulminates against the dominant religion of his culture.
[/QUOTE]

Indeed. Some of us have spent plenty of time debating Christian fundamentalists and want to to spend some time going after bigger game.

But surely there must be some forums out there where there are plenty of English speaking Muslims to debate with.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
I prefer reason.
[/QUOTE]

I’m sorry, I’ll need stronger evidence of this.

Case in point. We know there are fairly few openly Muslim posters here, and you started this thread a mere 12 hours ago. You’re assuming a lack of a Muslim response illustrates some larger point about Muslim culture, but your conclusion is unsupported by evidence. It could simply be that of the Muslim members (already a small group) few have noticed this thread, fewer opened it and fewer still responded to it. Your behaviour could easily be discouraging responses, either pro or con. You’re not giving them any incentive to offer their opinions, not even the merest sign that you’d give their views the slightest respect.

I suggest you’re merely seeking to claim reinforcement for beliefs you already hold, rather than seeking new insight.

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Your behaviour could easily be discouraging responses, either pro or con. You’re not giving them any incentive to offer their opinions, not even the merest sign that you’d give their views the slightest respect.
[/quote]

And of course, we already have one Muslim poster who said that this is exactly the case.

[QUOTE=BrainGlutton]
Look, I can get where you’re coming from, Valteron. I once, with the best of intentions, invited white supremacists into this Forum to defend their views. The general Dopesensus was that this was ill-advised.

Of course, that lot are cranks by any reasonable standard. We cannot so casually dismiss an ancient faith embraced by one human being in six.
[/QUOTE]

I think that thread was rather cool. And some of them really didn’t sound that stupid to me, even though the SDMB posters liked to claim so. I think one of them scored here:
“If my ancestors are from africa, then I should benefit from some affirmative action law or quota system that I have heard so much about and paid so many taxes to finance.”

[QUOTE=Marley23]
And of course, we already have one Muslim poster who said that this is exactly the case.
[/QUOTE]

Two, I guess. Raza in #16 and Angua in #38.

My theory is that Valteron is paying no more attention to those posts than he will to any of mine, and I’m posting here solely for my own amusement.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
But you already have dismissed ancient faiths by the dozens that existed for thousands of years and were believed by perhaps billions of individuals! I am talking about belief in Zeus, Jupiter, etc. Unless you really believe Mars and Aphrodite and the rest are living up there on Mount Olympus.

There are two ancient faiths today that are embraced by over one human being in six, and you MUST dismiss one of them, logically speaking:

  1. Christianity believes that Jesus was the Son of God (or Allah) and that Mohammed is a false prophet who did not really receive a revelation from God.

  2. Islam believes that God (Allah) had no son, that Jesus was just a human prophet, and that Mohammed was the final prophet.

I have just presented you with two mutually contradictory assertions, BrainGlutton.

When a rational human being is presented with two such assertions, then unless he is insane, he must reject at least one. You can in fact reject both if you believe there is no God, or if you are Jewish, Hindu, etc. But you cannot refuse to dismiss at least one of them and still call yourself a rational, thinking human.
[/QUOTE]

I’m down with saying that both of them are “insane”.

Also, hie thee to the “Ask the…” threads. They’ll give you more information and if you don’t come off as such a combative individual, then maybe something can be discussed.

[QUOTE=tomndebb]
Has anyone in this thread found an actual point to debate? Or is this supposed to be just a round-robin discussion of things that people do not like about other religions or about other posters?
[ /Modding ]
[/QUOTE]

I would like to argue about how Muslims recollect cold temperature experiences from their past.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
There are two ancient faiths today that are embraced by over one human being in six, and you MUST dismiss one of them, logically speaking:

  1. Christianity believes that Jesus was the Son of God (or Allah) and that Mohammed is a false prophet who did not really receive a revelation from God.

  2. Islam believes that God (Allah) had no son, that Jesus was just a human prophet, and that Mohammed was the final prophet.

I have just presented you with two mutually contradictory assertions, BrainGlutton.

When a rational human being is presented with two such assertions, then unless he is insane, he must reject at least one. You can in fact reject both if you believe there is no God, or if you are Jewish, Hindu, etc. But you cannot refuse to dismiss at least one of them and still call yourself a rational, thinking human.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, a rational person can also simply state that there is not sufficient information to draw a conclusion for either statement, and thus refuse to dismiss either; a rational person can also claim that they personally lack sufficient knowledge about either belief system to dismiss either at this time (though the information might be available if one sought hard enough); or there’s the third option that the rational person doesn’t care about the issue enough to waste time thinking about it at all, and thus refrains from even considering the assertions, much less dismissing them.

So, I think you have a wee bit of excluded middle here. Just like with your “Muslims must be incapable of rational argument, or they’d be here!” line of thought.

[QUOTE=Bryan Ekers]
Two, I guess. Raza in #16 and Angua in #38.

My theory is that Valteron is paying no more attention to those posts than he will to any of mine, and I’m posting here solely for my own amusement.
[/QUOTE]

Both of them seem to say the same thing. They have no desire to debate.

Angua’a argument is one I have heard often from religious people. Your mind and heart are closed to the truth so I will not bother to present it to you.

You can even find passage after passage in the Koran about how Allah hardens the heart of unbelievers so that Satan can lead them to Hell for having rejected the truth of Islam. (Leading me to wonder how responsible I can be for my unbelief if Allah planned it that way. :stuck_out_tongue: )

I remember a Mormon woman telling me something similar. Anyone besides a Mormon can see that the Book of Mormon is a bunch of made-up junk invented by Joseph Smith. Everyone knows there is not a scrap of evidence that there was a huge civilization of millions of people speaking “reformed Egyptian” and practicing the Christian Relgion in America between 33 and 500 A.D.

But this woman simply said, “Even if we were to find insciptions in reformed Egyptian saying welcome to (one of the cities mentioned in the B of M) you still would not believe.”

Muslims have told me much the same thing. How bloody convenient. In other words, “oh yeah, we have scads and scads of evidence to prove our beliefs, but you ain’t gonna get to see them because your heart is hardened against belief. So there.”

[QUOTE=begbert2]
Just like with your “Muslims must be incapable of rational argument, or they’d be here!” line of thought.
[/QUOTE]

I don’t remember saying they were incapable of rational argument. Please read my OP and stop misrepresenting my viewpoint.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Angua’a argument is one I have heard often from religious people. Your mind and heart are closed to the truth so I will not bother to present it to you.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t see anything in her post that suggest she isn’t willing to debate with people who disagree with her. She’s just not prepared to debate with you specifically, on the general ideas (as I understand it) that there would be no point in doing so.

In other words - it’s not because she’s a Muslim. It’s not because she’s religious. It’s because you wouldn’t argue in good faith. And I, an atheist, pretty much agree with her.

Raza suggests that he too doesn’t want to debate; but again, not because he doesn’t want to discuss religion, but because he doesn’t really like debating that much. I certainly haven’t seen his name all that much in GD. So again, the reason behind not debating is not religious in nature.

I put it to you that either you can’t read, or you have no interest in truly listening to those you fein interest in talking to. Frankly, under those circumstances, I wouldn’t want to debate with you either. So (aside from if you choose to address this post) I believe I shall not in the future.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Angua’a argument is one I have heard often from religious people. Your mind and heart are closed to the truth so I will not bother to present it to you.
[/QUOTE]

You already gave somebody else this spiel. Still, what he said is exactly what people predicted: your tone is exceedingly hostile and shows you aren’t really interested in debate. Yeah, the “you wouldn’t listen” argument can be a weak cop-out, but sometimes it’s true. Everybody eventually runs out of patience when talking to someone who won’t listen.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Both of them seem to say the same thing. They have no desire to debate.

Angua’a argument is one I have heard often from religious people. Your mind and heart are closed to the truth so I will not bother to present it to you.
[/QUOTE]

Except it’s not just the Muslims in this thread who are saying there is no point in arguing with you; it is also atheists like me and Revenant Threshold. There is a lesson in this, if you will learn it.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
Both of them seem to say the same thing. They have no desire to debate.
[/quote]

It’s worth adding the modifier that they have no desire to debate you. I contend that had you taken a more mature approach, you had a much better shot at a detailed response, especially from Angua. I don’t know if Angua will confirm or deny this, so it’s just a hypothesis for now. The gist is that the fault is not theirs, but yours. It’s very much like calling someone an easily angered asshole, and using their angry response to prove your claim. Reason is entirely disconnected from your posts.

[QUOTE=Valteron]
I don’t remember saying they were incapable of rational argument. Please read my OP and stop misrepresenting my viewpoint.
[/QUOTE]

Ah, you’re right, this statement of yours bears no resemblance whatsoever to ‘Muslims must be incapable of rational argument, or they’d be here!’

Except, no, wait - it does. Unless you specifically are referring to freewheeling, democratic, irrational debates?

I do not feel that I was misrepresenting you. And you’re definitely suffering quite badly from excluded middle - understanding “the concept of of participating in a freewheeling, democratic debate” does not imply that they want to engage in a freewheeling, democratic debate. Or a muslim-bashing session, for that matter.