islam, the religion of love...

This is a Saudi textbook. (After the intolerance was removed.) - washingtonpost.com

And some people claim that Western imperialism is the cause...

If one reads the Kuran carefully, one will notice that the book cleary calls for the elimination of non muslims. So does the Bible for Jews and Christians, and it's true. However, both the folllowers of these religions - for the most part - have put aside their book and used reason.

With their access to modern weapons, Islam truly is a scary religion.

Or is it just a handful of extremists?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by Janus X

If one reads the Kuran carefully

Read: selectively; ultraconservatively.

Fanatics and the ignorant are too easily ready to use text for their own ends. Specific religion doesn't matter as much as education. Unfortunately, with ultraconservatives controlling state institutions, and vocal Imams playing politics by condemning the West, ignorance is rampant in the middle east right now.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Janus X

This is a Saudi textbook. (After the intolerance was removed.) - washingtonpost.com

And some people claim that Western imperialism is the cause...

If one reads the Kuran carefully, one will notice that the book cleary calls for the elimination of non muslims. So does the Bible for Jews and Christians, and it's true. However, both the folllowers of these religions - for the most part - have put aside their book and used reason.

With their access to modern weapons, Islam truly is a scary religion.

Or is it just a handful of extremists?

Are you joking. Do you know any Muslims? Do you know how popular the religion is and how many followers there are? Do you know that most practicing Muslims (and when I say "most," it's the vast majority) are completely benign individuals who worship without hate?

Now. Do you know how many Christians in the United States alone spew a lot of doublespeak hate talk?

I apologize in advance if this post seems hostile. I am just absolutely SICK of people judging an otherwise peaceful religion based on a few crazies.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

I'd just like to say that I'm laughing at the "BEAUTIFUL MUSLIM SINGLES FOR MATRIMONY" ad at the bottom of the page. Especially since the woman in the picture is wearing a headscarf.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Well, if she wasn't wearing a scarf, she wouldn't be beautiful.

She'd be a filthy, unmarriageable whore who must be stoned.

I was speaking idiomatically.

There's an arab girl (black American muslim) in my International Law class who doesn't care much for Israel. It's pretty funny.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

The End of Faith - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reason trumps belief. We've been conversationally tolerant long enough. Etc.

FELIPE NO

And once all the rage of internet atheists is coalesced no force will be able to stop the intellectual prowess of thousands of skinny white guys. Certainly no god (which doesn't even exist).

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by RacinReaver

I'd just like to say that I'm laughing at the "BEAUTIFUL MUSLIM SINGLES FOR MATRIMONY" ad at the bottom of the page. Especially since the woman in the picture is wearing a headscarf.

But if it is HER FREE choice to wear one; who are you to judge?

There were alot of gals at my university who wore them happily; you just don't notice after a while.

Sikhs wear turbans. Jews the Kippah; so why people can't get over a woman wearing a religious article oh my God they must be opressed.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Those aren't the best examples. Sikhs have also run into trouble from secular society due to their headgear fetish (for example Sikhs working in construction who refuse to wear hardhats because they'd have to take their turbans off).

There's nowhere I can't reach.

The ceremonial daggers are also problematic.

And Brady can get as bent out of shape as he wants, but at the end of the day, we all know he's as frustrated as any of us by religious zealotry. And probably more than the rest of us when it comes to religion mingling with politics.

(P.S. Since when am I skinny?)

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Actually yes, in many cases that's exactly what's happening.

Turbans and Kippahs aren't even remotely comparable to common Islamic female dresscode since they aren't designed to hide gender-specific features.

man beaten so hard on this

Additional Spam:

Quote:

And Brady can get as bent out of shape as he wants, but at the end of the day, we all know he's as frustrated as any of us by religious zealotry. And probably more than the rest of us when it comes to religion mingling with politics.

I'm certainly no fan.

At the same time, hardline literature is precisely what helps stoke the fires of fanaticism. If previous religious revivals were initiated due to the onsaught of people drinking a lot or not going to church what do you think will happen if atheists re-ignite the culture war?

You see the same problem in leftist intellectualism and its relation to politics. Regardless of any objective "correctness" the reality is that a lot of activists are highly condescending, which helped generate the kind of conservative backlash that put Nixon and Bush into office.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Can we just bring up female circumcision, nazis and how 9/11 was all Islam's fault right now? Just so when it comes up later no one will have to feign shock that someone dared do it?

I just think it's easier this way.

I was speaking idiomatically.

I actually was going to bring up female circumcision and how the aforementioned arab girl thought that granting asylum to a girl and her family based on fears of female genital mutilation was bunk, but I felt it would be too complicated for the argument I was going to attempt to make about determining consent.

Opportunity lost.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Bradylama

I actually was going to bring up female circumcision and how the aforementioned arab girl thought that granting asylum to a girl and her family based on fears of female genital mutilation was bunk, but I felt it would be too complicated for the argument I was going to attempt to make about determining consent.

Opportunity lost.

Show up to school one day driving a SAAB, wearing a yamaka and a t-shirt that says "REPPING FOR JUDEN."

Offer her a ride.

Film the results.

How ya doing, buddy?

So have women in Turkey, its a huge national issue over there, theres been riots and protests since Turkey turned secular.

I have studied Ethinic Minorities and Law with one of the best professors literally in the Uk and possibly the World this year as one of my 4 core Law modules and I know the shit these people take. In regards to Sikhs, its a lack of common sense and in the UK many cases have gone to court and won on the grounds of racial discriminition or Art. 9 of the ECHR. The point is with women and headscarves its a different type of prejudice alltogether.

In regards to Women headscarves its been utter shite some of the stuff UK politicians, the press and the general attitude of the public. Look at the English case of Sabina Begum v SB Denbigh Highschool, it was overturned TWICE on appeal. Just because she herself wanted to wear the Jilbab (covers body) she was thrown out of school because the other children and teachers 'found her a bit scary'. The case is one of the biggest bollocks I've seen in the past 10 years, and seeing the Judge's backtrack due to the negative Muslim coverage in the press in regards to the said case was shameful.

Point is if she wants as a woman to express her religion through her free choice of wearing those clothes, who are Judges and uneducated persons to turn around and say oh she's opressed, or oh she doesn't or cannot fit into our society, oh she can't become a functioning member of our society.

In the UK a woman was denied a hairdressers job becuase she wore a headscarve, the propestive employer told it straight to her face. As such they were fined £5000 and rightly so. It simply had nothing to do with her ability to cut hair. And that it simply highlights the negative attitude that these poor woman suffer due to others prejudices or fixed minds.

However in the Uk we become tolerant for example in the 70's we have specific acts to allow the slaughter of animals (halal and Kosher), carrying of ceremonial daggers, changes in traffic laws etc..

Problem is it makes life easier for minorities but still doesn't change our attitude.

The fact is you even think the word Sharia over here and it sparks negative press, wthout people actually being Educated on Sharia law. The fact is the stupid press keep quiet of the Sharia Law thats already in our Legal system thanks to case precedent.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Show up to school one day driving a SAAB, wearing a yamaka and a t-shirt that says "REPPING FOR JUDEN."

Offer her a ride.

Film the results.

She's honestly a smart girl and the class is the better for the kind of issues she raises but the whole problem is the bias and how it completely dominates her worldview and ISRAELAPARTHEIDMASSMURDERHOLOCAUST

Quote:

Point is if she wants as a woman to express her religion through her free choice of wearing those clothes, who are Judges and uneducated persons to turn around and say oh she's opressed, or oh she doesn't or cannot fit into our society, oh she can't become
a functioning member of our society.

Damn those activist judges, presuming that an article of clothing which makes you a formless non-entity could be de-humanizing or indoctrinal.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

Originally Posted by El Ray Fernando

I have studied Ethinic Minorities and Law with one of the best professors litterally in the World this year as one of my 4 core Law modules and I know the shit these people take.

Well I've studied Anthropology at some of the top universities in the world, with some of the top professors in the field and I can tell you: No, you really don't.

Want to keep the academic pissing contest going or can we move on with our lives now?

You've offered some examples of what are obviously overreactions by people towards Islam.

But you know what's just as stupid and dangerous? Assuming you have a full grasp of thousands of years of history, religion and belief because you took some classes on law.

Blanket acceptance is just as idiotic as blind rejection.

EDIT FOR BRADY

It's the danger of a belief in anything, really. Once you wholeheartedly buy into any given system, be it secular or religious, you're generally cutting off certain logical options.

In summation:

Grow a set of those dangly hair thingies the rabbis rock and look into learning the Israeli national anthem.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

By definition anyone whose life is defined so strongly by their beliefs as to tell them how to dress is necessarily an outsider in society. Of course we shouldn't discriminate against them, but we don't need to. They discriminate against themselves by their decision to knowingly appear alien. Their choices make it difficult or impossible for them to "fit into society" because (like it or not) a society is and must be defined by something more than "let's be tolerant of everybody". Sure, people have the right to wear what they want... but at the same time don't you think I'd get some funny looks if I went to work every day in a toga and a top hat? Do you think my boss would like that very much? Oh, I could sue for the right to go to work in my toga and top hat, and I might even win, but — I could also just get over myself and wear appropriate clothing in the style common to wherever I live. Otherwise I'll always be "that toga guy", moaning about how people treat him like he's weird or something! Of course I'm weird! I'm wearing a fucking toga! I'm wearing a full-body burlap sack in the middle of a California summer in a society where naked people appear frequently on billboards!

Originally Posted by Bradylama

At the same time, hardline literature is precisely what helps stoke the fires of fanaticism.

Absolutely. One of the main things fueling the current American revival in conservative Christianity is the notion that they're somehow being oppressed, and every stamp-out-the-loonies book and editorial just gives them more fuel for that delusional fire. While the notion that kooks shouldn't have to be tolerated is a valid one, it's flatly impossible by definition to reduce extremism via a zero-tolerance policy. Persecution (or the appearance of persecution) strengthens cult behavior.

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Pangalin

Absolutely. One of the main things fueling the current American revival in conservative Christianity is the notion that they're somehow being oppressed, and every stamp-out-the-loonies book and editorial just gives them more fuel for that delusional fire. While the notion that kooks shouldn't have to be tolerated is a valid one, it's flatly impossible by definition to reduce extremism via a zero-tolerance policy. Persecution (or the appearance of persecution) strengthens cult behavior.

But they are being oppressed, Pang. They've only had 43 Presidents be of their faith. And though that might seem impressive from a percentage standpoint, it's absolutely horrific when you think of it in terms of a number.

I mean 43 is a lot less than a million.

And that's terrifying.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

Oh, most of those Presidents weren't really Christians, Deni. Not Real True Christians. One of them was even a Papist, don'tcha know.

No President will be a Real Christian in the eyes of the modern fundamentalist movement until he deploys troops specifically to secure the Temple Mount for Israel (at which point the Messiah may return to Earth and the Saved will be raptured, yes lord god jesus amen).

I was speaking idiomatically.

Overraction isn't just the problem, its a lack of willing self education.

People always put personal law into the unoffical sphere. They don't think wearing a headscarve for example as a personal law, rather a mere cultural practice. Same goes for Sharia Law, the stuff always finds itself into the system so why not do it properly rather than sweep it under the rug.

Whats wrong with a controlled blanket acceptance, you either have a type 1 model which we have in the UK of a Uniform law with granted exceptions. (This doesn't work at all amd is highly discriminatory). Or you have a type 2 Ballard model whereby you allow the use of codified personal laws into the uniform and make futher exceptions on a cases by case basis. The problem is things like Sharia are a political no no, so its not even considered. For example rules governing Talaq are very important.

There is one thing that holds true, any state never discriminates or opresses against a Muslim because they are Muslim. They do it because they refuse to assimilate into the states official system. The same goes for most of you people.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Pangalin

Oh, most of those Presidents weren't really Christians, Deni. Not Real True Christians. One of them was even a Papist, don'tcha know.

No President will be a Real Christian in the eyes of the modern fundamentalist movement until he deploys troops specifically to secure the Temple Mount for Israel (at which point the Messiah may return to Earth and the Saved will be raptured, yes lord god jesus amen).

You're being smarmy, but when Earth 2 happens, I'm going to be chillaxing on a beach that's almost exactly (but not quite) the South of France and you'll be burning in hell for using sarcasm about our Lord's return and the rapture.

Or in some sort of mass void of nothingness.

The scripture is a little vague on that.

But it is clear on being anti-fag. Sorry half of GFF.

FELIPE NO

Quote:

Oh, most of those Presidents weren't really Christians, Deni. Not Real True Christians. One of them was even a Papist, don'tcha know.

Some of them were even Deists!

This nation was founded on the notion that God is not an active universal participant! VOTE SECESSION

Quote:

But it is clear on being anti-fag. Sorry half of GFF.

They knew what would happen when they chose to be gay.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Bradylama

Some of them were even Deists!

This nation was founded on the notion that God is not an active universal participant! VOTE SECESSION

Your currant av and sig combination makes your political motivations suspect, Mr. Lama.

Jam it back in, in the dark.