Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Eldorado

Islamophobia in the Conservative Party

170 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

itsnotoutthere
Posted (edited)
On 08/03/2019 at 2:19 PM, Phaeton80 said:


Oh really? How do you feel about the term 'Anti Semitism', dear Gardener?

Unbelievable this dude. :lol:

Difference is criticism of one is usually followed by harsh words while criticism of the other (even cartoons) is usually followed by bloodshed on the streets.

Edited by itsnotoutthere
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk

Trying to make an equivalency between anti-Semitism and Islamophobia is truly disingenuous.  Anti-Semitism is pure hatred of a race.  Islamophobia is a legitimate concern of an ideology bent on world domination.  Even if the majority of Muslims are not Salafists, said sheep are still used to spread the ideology.  About 74% of Muslims believe in Sharia law.  That is a combination of ignorance and can be manipulated by the Salafists.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
7 hours ago, odas said:

No they don't, only specific situations as P80 pointed correctly out.

 

So the Quran isn't a book from god to man for all time, it's instructions on how to kill people 1400 years ago, it might as well be dumped in the trash can then.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
ExpandMyMind
On 11/03/2019 at 1:20 AM, Likely Guy said:

I'd rather see people stop attacking all religions in general.

It's not any specific religion that's wrong, just the people that bend it toward their own perverse will.

I say we attack them all equally :D

  • Like 1
  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
6 hours ago, Phaeton80 said:


:o If you say so, oh ye magnificent truthsayer; master of objective - critical thought, friendly neighbourhood Quran adept. Wouldnt want to damage your cozy worldview, neatly divided into black & white, 'good' & 'bad', and all that.

They want to murder all of us 'Unbelievers', 'real Muslims' simply murder everyone who doesnt 'do as they do'.. anyone else's blood is purrrfectly halal. Just like 'ISIS', a prime example of the toxic contents of the Qur'an! 'Moderates' are just the fake version of the true Islamic 'mass murderers / natural born terrorists'.. We all need to up our military budgets and combine our military might to bomb these Evil Muslims to kingdom come for once and for all, lets use the Iraq template for the whole of the ME! War on Terror is so 2001, we need a War on Islam, and all Islamic countries (xcept Saudi Arabia / Qatar / UAE ofcourse)! *Yay!*

Also, to soothe your (b&w) mind, heres one of your favourite vdo's..

Excellent isnt it.


..Better?

Your flavour of islam would like to bomb Iran more than anyone else.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
On 11/03/2019 at 1:20 AM, Likely Guy said:

I'd rather see people stop attacking all religions in general.

It's not any specific religion that's wrong, just the people that bend it toward their own perverse will.

With the Quran you don't have to bend anything.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ExpandMyMind said:

I say we attack them all equally :D

While I appreciate the sentiment, I maintain that religious people are, like most people, good people.

Their dogmas, maybe not so much.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, hetrodoxly said:

With the Quran you don't have to bend anything.

Name me we one mainstream religion that's all inclusive and accepting.

Edited by Likely Guy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
lightly
53 minutes ago, Likely Guy said:

Name me we one mainstream religion that's all inclusive and accepting.

      Hindhuism?  Wherein, ALL paths lead to God... And however one worships God,  God becomes "that" ,for the worshiper...out of LOVE.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Likely Guy
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, lightly said:

      Hindhuism?  Wherein, ALL paths lead to God... And however one worships God,  God becomes "that" ,for the worshiper...out of LOVE.

If that becomes the truth for the individual, then maybe yes.

There will be no salvation for humankind without the acceptance of the 'Golden Rule', which is the only shared tenet amongst all religions.

Edit: Oops, sorry. I was sounding preachy there.

Edited by Likely Guy
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RavenHawk
2 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

If that becomes the truth for the individual, then maybe yes.

There will be no salvation for humankind without the acceptance of the 'Golden Rule', which is the only shared tenet amongst all religions.

Is that not Jesus?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, RavenHawk said:

Is that not Jesus?

Jesus yes , Christianity no

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
2 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

If that becomes the truth for the individual, then maybe yes.

There will be no salvation for humankind without the acceptance of the 'Golden Rule', which is the only shared tenet amongst all religions.

Edit: Oops, sorry. I was sounding preachy there.

Care should be taken with the application of the Golden Rule. It is a little unsophisticated.  If, for example, I'm not offended by being called a gora, gaijin, cracker, or pale-ape - I don't get to free pass to potentially offend.

Quote

“The golden rule of conduct is mutual toleration, seeing that we will never all think alike and we shall always see Truth in fragment and from different points of vision.” - Gandhi

 

Gandhi's Golden Rule of Conduct is some what of an improvement.  It suggests we should accept and have some regard to our differences.  If road users could bear this in mind it might even reduce road rage.

If you could apply something like the Hicklin Test (1868) - whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscenity is to deprave and corrupt those whose minds are open to such influences - and apply it more generally, you can beging judging whether, or not, an act may reasonably offend.

I wonder if this is how we ended up with the Platinum Rule - Do unto others as they would want done to them - and how it is written into codes of conduct.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
13 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

If road users could bear this in mind it might even reduce road rage.

Assuming everyone that I see driving like a maniac is just in a hurry because they really have to poop is how I cope with road rage :D

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
15 hours ago, odas said:

No they don't, only specific situations as P80 pointed correctly out.

 

No, that is not correct Odas. I've looked at the original verses, and even the transcribed arabic. The verses are open-ended, and deal with faith and jihad.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
20 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

No, that is not correct Odas. I've looked at the original verses, and even the transcribed arabic. The verses are open-ended, and deal with faith and jihad.

I was discussing this with a Muslim fellow I used to know. College educated and very well off British Pakistani chap and his take was that its open to interpretation. I was shocked when this, again well off and educated guy, said that while he didnt interpret the scriptures as justification for terrorism he could understand why people do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
31 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

I was discussing this with a Muslim fellow I used to know. College educated and very well off British Pakistani chap and his take was that its open to interpretation. I was shocked when this, again well off and educated guy, said that while he didnt interpret the scriptures as justification for terrorism he could understand why people do.

That's very interesting, @Farmer77. I'm not sure about terrorism , however. I guess it depends on how you define it. From the "terrorists" point of view, they are carrying out a Holy cause. Hmmm......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, RoofGardener said:

That's very interesting, @Farmer77. I'm not sure about terrorism , however. I guess it depends on how you define it. From the "terrorists" point of view, they are carrying out a Holy cause. Hmmm......

Yeah I should have said jihad but terrorism was the context he and i were discussing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
4 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Yeah I should have said jihad but terrorism was the context he and i were discussing.

I guess I'm quibbling. Jihadism IS terrorism, but just with the political element replaced by a theocratic-political element ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, RoofGardener said:

I guess I'm quibbling. Jihadism IS terrorism, but just with the political element replaced by a theocratic-political element ? 

Well Jihad can be actual legal war or it could be a simple act of resistance like financially boycotting someone, it doesnt have to be violent or illegal. LOL or at least thats how I understand it as explained to me , im typing like i actually know something ...and i really dont ..first time ever ..i swear

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

Well Jihad can be actual legal war or it could be a simple act of resistance like financially boycotting someone, it doesnt have to be violent or illegal. LOL or at least thats how I understand it as explained to me , im typing like i actually know something ...and i really dont ..first time ever ..i swear

Yeah.. I mis-spoke. I meant violent jihadism, in the sense of physical attacks against the citizenry. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Farmer77
Just now, RoofGardener said:

Yeah.. I mis-spoke. I meant violent jihadism, in the sense of physical attacks against the citizenry. 

Oh yeah I meant to add to that last post that yes otherwise violent jihad is just theocratic terrorism. The problem is they dont see it that way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
hetrodoxly
9 hours ago, Likely Guy said:

Name me we one mainstream religion that's all inclusive and accepting.

You miss the point completely, Islam was born of violence spread by the sword, it's founder was a warlord, Muslims are proud of how brave he was in battle, he had named swords, took the biggest cut of the booty, took sex slaves, he's concidered the perfect man and Muslims are told they should try to emulate him, Jesus was as poor as a church mouse, had no interest in sex and never killed or hurt anyone, to make a comparison is to ignore reality.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
1 hour ago, hetrodoxly said:

You miss the point completely, Islam was born of violence spread by the sword, it's founder was a warlord, Muslims are proud of how brave he was in battle, he had named swords, took the biggest cut of the booty, took sex slaves, he's concidered the perfect man and Muslims are told they should try to emulate him, Jesus was as poor as a church mouse, had no interest in sex and never killed or hurt anyone, to make a comparison is to ignore reality.

And yet, if you where to make that statement on Social Media, you would be banned. If you made it as a public figure; an MP, or a Councillor, you would be hounded into resignation. If you said it as a public worker, you would risk the sack. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
odas
6 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

No, that is not correct Odas. I've looked at the original verses, and even the transcribed arabic. The verses are open-ended, and deal with faith and jihad.

Refering to specific battles, Roofgardener. One cannot take, in most cases, a verse out of context. The battle of Badr, for example. Verses in different chapters seemingly not conected, refere to the same battle. It repets itself as a reminder. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.