Tolerance: Muslims Versus Jews

[Shiranu]

That's doesn't come from any of my posts. Get your facts straightened.

Sorry you had to learn this this way, but you are not the only one on the forum I can quote. World shattering, I know. I again apologize profusely.

You should look at yourself in the mirror. Emotional and irrational is your trademark. Defending a religion like Islam at all cost even to the point of absurdity is no sign of rationality. Get a reality check.

Yes, and your little tirades and ad homs. are a shining beacon of emotional stability, as you nod your head and quote malicious articles with zero evidence supporting them truly show an unwavering and unshakable dedication to "the truth". Oh, to be like you someday. Us lesser minds can only dream...

Unfortunately we have a number of Islamic apologists on this forum, who are in deep denial that they are apologists. Worse is that they think Islam is perhaps a race, or maybe an ethnicity and therefore any attack on it becomes the work of racists, when in reality, ISLAM is a RELIGION. And it doesn't matter how many times you repeat that  ISLAM is a RELIGION, they simply are in total denial, revealing their true nature of apologists!!

That's racist.

[pr126]

That's racist.

[josephpalazzo]

Sorry you had to learn this this way, but you are not the only one on the forum I can quote.

You deliberately put this quote on top of some of my quotes giving the false impression that it was my quote. Consider yourself on my ignore list. Were I a mod you would be banned immediately. Consider yourself lucky.

[Shiranu]

Lol.

Seems Werribee

You deliberately put this quote on top of some of my quotes giving the false impression that it was my quote. Consider yourself on my ignore list. Were I a mod you would be banned immediately. Consider yourself lucky.

Was he always this much of a spoiled ass before he left?

[josephpalazzo]

On terrorism: it is a legitimate tactic. Every nation and hostile force uses terror as a weapon. If I was part of some rebel force I'd use terror tactics. What you want is your enemy to be afraid. I don't blame radical Muslims for terrorism, that's how war goes. I blame the west for failing to realize that we are at war, failing to see the enemy.


I honestly don't know what to do, but if we don't deal with it soon it will turn ugly. I'm talking full scale slaughter and genocide. Don't want that to happen? We need to wake up and deal with radical Muslims now.

Bush screwed it up with a needless war in Iraq, and that makes it almost impossible for the US to pursue a strategy that would eradicate radical Islam. Just look at the policies to fight ISIS; aerial attacks with no boots on the ground is useless. Unless there is another attack like 9/11 style, the US will continue to sleep at the wheel.

[pr126]

By saying 'radical Islam'  is implying that there is another  moderate, peaceful Islam somewhere.
This does not exist.

There are Muslims who do not engage in violent jihad, but that does not mean that Islam is peaceful.

All Muslims read the same scriptures. There is no Quran for radicals and another one for 'moderates'.

The Quran is in reality two books. Mekkan and Medinan.
The Mekkan part was from the times when Muhammad was still concilliatory, trying to get followers.
The second part are the Medinan verses which came when he migrated to Medina (Yathrib) and became a warlord with his army of followers.
The Mekkan verses then were abrogated, (annulled)  by the later, more violent warring verses.

[josephpalazzo]

By saying 'radical Islam'  is implying that there is another  moderate, peaceful Islam somewhere.
This does not exist.

There are Muslims who do not engage in violent jihad, but that does not mean that Islam is peaceful.

All Muslims read the same scriptures. There is no Quran for radicals and another one for 'moderates'.

The Quran is in reality two books. Mekkan and Medinan.
The Mekkan part was from the times when Muhammad was still concilliatory, trying to get followers.
The second part are the Medinan verses which came when he migrated to Medina (Yathrib) and became a warlord with his army of followers.
The Mekkan verses then were abrogated, (annulled)  by the later, more violent warring verses.

Fine, but you must understand that the US is a secular state, and as such, every American individual has a right to his or her religion. The US government cannot simply declare war on a religion, be it Islam or any other religion. In order to pursue a strategy, the US government must frame it within a political reality. Narrowing it down to a group of individuals or to a movement is a must. So the government so far has used "Islamic terrorist" or "Islamic extremists", and similar terms to justify its course of action. Also, the US has several allies in the ME, not necessarily the most savory ones, but the US is caught between a hard place and a rock: if it does too much, it is accused of having imperialistic ambition; if it does not enough, it is accused of letting the barbarians running the show and committing atrocities.

[mauricio]

By saying 'radical Islam'  is implying that there is another  moderate, peaceful Islam somewhere.
This does not exist.

There are Muslims who do not engage in violent jihad, but that does not mean that Islam is peaceful.

All Muslims read the same scriptures. There is no Quran for radicals and another one for 'moderates'.

The Quran is in reality two books. Mekkan and Medinan.
The Mekkan part was from the times when Muhammad was still concilliatory, trying to get followers.
The second part are the Medinan verses which came when he migrated to Medina (Yathrib) and became a warlord with his army of followers.
The Mekkan verses then were abrogated, (annulled)  by the later, more violent warring verses.

Obviously it is the same quran but they interpret it differently because it is a complex, poetic, and self-contradictory book. Same shit happens with the bible and the thousands of christian sects. They maybe not be very rational in their reinterpretations but to claim they do not exist is stupid or that there is one true interpretation is also stupid, that's literally fundamentalist reasoning. Complex books , specially when they are poetic/literary are usually written to be interpreted differently by different people. Just look at any other literary classic. An interpretation of a literary work doesn't have to be and usually is not completely rational since that is not the nature of the work itself being analyzed.

[mauricio]

Obviously it is the same quran but they interpret it differently because it is a complex, poetic, and self-contradictory book. Same shit happens with the bible and the thousands of christian sects. They maybe not be very rational in their reinterpretations but to claim they do not exist is stupid or that there is one true interpretation is also stupid, that's literally fundamentalist reasoning. Complex books , specially when they are poetic/literary are usually written to be interpreted differently by different people. Just look at any other literary classic. An interpretation of a literary work doesn't have to be and usually is not completely rational since that is not the nature of the work itself being analyzed.

to expand on this. Even when reading a supposedly clear and objective document like a manual to repair an engine you will easily find yourself confused at how to interpret certain indications and you may ask for help to other people who might read it differently. That's the nature of human language and it's limitations. It is prone to ambiguity.

[Shiranu]

Worse is that they think Islam is perhaps a race, or maybe an ethnicity and therefore any attack on it becomes the work of racists, when in reality, ISLAM is a RELIGION.

I actually want to go back and give this a serious response, even if I am now ignored...

You are accusing an anthropology student of placing Islam into race/ethnicity... concepts that don't exist in my field of study and were debunked years ago. Come on now...

Edit: Also, I see there will be no holding people to equal standards.That's all I wanted to know, and I will drop that train of thought now. It's disappointing, but it is what it is.

Edit Edit: That sounded too much like trying to put the responsibility on others. I apologise for not quoting correctly. That is all.

I won't apoloigise for my response though until I receive an apology for the slew of ad hom attacks which have been exceedingly far and beyond anything I have thrown their way. I think that is fair enough, even if we do not hold both parties to equal standards.

[mauricio]

You are accusing an anthropology student of placing Islam into race/ethnicity... concepts that don't exist in my field of study and were debunked years ago. Come on now...

In what sense does race not exist?

[Shiranu]

In what sense does race not exist?

Genetically, there is nothing that separates us into "different" humans. You cant go by skin tone; at what point does "black" stop being "black" or "white" stop being "white"? As for other traits, such as "big lips" or a wide nose, that is not tied into skin colour either. If you lined up 400 people and put them in order of skin color, lip size, nose width, eye shape, whatever... the middle would be hard to classify as one "race" or another, and it would be hard to draw a line where race 1, 2, 3 etc. starts and ends.

That is assuming everyone is purely from "race" A, B, C, D... but the vast majority of us are a mix of several "races" because humans love to fuck everything, so it becomes even muddier once you add that into the equation.

[mauricio]

Genetically, there is nothing that separates us into "different" humans. You cant go by skin tone; at what point does "black" stop being "black" or "white" stop being "white"? As for other traits, such as "big lips" or a wide nose, that is not tied into skin colour either. If you lined up 400 people and put them in order of skin color, lip size, nose width, eye shape, whatever... the middle would be hard to classify as one "race" or another, and it would be hard to draw a line where race 1, 2, 3 etc. starts and ends.

That is assuming everyone is purely from "race" A, B, C, D... but the vast majority of us are a mix of several "races" because humans love to fuck everything, so it becomes even muddier once you add that into the equation.

that's literally the continuum fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy) Just because the concept of race is vague it does not mean it does not exist. Saying ''that race does not exist" sounds like a pretty revolutionary and neat idea, but in reality what you probably mean to say is that race is not a valid taxonomic class because it is too vague. Physiological differences between different ancestries certainly exist due to the fact that post human early migrations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_human_migrations) different human populations were isolated from each other for 75000-100000 years. That is center of the concept of race and it is real. Race is a continuum and not an on/off state.

[Shiranu]

that's literally the continuum fallacy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuum_fallacy) Just because the concept of race is vague it does not mean it does not exist. Saying ''that race does not exist" sounds like a pretty revolutionary and neat idea, but in reality what you probably mean to say is that race is not a valid taxonomic class because it is too vague. Physiological differences between different ancestries certainly exist due to the fact that post human early migrations (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_human_migrations) different human populations were isolated from each other for 75000-100000 years. That is center of the concept of race and it is real.

The physiological differences though are far, far, FAAAAR too minute to count them as a different race. We are so overwhelmingly similar it is ridiculous to try to vary us based on physical rather than cultural differences.

[mauricio]

The physiological differences though are far, far, FAAAAR too minute to count them as a different race.

what do you mean by race ?