lojzelote Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 How ingorant do you have to be to acuse all Muslims of what happened yesterday in Paris? Are all Germans to blame for WWII? Are all Americans to blame for Iraq/Afghanistan? In a topic a bit closer to home, are all Serbs to blame for Srebrenica? Or all Croats for Jasenovac? Acusing all members of one large group, be it nation or religion, for anything can only achieve members of that group getting more and more isolated, which can only lead to them becoming close-minded and more susceptable to manipulation which can only cause further problems. Since you're bringing unrelated subjects into this... Say what you will, Czechoslovakia took this stance after the end of WWII and sent their traditional, millions-counting German minority back to Germany, and it worked out quite well for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It's directed at everyone who said that and there have been a few. If you feel it's directed at you, the chances are it actually is. Yeah, no. Your comment appeared after mine so I asked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trickster Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 ETA: in my view, the single biggest issue with Islam is the belief that the Quran is the word of God direct. Hence, it cannot be changed or questioned. Any attempts to modernize or contextualize it will be met with this sort of toxic shit, therefore, because to their minds, we're editing God (gasp!).Muslims consider all Abrahamic faiths to be corrupted versions of Islam. Abraham, Moses, Jesus,David all apparently preached Islam. But kings and religious authorities apparently modified those versions to suit their need. Hence Muslims are quite paranoid about making any change to their fifteen hundred year old religion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Yeah, so I've been told. I was raised Muslim in Pakistan and believe me, there is a lot of this sort of thinking here. Muslims probably think they're being hella magnanimous by 'recognizing' Jesus, Moses etc. as prophets. What's more logical? That God chose to focus on 1 tiny region for all his 'major' revelations, or that these religions/people borrowed and learned from each other's history, anecdotes and culture? You know, like Christmas being a pagan holiday originally? Sigh. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Trickster,And I belive Crixus' point is that paranoia you mention is damaging Islam. That lslam could use a "reformation". What frightens me about that prospect and what now makes me wonder if the violence of the past few decades is not indicative of the beginnings of such a reformation is the knowledge of how very bloody the Christian reformation in Europe was. I seem to remember reading that whole swaths of central Europe were largely depopulated from the fighting during the "Thirty Years War" between Catholics and Protestants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iceman of the North Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 This morning's papers confirmed what a lot of people here feared; freedom of the press has been compromised by fear of violent reprisal.What exactly are in this morning's papers to confirm this? I have not seen all the papers over here, but of those I have seen, none have exhibited any restrictions on their freedom of press - au contraire. ETA: In the discussion of Islam, and how backward it is, it's interesting to note that several of those belief that we abhor about Islam were quite common in the Christian world within the last Century. People tend to forget that reform and democratization doesn't happen overnight. Last year Norway celebrated the 200th Anniversary of the 'democratic' Constitution, but it would take almost another 100 year before Norway reached what I would describe as fully democratic. For the US it took almost 200 years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Alexander Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I think there is no denying that other religions committed as much or more violence in history, but at this point right now there is no arguing about elephant in the room - only one religion is as populous and resistant to social progress (or what is considered social progress in the west). Which would be fine and dandy if not for globalization. ps: Is US+friends also to blame for misdirected intervention around the world- yes. thanks for demonizing white people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 What exactly are in this morning's papers to confirm this? I have not seen all the papers over here, but of those I have seen, none have exhibited any restrictions on their freedom of press - au contraire. A collective lack of backbone in taking a risk at angering the perpetrators and their supporters is what I was getting at. The Indy did it, and did it well, but were pretty much abandoned by their UK counterparts. Maltaran already linked to the front page of The Independent but they managed to hit back at the attackers without taking action that would offend moderate Muslims, as some people suggested might be an appropriate response but really just drives a wedge between them and non-Muslims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Trickster,And I belive Crixus' point is that paranoia you mention is damaging Islam. That lslam could use a "reformation".What frightens me about that prospect and what now makes me wonder if the violence of the past few decades is not indicative of the beginnings of such a reformation is the knowledge of how very bloody the Christian reformation in Europe was. I seem to remember reading that whole swaths of central Europe were largely depopulated from the fighting during the "Thirty Years War" between Catholics and Protestants. Yup. You'd hope that we've evolved enough for that not to happen again, but I know better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Iceman of the North Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 A collective lack of backbone in taking a risk at angering the perpetrators and their supporters is what I was getting at. The Indy did it, and did it well, but were pretty much abandoned by their UK counterparts. Maltaran already linked to the front page of The Independent but they managed to hit back at the attackers without taking action that would offend moderate Muslims, as some people suggested might be an appropriate response but really just drives a wedge between them and non-Muslims. Interesting. Here's the front page of my local paper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lojzelote Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Yea, I don't care that Christianity was similarly violent hundreds of years ago, what interests me is what is the danger now, in the time I live in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Interesting. Here's the front page of my local paper. I like that one. Here's a link to a tweet that has collated the main UK paper's front pages today: Media Guido's Twitter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ser Scot A Ellison Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Lojzelote,Yea, I don't care that Christianity was similarly violent hundreds of years ago, what interests me is what is the danger now, in the time I live in.If that is directed at me my point is that serious reformation of an Abramic faith may be, inherently, a violent process. Which, frankly as a member of an Abramic faith, doesn't speak terribly well for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crixus Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I agree to an extent. What I would hope is that we can learn from such violent history and not repeat it (highly unlikely I know). I still have to work at myself to not automatically hate anyone with a beard, because I am surrounded by the toxic implications and interpretations of Islam daily. It isn't easy but the alternative is shit, so I persevere. Here, in Pakistan, people like me are the minority, and the bearded ones thrive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Happy Ent Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 Interesting. Here's the front page of my local paper. The problem with this page, and several others, is that they are not Charlie. The only way to be Charlie is to deliberately insult the prophet. Everything else is just cowardice, empty signalling. It takes the name of CH in vain. And yes, I’m a coward as well. I’m a pretty good cartoonist, but I don’t dare drawing Christopher Hitchens anally raping the Prophet, which is what is called for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJDonegal Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 And yes, I’m a coward as well. I’m a pretty good cartoonist, but I don’t dare drawing Christopher Hitchens anally raping the Prophet, which is what is called for. Even at the risk of angering the moderates? This wasn't an attack by all Muslims; it was a couple of crazy Muslims warping what Islam is and using it to justify murder to themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Once and Future King Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 I first want to aknowledge the 12 dead at Charlie Hebdo : They will be missed. It's already been mentioned but the 2 main suspects have not yet been aprehended and nobody was shot. There have apparently been other violence during the night : 2 cops were shot near Paris this morning and a bomb exploded near a Mosque in Villefranche-sur-Saône, although potential connections between those and what happened at Charlie Hebdo are unknown. I think they were perfectly aware of what the consequences of their actions might be and they accepeted this risk. They recieved daily death threats and the locals of the journal had already been attacked in the past. This fact doesn't justify what happened to them as Werthead rightly says : I heard a 2-month old interview from Cabu this morning on the radio and he indeed faced countless trials, most of which he lost, except one against Jean-Marie Le Pen where the tribunal aknowledge his "right to caricature". They do not leave it to the first world nations, and muslim countries are the first to suffer from muslim attacks. See the attack on the school in Pakistan just a week ago, the nigerian school girls that were abducted and forced to marry or the bombing that occur daily in Middle East countries, like in Yemen just yesterday.Or maybe sadly we are too used to hearing this shit over the news every day to pay any real attention to it anymore... It is absolutely true that western countries have armed terrorist groups and supported them (the taliban in Afghanistan being a prime example) when they had an interest in it. However, I do not think that the military response is appropriate as it sows even more chaos. You are wrong on that (bolded part). Charlie Hebdo mocked every one and in particular every religion, I don't see why Islam should have had a different treatment from others. Things indeed exacerbated in 2006 when they published the danish cartoons to denounce censorship. And no, the publishers were not at fault, they were doing their job according to their conscience.Another thing with which I completely disagree is your take that they should have been armed and ready to defend themselves. France is not the US, and as another French stated upthread I don't want France to change on that respect. People are not allowed to carry weapons just like that. They had policemen charged with their protection. One of them was killed as well (as far as I understand the second policeman was just in the street doing his patrol).Agreed on the last paragraph though. I didn't know Christopher Hitchens but I certainly do agree with that. What bothers me now is that I feel that religions are becoming more and more radical and violent. The surge against the gay marriage has reinforced catholic radicals, and violence against homosexuals has apparently risen in France. My mom was from a non religious jewish family and I also have a feel there is a radicalisation of Jewish people in France. I certainly hope I'm wrong and things will get better.What do you mean by a radicalization of jewish people in france Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salafi Stannis Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 The prophet Muhammad (pbuh) said that Muslims living in non Muslim countries have a type of "contract" with that country to live by it's rules. Also, extremists existed during his time, and he said that they would always exist, and he described them as "the worst of creation". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arakan Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 It is unbelievable. In the year 2015, in the heart of europe, people get murdered for drawing a caricature. Those muslim fundamentalists are just ridiculous. Monty Python style ridiculous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Once and Future King Posted January 8, 2015 Share Posted January 8, 2015 How ingorant do you have to be to acuse all Muslims of what happened yesterday in Paris?Are all Germans to blame for WWII?Are all Americans to blame for Iraq/Afghanistan?In a topic a bit closer to home, are all Serbs to blame for Srebrenica? Or all Croats for Jasenovac? Acusing all members of one large group, be it nation or religion, for anything can only achieve members of that group getting more and more isolated, which can only lead to them becoming close-minded and more susceptable to manipulation which can only cause further problems.What do you mean are all americans to blame for Iraq and Afghanistan? If you mean for the war than I would answer yes as the vast majority of the public supported the invasion. (Although it has no business being on this list)Same goes for Germany in WW2. The vast majority of Germans supported the rise Nazis, and many historical scholars blame Germany as a whole (along with poland) for the atrocities committed in the holocaust. I am not saying all muslims are responsible for the attack but to wash their collective hands particularly based off the misguided proof you gave is ridiculous Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.