Whever the anti-Islamic crowd would have one think, Islam isn't the main problem in the E.U.

[MrScorpio]

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2015/01/08/3609796/islamist-terrorism-europe/

[seveneyes]

1. The distinction a victim thereof can not live with

[Joel thakkar]

2. It's Good that they have good security

as they arrests 100s of suspected terrorists every year even before they commit religiously motivated terrorist attacks. Thus, it is very low percentage in the actual attack numbers.



Thus, just because they are stopped before the attack..doesn't mean they are gone..also this report separates right wing extremism but i bet many right wing extremist may be Christian fundamentalists.

[Vartra]

3. "Terrorism"?

What makes you think "terrorism" is the most important damaging expression of religionist ideology?

Child abuse, anti-gay bigotry, violence against women, demands for censorship and other repressive laws not on the radar for you at all?

[MrScorpio]

4. I take this to mean that you have a lot of problems with Islamic people...

All one and one half billion plus of them, from every denomination perhaps?

[Vartra]

6. I think religion leads to the problems I listed

...and islam is a contributor. "Terrorism", is only part of the problem, even when it's honestly quantified.

Do you think I shouldn't be allowed to oppose illiberal ideologies?

Do you think we should turn a blind eye to child abuse, anti-gay bigotry, violence against women, demands for censorship and other repressive laws when carried out under cover of far-fetched supernatural "god" claims?

[MrScorpio]

7. Do you think that that stuff is exclusive to only Muslims?

Don't we in the Christian west need to clean our own houses before we start throwing stones through the windows of others?

[Vartra]

8. I've already stated the opposite.

What's this "we" nonsense? I'm no christian, and Enlightenment is not the exclusive property of "the west".

Do you think we should hide our opposition to harmful illiberal ideologies if they're presented under cover of a "god" myth?

[MrScorpio]

9. What I do object to is the painting of one and half billions Muslims as the problem...

AS if all Muslims everywhere are a threat.

It's not like we haven't heard this kind of rhetoric before about others.

[Vartra]

10. Your objection is irrelevant to my post

...since that's not what I said. The only person talking about "all muslims everywhere" is you.

Do you think it's OK to oppose harmful illiberal ideologies even if they're presented under cover of a "god" myth?

[MrScorpio]

11. Oh... So you're only talking about the "bad" Muslims...

Well, yeah, of course there are bad Muslims, just as there are are bad religious fundies of every stripe.

So, what makes "bad" Muslims any worse that any other "bad" fundie?

[Vartra]

12. I'm talking about the illiberal ideologies of religion and islam.

I have not characterised any person as "bad". That's your word, not mine.

Do you think it's OK to oppose such harmful illiberal ideologies, even when presented under cover of a "god" myth?

[MrScorpio]

13. I classify that as a corruption of religious belief, not the problem stemming from belief itself...

I'm not not even religious my damn self, but that doesn't mean that I think it necessary to piss on all religions.

You're going to find both bad and good followers of every so-called religion on this planet, as well as bad and good atheists and agnostics.

Human beings suck. I don't think that this is any secret.

[Vartra]

14. You're dodging the question.

There are many explicit calls in the core texts and current practices of religion for me to be harmed.

Do you think I should stop opposing that illiberal, harmful ideology because of some supernatural "god" myth, or some ropey anonymous stats about "terrorism" (which is a drop in the ocean of the harm that religion does)?

Human beings are great. Religion harms them, and that's a good reason to oppose it.

[MrScorpio]

15. Cherry picking millennia old religious text will render any argument you wish...

I'm more attuned to religious freedom. It's not my place to judge whether or not anyone should or would believe in the God/Gods/Lack of Gods of their choice.

In America and much of the rest of the world, it's live and let live.

You're regarding religious belief as a curse of humanity. I think that humans are genetically predisposed to believe in things that they can't see. Whether or not "god" myth harm us, I don't think that the judgment is in on that. Because, it's always been with us, and in either one way or the other, I'm quite sure that our myths will always be with us.

I suggest that you bone up on your Joseph Campbell.

[Vartra]

16. I haven't "cherry picked" anything.

Nor have I used the idea of a "curse", or objected to others believing any fantasy they choose. I'm talking about specific - and current - harmful ideas and practices of religion which are outside the narrow bracket of "terrorism".


Are you saying I should stop opposing harmful illiberalism if it's presented under cover of a "god" myth? Are you saying religion should be a protected form of political idea?

[Rex]

17. Religion is a protected form of political idea, just look at Indiana.

I have no idea what you two are arguing about, but for me, opposing harmful dogma from any point is a good thing. IMO, religion is a warped version of ritualistic burial humans practiced...before we decide to organize or wanted power over others in mass numbers.

[MrScorpio]

20. Where religious freedom holds sway, no one religion has the power trump any other or lack thereof...

The original Indiana model was a false and unconstitutional one. We all knew that.

[Rex]

22. Well I believe organized religions formed, because the ptb realized they had a new tool

to control the masses. NOT ALL spiritual belief systems are this way, not saying that. Just that modern organized religions still compete with their brand to influence billions of people into believing something I find to be irrational and illogical from the outset.

Yes we all knew the Indiana model was false, but they wanted it anyway and a lot of states have similar laws on the books. Texas (my state) already has such religious protections.

Also I disagree with you in the since that some religions trump others, because they are not just the cultures religion - but their governing body as well.

Of course atheist have nothing to crow about either...Stalin had no problem sending people to the gulag nor did China have a problem killing off political dissenters.

My point is this, I oppose any and all dogma that harms a society overall. I think modern religion and some forms of state are very harmful to their population.

Just look at the 'worship' of money by the church of Wall Street. Need I say more?

[MrScorpio]

18. It's your argument that belief in Islam mandates misogyny, child abuse and other shit...

I get what you're saying.

I just think that it's a ridiculous argument in support of anti-Islamic bigotry.

[Vartra]

19. Wrong.

I'm saying its a harmful illiberal ideology, far beyond your narrow claim about "terrorism". No need to invent things I never said.

Do you think I should stop opposing it because it's political ideas are presented under cover of a "god" myth?

I have not supported "bigotry" of any stripe, and would not do so.

[MrScorpio]

21. I'm a non-religious liberal...

Who thinks that everyone should have the right to believe in whatever they want, just as long as the practice of those beliefs aren't harming anyone else.

That someone could both believe in the "god" myth of their choice and represent a threat, that's just not me.

That's why I oppose theocracy of any type being established in this country.

Now, since the same is general practice of this is well established in most of the West, perhaps you can explain why this is not the case places like the U.S. and the E.U.

I think that this is the point where you should add the "Sharia Law" leg of your argument. Because, without it, your point isn't getting across.

[Vartra]

23. "Sharia" isn't particularly relevant, either.

I really don't care if others want to believe myths or not. Do you think I should stop opposing illiberal ideology when presented under cover of a "god" myth?

Your OP suggests "terror" is a major driver of an EU "anti-muslim crowd", and now you're misdirecting to "sharia". In fact, many people are simply opposing the illiberal politics that are wrapped up in the myth.

Perhaps you should ask some actual EU ex-muslims what makes opposing islam so attractive, rather than accepting assumptions about "terrorism" from sketchy 3rd parties: http://www.councilofexmuslims.com/

[MrScorpio]

24. So now you're going back with the "all Muslims are bad" argument again.

So again I ask you, does that include all of one and one half billion of them, or just the ones you don't like?

[Vartra]

25. Where have I made any such claim?

Do you understand the difference between an ideology and a class of people? I have never used the term "all muslims" in my life - you're fantasising.

Have you ever interacted with an ex-muslim before?

[MrScorpio]

26. Are they like ex-Catholics, ex-Lutherans and ex-Baptists?

Every single Muslim on this planet are not believers of the exact same "illiberal" political ideology.

Why is belief in Islam bad in all cases?

[Vartra]

27. Religion is politics.

Do you oppose Republicanism "in all cases"? Do you think religion should be un-opposed?

I have made no claim about "every single muslim". You're the one making blanket claims about a supposed "anti-islam crowd", which appear to be unsupported.

There is more to oppose than "terrorism" - and plenty of good reasons to leave and to oppose islam. Hiding behind a supernatural myth does not, and should not, grant immunity to opposition.

[MrScorpio]

28. I oppose right wingers in all cases, which would include a good number of Republicans.

When it comes to religion, I regard one's own belief to be an inalienable right.



There are many educated women who are not oppressed by their own belief in Islam. Frankly I don't think that anyone has to right to tell them otherwise when it's their free choice.



You're promoting this narrow-minded and one sided bullshit that living in Islam is a living hell. I just know that it's bullshit



Islam doesn't have a monopoly on "illiberal" oppression and it not a tenet of Islam to oppress.



I just think that your broad-brushing of an entire religion is wrong.

[Vartra]

29. The only one "broad-brushing" is you -

- with your "anti-muslim crowd" nonsense.

Guess what - there are plenty more reasons to oppose islam than "terrorism". Plenty of people have escaped islam because of its illiberal ideologies, and will continue to do so. Do you think we should not be allowed to oppose such illiberal ideology if its wrapped up in a "god" myth?

"Protecting"? From what, exactly? One man's "protecting" is another woman's enclosing.

[MrScorpio]

31. You're making it sound like belief in Islam is just like living in a concentration camp...

That they're enslaved by an ideology wrapped up in their beliefs in a god which you classify as a "myth." The same god that both Jews and Christians believe in, only in their own way.

Other than a few buzz-words, you still haven't made a valid point here.

What's so wrong with Islam and its one and one half billion followers?

[ZombieHorde]

5. Those are also important considerations. nt

[riderinthestorm]

30. Actually this is an important and relevant point

welcome to DU!