1. The official Sherdog Store is back! Check it out! » Discuss it here! »
Violence/Genocide: Do not condone violence or genocide on a person or group of people. You are free to attack a person or groups ideas but you are crossing the line when calling for violence. This will be heavily enforced in threads with breaking news involving victims.

Social Political correctness vs Islamophobia - is there compatibility of Islamic and Western values?

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by TheMaster, Jul 20, 2021.

  1. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    Except I pointed out that it wasn't only used in war related crimes by citing the case of a fascist intellectual who was executed for his fascist publications. Is publishing an article and act of war now?

    Another example from during the Civil War is of a man was tried and executed for treason because he pulled down the American flag. How is that any different than executing someone for insulting the Prophet(PBUH)? Then there's the case of the Rabbi who was imprisoned in the US during WWI for handing out anti-war pamphlets, in fact that case is where the "yelling fire in a crowded theater" analogy comes from and its what the judges compared the anti-war activism to. Is that sufficiently war related in your eyes?
    That's a complex question that is answered different based on a whole host of factors. Lots of questions are like that, up to reasonable disagreement.
    Not even sure what you're trying to say here.
    Traitors being executed during the early civil wars in the Ummah doesn't bother me but I don't support Bangladeshi vigilantes butchering atheist bloggers.
    In terms of the claims by the government there are many more than in traditional Islamic societies given the massive expansion and totalitarian nature of the modern bureaucratic state that was created by the West. No one in the Ottoman Empire's heyday was getting fined for tall grass or parking their horse in the wrong spot.

    As for the Muslim communities in the West that form ghettos, are we just going to pretend that they did this all on their own and that the host nations had no part in it? France literally built massive housing projects to stuff these foreigners into so they wouldn't be close to the heart of the city but then created public transport so they could commute and work menial jobs. That whole situation is largely the creation of modern, top-down urban planning and its been a disaster. That's not to say that the Muslim ghettos don't have unique issues but formation of ghettos happens elsewhere as we see in the US with black ghettos and for a similar reason, due to the disaster that is modern urban planning.
     
  2. Ramon Antonio Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,165
    Likes Received:
    2,423
    Lol are you seriously arguing humans were more free in the year 600 because they couldn't get a parking fine?

    Would you seriously say you'd rather live in the year 600?
     
  3. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    They were undoubtedly more free from government yes, that much is hardly uncontroversial and its especially true of tribal communities like Bedouin Arabs or Turkic Steppe tribes.

    Of course there are downsides to that rough and tumble, anarchic lifestyle that most modern people would find not worth the cost of freedom from state control. I personally doubt I am hardcore enough to live of camel milk and dates like the Bedouin tribes or horse blood and field mice like the Steppe tribes.
     
  4. Ramon Antonio Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,165
    Likes Received:
    2,423
    Alright I'll grant you that a Bedouin in 600 was more free from government than someone living in a Western (or non-Western) governed state in 2021. Not sure what this does for your argument of whether Islam fits into MODERN Western society though as Bedouins wouldn't fit in very well. I could also mention how free the Vikings were compared to today, but they wouldn't fit in either.

    I'm not even sure what your point is in making all these silly comparisons. Even Christians from 600 (or 1600 for that matter) wouldn't fit into today's Western society. If Islam is willing to water itself down it can fit. So cherry pick away (like lots of Muslims fortunately are already doing).
     
  5. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    If you're arguing that the Islam is incompatible with the modern West due to the latters heavy emphasis on bureaucratic statism and totalitarian government control then I would agree to some extent.
     
    Denter likes this.
  6. Ramon Antonio Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,165
    Likes Received:
    2,423
    We also don't like cutting off hands for theft or murdering people for speaking against prophets.
     
  7. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    No of course not, that's reserved for people who publish wrongthink articles or who take down the flag. Those are civilized reasons to execute someone.
     
    mjfan23 likes this.
  8. Ramon Antonio Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,165
    Likes Received:
    2,423
    Why do you keep bringing up unrelated matters? Our entire conversation is a giant whataboutism fallacy. Even if Western society found 1000,000,000 justified reasons to kill someone, if we don't agree with doing it in the name of blasphemy or apostacy because we have separation of religion and state and are secular it still makes Islam incompatible with the West. Furthermore, nobody claims that Western law is perfect either.

    Islam however does claim to be the infallible religion sent for ALL of mankind. It simply cannot handle criticism very well. Make a film like 'Life of Brian' about Muhammad and you'd easily see the consequences. If you don't want to spend all your energy making a movie, simply draw a cartoon about him and publish it. You'll see how 'compatible' the West and 'peaceful' Islam really are. Even the 'moderate' Muslims.
     
    Bald1 likes this.
  9. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    Except they're not unrelated, I'm trying to get at the values that you guys claims are incompatible with the West and showing you that there's precedent for it in the West. Whereas you want to myopically focus on this or that minor detail. The same country, France, that claims it supports free speech by displaying cartoons of the Prophet(PBUH) is also cracking down on its own form of wrongthink at the same time. You seem blind to such hypocrisies.

    Like I said though there is truth to the idea that there are serious tensions between Islam and the West given the intense statism and enforced atomization of the West.
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2021
    Anaconda99 likes this.
  10. mjfan23 Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    16,638
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    Location:
    Hall of fame
    Of course you do not get it. If you did you would not keep arguing about it

    To refresh your brain:

    - you say Islam is incompatible with the west cause it doesn’t like people who leave it, or try leaving it.

    - the west here is being defined as North America and Europe

    - two regions shaped strongly on genocide and religious cleansing where is it is a documented fact that you were killed if you were not Catholic or Christian enough.

    - it’s pretty hypocritical to say a religion that’s perceived to be rigid and not compromising is out of place in a society formed on rigidity and intolerance lol
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2021
    Khabib Khanate likes this.
  11. TheMaster Take The Road To Reality

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,132
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    The fact that you need to look at wartime doctrine to compare with the rule about 'apostasy' ,when very obviously allegience to the enemy side or desertion were considered treason and warranted death penalty is telling.
    So are we to look at some Islamic laws as similar to people in a wartime environment from hundreds of years ago, which they may be holding to now? I'm not claiming that is what you are saying but the comparison you bring up implies this.
    The familar "I don't know, I'm not a scholar".

    Well shouldnt you know? Like isn't a big deal to know if you or someone you knows want to leave Islam today the 'scholarly' opinion might be that you should be killed?
    Perhaps there is just so much fear in that community that such a thought wouldn't arise or would be kept secret so the issue isn't considered to be serious. I think this is likely the case although there was some seemingly more optimistic views in this shared by Azam.

    You also try to to minimize it saying 'even if the penalty is death there is a chance to repent'
    I.e. coercian to the belief under the threat of death.

    Most of the time it's communities and families who act on or make threats and they are not scholars, they just have a general obedience mindset which Islam fosters and the idea that the person leaving the faith is bringing 'shame on the family'.

    The example of the recent beheading of the gay guy in Iran by his own family shows this. The guy was literally a few days from leaving the country where they wouldn't ever have to see him again, but no, those hellholes had to kill him first. Yes, again we are trying to exclude Islamic countries from the picture to give at least a chance for a fair assessment of Islam in the west, but this is an example of how attitudes that are prevalent drive things not some scholarly opinion.

    Since we are talking about volent and coercive religious traditions that were practiced centures ago but may survive until now, is there anywhere else among any other religons where this happens?

    Islam is actually the youngest of the 'Five great religions' and yet I can't think of a case where in any of the others there has been enforced penalty of death for leaving the religion for hundreds of years. Certainly in religions like Buddhism it never existed at all even though that was widespread for hundreds of years in Pakistan, Afghanistan and parts of Iran before Islam.

    The closest I could think of in modern times comparably is some Hindu inter-Caste violence. But even this is also a social issue not really religious. And as far a I know not something they have exported to Western countries when they move there.
     
  12. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    You never responded to my other post but now you want to come in here and snipe at a post I made that wasn't even directed at you. Like I said, you pretend to be this "good faith", "just asking questions" guy but just from your behavior its clear from the outset you were operating in bad faith against me. You act like you have the right to interrogate me here while dodging the stuff I say in response, why should I answer your long, rambling posts?

    Buzz off dude, as I said earlier you're just like that sea lion from the comic.
    [​IMG]
     
    m25105 likes this.
  13. TheMaster Take The Road To Reality

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,132
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    Which comment are your referring to? Will be happy to respond.
    I think some of your points have been valid and some not some much. Don't feel you are responding to me personally just see it as clarifying points.
    And isn't the whole idea of a forum thread that multiple people can respond to a comment by anyone? That's the whole idea of an open discussion.
     
  14. Denter Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    14,351
    Likes Received:
    1,198
    Location:
    Houston
    Unity against what? Every identity is about exclusion as well as inclusion. Mindless inclusion is the ideology of a bus stop.

    I've got more in common with a traditional Muslim than with most of my countrymen. There's something there, we just don't have a word and a concept yet.
     
    Khabib Khanate likes this.
  15. TheMaster Take The Road To Reality

    Joined:
    May 25, 2002
    Messages:
    5,132
    Likes Received:
    4,536
    I take it you are referring to this post so I will respond here.

    I don't see you as an enemy far from it, I think that moderate Muslims like you are needed to be a relative voice of reason and integration for that community.
    As well as being culturally integrated you appear to have enough traditional beliefs where the hardliners couldn't dismiss you easily or call you a fake or say you were excessively cherry picking your beliefs.

    That said, it's also a point where when we get into some of these deeper discussions on these issue there may be some disagreement which is why it is good to air them.
    So that's obviously why not just myself but others are keen to ask and discuss these issues with you, probably the first time alot of people would have been able to enage directly with a Muslim on these issues which is one of the beauties of an open forum and surely a good thing.

    As to your points about groups with low trust levels and collective action and the phenomena of some muslim groups and widespread sexual incidents in western countries, I would agree somewhat.

    You cited the example of the original Sicilian crime gangs being similar and insular.

    Of course it's also a result of the liberal and less authoritarian governments in the west not punishing it as much, there was a case where one of the Rotherham abusers was released just a few years after conviction and bumped into a former victim in a supermarket. So it's also the fault of the excessively leniant justice systems and any criminal groups, muslim or otherwise exploiting this with less fear then they should have about consequences.
     
  16. Ramon Antonio Black Belt

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    7,165
    Likes Received:
    2,423
    We are talking about the modern West. I did not know that was not blatantly obvious to anyone reading this thread.

    Christians from the year 600 or 1300 etc. don’t fit into modern western society either. Only watered down versions of religion can still fit.
     
    SanchoMF likes this.
  17. mjfan23 Gold Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2005
    Messages:
    16,638
    Likes Received:
    4,672
    Location:
    Hall of fame
    Which basically leads to the very logical conclusion that I have been saying over and over ( while this thread is focusing a narrow islamophobic scope): no religion but the religion of sheep and big tech is welcomed in the woke era! We still have a Catholic president and a Supreme Court willing to revisit the abortion bans but In a few decades our leaders will look like the new FBI recruitment ads featuring very unique individuals
     
    Khabib Khanate likes this.
  18. Azam Brown Belt

    Joined:
    May 10, 2011
    Messages:
    2,663
    Likes Received:
    322
    Location:
    London
    Back in my day (not even that far back) beatings were common for a lot less than apostasy. Usually it was deserved (for being naughty).

    The issue I have with the scenario you're painting is that it's specific and from what I know not particularly common. Like you said you get a mix with Muslims and you do get strict/conservative families but many of these families would not act to the point of physically attacking or threatening violence for a son/daughter that no longer wants to be Muslim. Their responses might range from disapproving to ostracization. Physical abuse imo is rare.

    Should families ostracize a family member because of their personal choice? It's not really my place to tell them what to do or insert my morality/views into it. Everyone is an adult and entitled to react/respond the way they want (exception being violence).

    Personally would I ostracize a family member - no. But I might not approve of their lifestyle choices (depending on what they are) and whether I would want what I deem a negative influence around my kids (I think every parent is entitled to do this).

    In regards to people that I know that have been ostracized for being non-practicing - I know no one who's had that happen to them. The only thing I have really heard/seen is someone being "excommunicated" from the family by marrying someone their parents disapprove of (both boy & girl).

    I do agree most don't bother telling their families about not believing in it - but because they don't want to deal with their parents hassling them or trying to encourage them to "get back on the path" so to speak. It's not because they fear beaten abused - I'm sure a few might but the majority probably don't want to deal with the aggro.



    Yeah thats the thing - it's the vocal minority of dipshits that pressure or aggro these ex-Muslims and hassle them. Usually they have extremist leanings. In an ideal world they need to be told to stfu and keep their opinions to themselves - especially when no one is asking you what you think.



    Human unity since we're all human beings.

    Not sure about you but I have friends from all different walks of life: different ethnicities, backgrounds, religions etc.

    We have way more in common with one another than not.

    Unity against people who spread discord/enmity between people for their own motives.

    A little bit of compassion, tolerance and patience would go a long way in solving many of these divisive problems that culminate from selfish greedy evil human beings - unfortunately we have a lot of those people in positions of power.
     
  19. SanchoMF Equally Useless

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    3,151
    Likes Received:
    1,640
    Location:
    La France Glorieuse!
    Do you think that I support people being persecuted over political views, let alone getting whacked over them? Nothing that I've said should make you think so.
    We're talking about a specific topic of killing someone in the name of religion for them denouncing their faith.
    In our context you say it was OK because the text related to it was written at a time of war and your interpretation says that it was a wartime rule, comparable to treason or desertion.
    I can actually entertain that as somewhat comparable reference.

    However I still didn't get a straight answer from you regarding if death for apostasy is OK :
    You say it's not OK if a crowd carries it out in rage (like some blogger getting lynched over atheism etc.) only to refer again to the time of warlords and desertion/treason being relevant here, only leaving the door open for basically Islamic courts to dish out death sentences for apostasy.
    Are you OK with death sentences for apostasy, in today's world, sentenced by anyone?

    Thanks
     
  20. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,749
    Likes Received:
    14,817
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    Kinda annoying that you guys feel so entitled to interrogate me, going through my posts line by line and extracting uncharitable interpretations, but when I turn that approach back at you, you guys clutch your pearls and act dumbfounded.

    The disconnect between what you guys seem to think Shariah courts were for and what they were actually historically used for is just so wide that its hard to have a clear conversation about what the historical record actually tells us about Shariah. You guys are constantly complaining about death penalty for this or that but when you actually read scholarship that pours over Shariah court records you find that these courts were mostly used for arbitrating marriage, divorce, and inheritance as well as being used to manage charitable endowments with, as far as I have read, virtually no record of any consistent application of Hudud punishments. I have read more specifically about the Eastern Mediterranean in the early modern period and I can't say I have ever read of Hudud being applied in that time period by some official Shariah court. Here's a clip from the wiki article on Hudud
    Its most likely the case that more people have been subjected to Hudud since 1979 than in the entire period beforehand. So maybe ask yourself why there is virtually no record of a consistent Hudud regime in premodern times but after the onset of modernity in the Islamic world and the adoption of the Western nation-state model and all the institutions and social practices that come with we somehow see Hudud come out of nowhere.

    Why do you think that is?
     
    RabbitPunch36 likes this.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.