42
43

Lets talk about Islamophobia on SRS (self.SRSDiscussion)

submitted by Obviouslyfakered

sorted by:
best
best
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]boatzzs [score hidden]

The problem you really have to accept is that if you have it in your mind that the majority can be convinced that compared to other Western Religions, Islam is a special snowflake in terms of not perpetuating stone age beliefs that come off as brutal, racist, and sexist within its holy scriptures then you're sorely mistaken. I think most of the people in this kind of community are fully capable of not treating followers of Islam like shit simply because they're Muslim, but I'd say a majority of us are non-religious simply due to the fact that religion is a major tool used by bigots to perpetuate the sorts of injustice and inequality most of us are obviously against. What this means is that, while many of us are capable of recognizing that Islam is no worse than Christianity or Judaism and that Muslims are treated quite poorly in a number of western contexts...that doesn't mean Islam is something we're just going to accept as not inherently harmful due to the simple fact that it's an organized religion that bases its sense of morality in the 7th century, which is about as problematic as other organized religions.

It's not a hatred of Muslims or Islam; you cannot just say we don't like Islam simply and we're somehow incapable of understanding it. Many of us "understand" Christianity yet still want absolutely nothing to do with it because we see the type of abuse capable of being rationalized from that sort of religious world view which values the morality of scripture over more modern progressive views of equality. I don't like that you've gotten hateful messages over your faith, but you can't possibly believe that your faith in Islam makes you a better feminist or the like than anybody else who is a non-Islam. I sometimes see that subtle argument being thrown out in this community under the guise that we're too intolerant of Islam compared to any other major organized religion, but the truth is that there'd probably be just as much resistance if you were telling us to lay off of Christianity.

EDIT: fixed errors

EDIT: Ugh, more errors. Just woke up.

[–]Obviouslyfakered[S] [score hidden]

Okay, here let me tell you something important.

Christianity. Judiasim. Islam. They are not based on 7th century morality. They are evolving, changing everything based on reinterpretations of scripture, culture, beliefs, and people. It is a way of life. The fact is, the Quran has dozens of passages discussing how to treat your camel, and how it affects your life, so religious Scholars, instead of assuming cars are blasphemous, instead apply those ideas to cars. The religion changes based on the world itsself, and its how its always been, its only recently that the reactionary element has taken root in areas of Islam, which calls for a return to the "olden" times that never really existed.

And see, this post is what I'm talking about. You assume that we base our morality on how people in the 7th century would act, but the thing is, thats almost never been the case. Throughout Islamic history, its always been up to the Muslims at the time, to see how to interpret and apply religious teachings. It may seem arbitrary, but people spent their entire lives learning, and reading, and arguing, and debating, and understanding, and theres always been resistance to change, but Islam changed regardless.

And you know what, I never claimed to be a better Feminist then somebody who wasn't Muslim. The idea that I'm a "better" feminist is pretty bullshit in the first place, since gender equality means different things in different areas. Its why Slut Walks among African American women are seen as detrimental, and why in France keeping Hijab is very much a feminist issue. Muslim Feminists, fight for gender Equality, in the ways that matter to them, not the based on what matters to you, and maybe you should understand that, instead of implying that they are some how worse feminists because they're Muslim.

And you know what, I never said don't discuss Islam, I never said it was a "special snowflake" but I did say don't pretend you understand it, or pretend you come from a position of authority, when you clearly don't. And, I hate to seem combative, but you don't. You don't have the context, and you don't seem to actually care about the religion its self (Which is perfectly okay by the way), and you seem to think that the Religion is incapable of change. This is why I tell you to listen, instead of telling me what my Religion is about.

And don't pretend you were asking questions either, you could have asked me about how Islam is used to perpetuate Bigotry, and I would have loved to discuss it, and discuss the controversy surrounding it, but instead, you pretty much just implied that Bigotry is the only thing that Islam and other religions are used to perpetuate.

Finally, maybe I don't see it because I'm not Christian, but I don't hear half the shit I hear about Christianity on SRS, or Reddit in general, that I hear about Islam. Most of the stuff you hear about Christianity is always framed in such a "Look at these dumb Christians" fashion, as opposed to the "Look at these evil backwards Muslims". Maybe I'm wrong, maybe it feels like people are implying Christians are evil too, but I don't think you'd imply that I'm somehow less Feminist if I claimed to be Christian and a Feminist.

Edit: Also, in case you didn't get it. I identify culturally as a Muslim, I am not a practicing Muslim. When I say we, I'm discussing people who either practice Islam, or grew up with a predominately Muslim Background.

[–]boatzzs [score hidden]

They are not based on 7th century morality

You're right actually; they're based on far older codes of morality that were only written down when each religion was established and organized. You say religion evolves, but scripture does not evolve. In fact it is the very nature of scripture to be the unchanging word of God, to not ever be altered and edited as to deviate from its original message from God. Any world view which takes religious scripture as the building blocks to which to create itself is at extreme risk of being problematic simply due to the fact that texts such as the Qu'ran, Bible, and the Torrah include a plethora of views that are absolutely unacceptable by today's sensibilities. You're trying to explain to me that religious people can be good people despite some of the more unsavory interpretations of religious scripture out there, but that's well known and really not the issue at hand.

And see, this post is what I'm talking about. You assume that we base our morality on how people in the 7th century would act, but the thing is, thats almost never been the case. Throughout Islamic history, its always been up to the Muslims at the time, to see how to interpret and apply religious teachings. It may seem arbitrary, but people spent their entire lives learning, and reading, and arguing, and debating, and understanding, and theres always been resistance to change, but Islam changed regardless.

Do I need to criticize these points first by replacing all mentions of Islam and Muslims with Christianity and Christians before you realize that I'm not picking on Islam because Islam is Islam? Are you then going to try and tell me that Muslims don't try to live their lives according to the moral codes laid down by Mohammad, peace be upon him, as best as they can just like Christians don't try to live their lives according to the moral codes laid down by Jesus as best as they can? No, I think that's hard to refute. I'm fully aware that religious people will cherry pick sections of religious scripture that resonate with them the most regardless of the time period, but this cherry picking is why so many people in social justice circles want personally nothing to do with Islam; if you can cherry pick the good parts of a 1-2 thousand year old bit of scripture, then you can just as easily cherry pick the bigoted and hateful and seriously messed up parts of that scripture as well in order to justify whatever you damn well please in the present. This is not unique to Islam, and I must admit that for what's probably the 4th time.

Is your point that you take issue with the notion that some in this community may have expressed which is that Islam is somehow more problematic than other Abrahamic religions? If that's the key point you're trying to communicate, then of course I'm on your side. But don't expect a lot of people here to be particularly accepting of religion just on principle. I'll flat out acknowledge the mistreatment and racism that Muslims face from the West, but I still think Islam is fundamentally a hindrance to social justice just as much as other religions are simply because I don't think social justice is compatible with a system that creates morality from a scripture through interpretations of God's word that can never ever be falsified with worldly arguments; a system which basically all religions use.

[–]Obviouslyfakered[S] [score hidden]

You're right actually; they're based on far older codes of morality that were only written down when each religion was established and organized. You say religion evolves, but scripture does not evolve. In fact it is the very nature of scripture to be the unchanging word of God, to not ever be altered and edited as to deviate from its original message from God.

This again. Okay, let me say this now. The Quran, Torah, and Bible, are not actually the only part of the Religion. The way they are interpreted, which parts are focused on, which parts are seen as important and which parts are stories, and even what the morals of each story mean, change constantly.

And you know what, Religious people ARE good, often because of their interpretations of their religion. And just because there are unsavory interpretations, it doesn't mean thats what the entire religion is, or even if thats what the religion is now. I mean, there was a time when regular Christians were forbidden from reading the Bible, because it was sacred, and only priests were allowed to. Hell, in Islam, there was a time when it was forbidden to draw anything, not just the Prophet, and an other time when being a Scientist was conisdered being the closest you can possibly be to god.

I'm tired of people assuming they understand the religion better then the practitioners. The practitioners define the religion, not you, not the observers, the practitioner. I can guarantee you, that no matter what moral you can give me, there is a religious scholar that will claim the opposite is how a Muslim should conduct themselves or should believe. So, don't give me this bullshit about the divine mandate of the scripture, when you don't even believe that it was God who wrote it.

cherry pick sections of religious scripture that resonate with them the most regardless of the time period, but this cherry picking is why so many people in social justice circles want personally nothing to do with Islam; if you can cherry pick the good parts of a 1-2 thousand year old bit of scripture, then you can just as easily cherry pick the bigoted and hateful and seriously messed up parts of that scripture as well in order to justify whatever you damn well please in the present. This is not unique to Islam, and I must admit that for what's probably the 4th time.

If the Religious people themselves only care about the good parts, why the hell do you, the person who doesn't practice, care about the bad parts? And hell, show me these horrible parts. I want to see with my own eyes, that you actually know what the issues are with Islam, because I can think of a few, but thats with my context as somebody who has spent his life learning about the religion. Pretty much all of your examples, I can almost guarentee, are not from observation, but from second or third hand knowledge, many of them coming from people like Hitchens or Bill Mar, and other anti-theists, who couldn't give two shits about actually representing the religion properly.

And finally, you want to know something. I'm very big on social Justice. Huge in fact. I spend far too much time thinking about it.. And I do not see it as a hindrance at all. I do not see religion as a problem to Social justice in anway. I mean, we can all see Reddit here right and now, thinking the exact same bigotted shit that religious people are thinking many times, despite the majority being Atheist. Can you really tell me if we got rid of all religions, that this would change in anyway, despite the fact that we have numerous examples of Atheist states (like Russia, and China) being just as homophobic, racist, and just against social justice as any religious country or state?

[–]boatzzs [score hidden]

If the Religious people themselves only care about the good parts, why the hell do you, the person who doesn't practice, care about the bad parts?

Because too many religious people think the bad parts are convincing enough to kill and oppress others over. Look at the world around you. I'm not going to pretend that religion isn't an enabling force for those elite who wish to control the masses, be it priest, pope, cleric, rabbi, imam, or god-fearing politician. You can pretend I'm trying to get rid of religion if you want. You ever notice how people who are quite religious blame the bad things done in the world on humanity but attribute the good things only to their God? It's as if all religions are religions of peace. If that's the case then why are so many people killed by peace every single day? You want to assume I have naive dreams about getting rid of religion and thus saving the world from bigotry and violence? Okay, I'll let you have that strawman, but don't fucking bullshit me anymore by implying the opposite as if religion has been helpful, as if no significant amount of people are still oppressed by it to this very day.

This again. Okay, let me say this now. The Quran, Torah, and Bible, are not actually the only part of the Religion. The way they are interpreted, which parts are focused on, which parts are seen as important and which parts are stories, and even what the morals of each story mean, change constantly.

A religion is whatever it needs to be to escape the criticism of those who question it on a particular day and time. When Muslims heroically guard Egyptian Christians from being mobbed during conflict, that's a symbol of Islamic peace (nevermind the Muslims trying to kill the Christians). When a Christian fundamentalist murders an abortion doctor, that's just some fringe idiot that doesn't represent anything about Christianity. A religion is defined as the best that ever was and will be so that it will never be properly pinned down and analyzed. A religion is barely an organization; it's nebulous, has no tangible borders, and is so loosely interpretable by the masses so it draws in as many people under its wings as it possibly can. These are institutions which do not value reason; they value the strength of those who speak the loudest and hit the hardest. I don't care to be a part of such a thing, personally. Your spiritual inclinations are your right, and they do me no harm. But these institutions seek to do me harm so long as I am not a part of the one who is currently winning.

[–]JeuneSovietique [score hidden]

Because too many religious people think the bad parts are convincing enough to kill and oppress others over.

Same with nationalism. I have yet to see an anti-nationalism circlejerk crop up on reddit, though I'd love to.

[–]itsreallyfuckingcold [score hidden]

Same with nationalism

same with pretty much anything if its taken far or extreme enough

[–]afdsfasd [score hidden]

So you think that because some people interpret things to the radical extreme, then its okay to hate the entire thing? Is it okay to say feminism is bad because of a small percentage of feminists who take it too far? Is it okay to say soccer is bad because a small number of soccer fans take it too far?

When you say things like

or the like than anybody else who is a non-Islam.

it comes off like you don't know what you're talking about. What is a "non-islam", how can a person be "non-Islam"? Do you even know the words you are using?

Its fine critiquing anything, nothing should be immune from criticism, but people should actually learn about what it is they are criticising and understand it, instead of just hearing what others have to say about it. So if someone says "I think Christianity is bad but I don't understand it", or "I think Islam is bad but I don't understand it", it kinda comes off showing they are pretty dumb. No offence intended.

[–]boatzzs [score hidden]

So you think that because some people interpret things to the radical extreme, then its okay to hate the entire thing? Is it okay to say feminism is bad because of a small percentage of feminists who take it too far? Is it okay to say soccer is bad because a small number of soccer fans take it too far?

I agree with the core philosophy of feminism; I don't agree with the core philosophy of religion, which says that we should have faith in God's commands which are to be interpreted from a book that advocates a number of things that I find horrifying. I don't agree with a philosophy that clings to these words so insistently that one has to try very hard and be very creative to interpret God's word in such a way that it's still compatible with social justice. Maybe it's not compatible with social justice; maybe it's just the outdated morality from the past that has no business being put on a pedestal for any of us to follow as long as we're concerned with fighting bigotry and oppression. Radical feminists don't make me doubt feminism because feminism can actually be defined and it's a premise I actually agree with. With all due respect to religious followers, how in the fuck can I agree with the premise of your religion when that premise seems to change depending on who you talk to? How can I stand behind a premise that is fundamentally incapable of being examined through reason by virtue of the fact that the authority of its claims are attributed to some divine authority that any sociopath can claim they have access to?

it comes off like you don't know what you're talking about. What is a "non-islam", how can a person be "non-Islam"? Do you even know the words you are using?

You damn well knew that it was probably a typo when you this up. It's easier to get away with grasping at straws when it's not obvious that's what you're doing.

Its fine critiquing anything, nothing should be immune from criticism, but people should actually learn about what it is they are criticising and understand it, instead of just hearing what others have to say about it.

The nuances of Middle Eastern and North African culture escape most Westerners. But Islam is a religion we can understand simply due to the fact that Christianity and Islam are ideological brothers of Abrahamic tradition, we've had our western religious institution be at war with their religious institution for perhaps a thousand years, and faithful followers of Islam use exactly the same rhetorical claims about and defenses of their religion that Christians do; we are well equipped to handle reasonable criticism of the Islamic institution, as westerners, because that institution operates exactly in the same manner as the Christian institution when it comes to reacting to criticism. Do not be dishonest and try to confuse the discussion to be both about the various cultures that practice Islam and the scriptural and philosophical thread that ties them together as a religious institution; that thread is what we are discussing, and I'll be damned if I'm going to let people get away with sidestepping criticisms of religious institutions by pointing out that I am not allowed to do so because I'm not an expert on every single culture under the wing of Islam; by that rationale not even most Muslims are qualified to speak on the matter. What exactly is the premise of Islam that's so different from other western religions that would be so agreeable to social justice causes that we shouldn't simply dismiss that institution and its school of thought? Why is it assumed that we would treat Muslims poorly just because we personally disagree with the mission of the religious institution they find spiritual comfort from?

[–]afdsfasd [score hidden]

I don't think you understand the core philosophy of religion at all. If you did, you wouldn't say its incompatible with social justice. The core philosophy of almost of every religion is to be a good person.

Any sociopath can claim any ideology and take it to extremes and become hateful. Religion can be used as an avenue for hateful people to carry out hate, as can any ideology. It doesn't make it inherently bad.

The fact that so many people choose to attack the religion of Islam instead of attacking the attacks against Muslim people shows to me they don't give a crap about the people and just want to shit on the foreign people's societies while pretending like they are empathetic to them.

I'm not a Muslim or a believer in Islam by any means, but I know dozens of Muslims and I've studied it, and I actually understand Islam, unlike you. How many Muslims have you met? How many do you know? Have you ever spoken with a single Imam in your life? Or is your knowledge of Islam purely from what you hear in the western media?

Are there bad things written in the Quran? Undoubtedly. But if a non-hateful muslim reads them, they won't automatically become hateful and violent. And if a already hateful and violent person reads them, they wont become any more hateful and violent, they just use them as an excuse and vehicle to carry out their hate and violence, which was pre existing.

Most people are smart enough to filter out the bad stuff, and know how to take home the good messages, and know how to accept the overall good theme of it.

The core philosophy of religion is to do good things to others and to believe in God. You might not agree with that, you might think that believing in God is inherently immoral, you might be an Ayn Rand follower who believes that you shouldn't try to do good things to others but should try to only do good things on yourself. Thats fine, feel free to disagree. But I don't think any person can argue that that core philosophy is bad or creates bad people, even if you disagree with it.

[–]boatzzs [score hidden]

The core philosophy of almost of every religion is to be a good person.

I don't need God to tell me to be a good person. There are many like me in this regard and this is exactly why we don't accept religions such as Islam or Christianity.

Most people are smart enough to filter out the bad stuff, and know how to take home the good messages, and know how to accept the overall good theme of it.

In other words, religious people who are clever ignore parts of the word of God when it's convenient and reinterpret his word when it's necessary. What's the point of a belief system like this if not to manipulate the masses?

The core philosophy of religion is to do good things to others and to believe in God. You might not agree with that, you might think that believing in God is inherently immoral, you might be an Ayn Rand follower who believes that you shouldn't try to do good things to others but should try to only do good things on yourself.

"You don't believe in God like I do so I'm going to assume you're linked to this incredibly questionable person who most already believe has a terrible and horrifying world view so that I can dismiss any notion that you are capable of morality like us religious people"

This discussion is done. You're not here to have a discussion; you're here to preach. What it means to be a good person from a religious perspective is highly variable, but it lies in how one follows the commands of your God, as his commands are thought to be the key to being a good person. It's a shame this interpretation changes depending on who is holding the scripture and who is not.

[–]afdsfasd [score hidden]

Just like interpretation changes of feminism depending on who is holding the ideology. Many people take feminism to hateful levels, many people take belief in God to hateful levels. Most of them who do were hateful to begin with.

Btw, many religious people understand that their holy books were written by people and not by God, which is why they can be selective about it. There's nothing wrong with being selective and distinguishing the good from the bad, only a fascist would be non-selective and demand an all or nothing policy.

There is a reason western feminism will never ever resonate with middle eastern women, because western women do not understand middle eastern women at all and have huge patronising attitudes. Its basically like "oh you only are a Muslim because you are oppressed and don't know any better, but I'm coming along know to liberate you and tell you how you should really feel."

The fact that so many western feminists seem to make louder noise about women not driving in Saudi Arabia than about women being slaughtered as we speak in Gaza, shows they don't really care about the people. They just want an excuse to shit on their societies. Look at the comments here, how many people have mentioned driving in Saudi Arabia, how many have mentioned the woman being slaughtered by Israelis in Gaza? It shows that western feminists rarely care about the actual lives of middle eastern women when it doesn't give them an opportunity to attack their culture. Middle eastern women know about this, and that is why they are not particular to western feminism. There are huge feminist movements throughout the middle east, that most western women probably have no idea of. These resonate far more with middle eastern women than western feminism strains that try to dictate to middle eastern women how they should approach feminism (i.e. we are telling you your religion is bad because we know better).

[–]LiverFunctionTests [score hidden]

I don't think you understand the core philosophy of religion at all. If you did, you wouldn't say its incompatible with social justice. The core philosophy of almost of every religion is to be a good person.

This is so nebulous and decietful. What is it to be good. To follow the words of Allah, and what are the words of Allah? Men and women are different, gay people shouldn't have sex, you are special everyone who isn't Muslim is going to hell.

[–]Multiheaded [score hidden]

The core philosophy of almost of every religion is to be a good person.

This is as ridiculously oversimplified and naive as the raytheism in other comments here, just in the opposite direction. Suppose that religion spends even more of its intellectual/cultural potential on constructing what it means to be a good person as it does on persuading people to follow the ideal; is this still unequivocally admirable, or does it call for critical reflection and, if needed, the transvaluation of its values?

Most people are smart enough to filter out the bad stuff, and know how to take home the good messages, and know how to accept the overall good theme of it.

Let's say it's so for the sake of the argument. (Again, this feels too oversimplified to even be false.) Doesn't help if you're the one being - at best - mocked and humiliated and dehumanized for your personal choices by 2/3rds of people in your life. Say, do you have any damn idea of how fucking terrifying it can be to e.g. be closeted in a non-Western culture? I have.

[–]andr386 [score hidden]

You'd be impressed by how much christians or muslims are able to express their values, morality and ethics in secular way. And when I am saying secular, I mean it in the French sense "Laique". Not of freedom of religion, but of freedom from religion in the public space and debate.

[–]PoopKebab [score hidden]

...the majority can be convinced that compared to other Western Religions, Islam is a special snowflake in terms of not perpetuating stone age beliefs...

But that's not what she's arguing. No one claimed Islam was a special snowflake. The idea is that people freely attack Islam in ways Christianity and other religions are not attacked. If you're anti-religion, that's completely fine. However, there are certain individuals that invest all of their reservations towards Islam almost disproportionately. You really can't deny that compared to other religions, Islam is the one that's the most scrutinized. And most importantly, they're not just scrutinized by anti-religion folks.