BF2S Forums Religions of the world Thread

uziq wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

Saudi Arabia literally has a centuries old fancy title giving them legitimacy as a leader of the Islamic world. "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Custodian … ly_Mosques

yes okay and christianity in the levant or israel-palestine is representative of the faith globally. they have some fancy old titles! the church of the holy sepulchre! the order of st john!

salamanca is the centre of the christian world. people go on pilgrimages there!

my point was the majority of the world's muslims do not live in saudi society and do not follow that extreme interpretation of sunni islam.

The majority of Muslims live in states that enforce harsh religious laws that wouldn't fly in the west. Meanwhile the Pope is saying we shouldn't execute prisoners or pollute.

On August 2, 2018, the Vatican announced that it had formally changed the official Catechism of the Catholic Church on the death penalty, calling capital punishment “an attack on the inviolability and dignity of the person” and deeming it “inadmissible” in all cases.

I bet many Muslims would straight up kill the Pope if they could.

uziq wrote:

100 mill out of 1.8 billion? and you're taking them as representative of the entire faith? ok, go ahead. i'm sure that makes sense in your head.

adultery was illegal in most of europe until the 1970s and 1980s, fyi. in britain you could still legally rape your wife until the 1990s. i guess that evens things out too?

Saudi Arabia: 29 million people
Pakistan : 205 million
Iran : 82 million

316 million Muslims live in states you can executed for adultery.

Indonesia : 268 million
Nigeria : 196 million

464 million Muslims live in states where you can be jailed for adultery.

That's 780 million people or almost the entire population of Europe. That's not a small amount of people.

205 million people in pakistan are not presented with everyday fears of stoning for adultery. these practices only take place in remote, tribal mountainous areas. it is not mainstream. sex outside of marriage is also illegal in pakistan. do you think the entire country are shivering and waiting for a knock on the door from the sex police? to quote ken, use your fucking head.

Sex out of marriage is a crime in predominantly Muslim Pakistan and punishable by stoning to death under Islamic laws, although that punishment has never officially been handed down.

But in remote, semi-autonomous tribal areas, jirgas often decide on such issues. Hundreds of people are killed every year in Pakistan, most in rural communities, after being deemed to have dishonoured their families.

Last edited by uziq (2020-11-13 17:09:40)

Larssen wrote:

As a general note though guys I think it's pretty weak to always deflect into other subjects when the topic comes anywhere close to discussing to 'controversial' communities and behaviours within those communities. It's like a constant search for logiical inconsistencies and 'gotcha u racist' moments that don't actually bring a deeper understanding of anything. When I'm speaking about Turkey, I don't want to immediately be given a retort that's telling me I'm racist for speaking ill of Turkey because I'm not simultaneously decrying Poland and Hungary. Or, in the case of speaking about barbaric practices in certain parts of the world, we immediately deflect to barbaric practices elsewhere, or accuse someone of racism because they're not simultaneously actively involved in fighting barbarism at home. This would only be tolerable if you actually used that comparison to explain the situation at hand rather than sneer at the author...

I believe in helping non-Muslim minorities living in those states immigrate here as well as conversion and integration of Muslims living here and elsewhere too if it can be done.

Meanwhile Uzique and Ken will tell you: No! It's their culture and traditions which are bad and not their religion. The Asians, Hispanics, Eastern Europeans, and Central Africans all live in shit holes too!

Literally way more racist than anything I have ever suggested.

i have no problem criticising cultures. but you keep elevating ours on a pedestal as if we have attained universal enlightenment, and you're miraculously light on historical detail. making arguments about how advanced we are because of our attitudes to adultery, when it was criminal here too one generation ago, is not exactly a devastating critique of islamic mores.

uziq wrote:

i have no problem criticising cultures. but you keep elevating ours on a pedestal as if we have attained universal enlightenment, and you're miraculously light on historical detail. making arguments about how advanced we are because of our attitudes to adultery, when it was criminal here too one generation ago, is not exactly a devastating critique of islamic mores.

You must have missed my decades long rage at evangelicals in my own country. You bring up crimes in rural areas as if I have ever been an advocate for people living in rural areas.


The difference between my criticism of Muslims and my criticism of westerners is that you, Ken, and others leap to an unending defense of Muslims. You infantilize, and make excuses for them. You then throw Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, Eastern Europeans and others under the bus to make the Muslims not look so bad thereby making an argument way more racist then what I am suggesting. It is actually comical if you think about it.

uziq wrote:

Larssen wrote:

As a general note though guys I think it's pretty weak to always deflect into other subjects when the topic comes anywhere close to discussing 'controversial' communities and behaviours within those communities. It's like a constant search for logiical inconsistencies and 'gotcha u racist' moments that don't actually bring a deeper understanding of anything. When I'm speaking about Turkey, I don't want to immediately be given a retort that's telling me I'm racist for speaking ill of Turkey because I'm not simultaneously decrying Poland and Hungary. Or, in the case of speaking about barbaric practices in certain parts of the world, we immediately deflect to barbaric practices elsewhere, or accuse someone of racism because they're not simultaneously actively involved in fighting barbarism at home. This would only be tolerable if you actually used that comparison to explain the situation at hand rather than sneer at the author...

well, i see you shitting on migrant communities in the west and accusing them of basically being extremists or fundamentalists, and not, er, mostly moderate and modern muslims. you conflate someone voting for erdogan with sunni extremist terrorists. it's a bit of a stretch. you don't accuse elderly ladies in poland or truck drivers in hungary of being dangerous neo-nazi radicals. you view one group's nationalism as inherently more dangerous and suspicious than another's. of course the comparison is telling. the politics of poland are a pretty good mirror for the politics of erdogan's turkey. there's more violence in the streets and more direct clampdowns on people's freedom in poland, in its current political-judicial set-up. but, no, terrorist beheadings committed by non-turks in france for some reason get you worried about erdogan supporters. OK.

And here we go again. Instead of admitting a good point you prefer launching some sort of almost Trumpian attack with all sorts of BS about my frame of mind. What I explicitly, repeatedly said was that high support for Erdogan among expatriate/immigrant Turkish communities in Europe is a problem. That it's doubly problematic if the same group overwhelmingly supports left leaning politics here.

Instead of fucking well agreeing you launch a diatribe about Poland, of which I've said multiple times they should be sanctioned. You're obviously shielding a minority community of any and all criticism for the sole fact that they're a minority - it's pathetic. In what must've been 15000 words of assault only one or two lines were included that, yes, maleficent foreign influences should be addressed, but it appears to internally pain you even to say so.

if there are extremist or fundamentalist cells/groups within western societies, of course they should be policed and punished accordingly. voting for erdogan is not 'doubly problematic' or 'alarming', though.

you need to think about what it means to consider someone's voting choice a 'maleficent foreign influence'. erdogan is not instructing his supporters abroad to cut off heads or bomb public places. they are exercising their vote. you just don't like it. are trump supporters 'doubly problematic'? i just don't understand your total lack of self-awareness about how illiberal you are. 'these people don't vote for liberal causes! we must clamp down on them in our societies!' meanwhile half of the natives are voting for illiberal measures ... because yes, that's their fucking right.

do you have the same attitude towards jews in the US who are supportive of netanyahu? haven't you accused dilbert of being anti-semitic for crossing these wires? but you don't like being called islamophobic when you rally and rail against erdogan supporters? again, erdogan is not osama bin laden. working-class migrants voting for a 'strongman' figure out of patriotic fervour or whatever is not the same as condoning sunni terrorism. there's a whole constellation of reasons governing their political sympathies, some of them no doubt purely sentimental. they are not de facto religious fundamentalists or 'a dangerous islamist fifth column'.

Last edited by uziq (2020-11-13 17:45:56)

Larssen wrote:

You're obviously shielding a minority community of any and all criticism for the sole fact that they're a minority - it's pathetic.

Uzique engages in the liberal practice of "the soft bigotry of low expectations". He lives in a world where minorities are always the victim and whenever a minority doesn't buy into his narrative of victimhood he eventually calls them Uncle Toms. He really does assume that all minorities live an experience like blacks in the worst part of America based off of him watching the Wire. So when you point out that maybe the Euro-Muslim community has a lot of problems it won't compute because he thinks all non-Euros live in shit holes and that is just the way it always has been and you just can't judge them for living in shitholes because that is their culture.

Ken on the other hand is mostly fine.

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

SuperJail Warden wrote:

uziq wrote:

i have no problem criticising cultures. but you keep elevating ours on a pedestal as if we have attained universal enlightenment, and you're miraculously light on historical detail. making arguments about how advanced we are because of our attitudes to adultery, when it was criminal here too one generation ago, is not exactly a devastating critique of islamic mores.

You must have missed my decades long rage at evangelicals in my own country. You bring up crimes in rural areas as if I have ever been an advocate for people living in rural areas.


The difference between my criticism of Muslims and my criticism of westerners is that you, Ken, and others leap to an unending defense of Muslims. You infantilize, and make excuses for them. You then throw Asians, Hispanics, Native Americans, Eastern Europeans and others under the bus to make the Muslims not look so bad thereby making an argument way more racist then what I am suggesting. It is actually comical if you think about it.

I haven't seen anyone here making excuses for genital mutilation or stoning women to death out in the sand sticks. It's wrong to label Islam by its most backwards practices like it's wrong to label Christians or Hindus or Buddhists or whatever by their most backwards practices and those of the governments using them to intimidate, dominate, and terrorize. Throwing bricks at a mosque is going to solve jack squat.

Thank you for bringing up female genital mutilation. I totally forgot that was even a thing in that part of the world. And why are you upset about genital mutilation anyway? That's their religion/culture. They should be allowed to practice it in Europe/America and how dare you suggest we don't.

as part of the ongoing bf2s archiving, I will be adding a searchable index for macbeth's slow decline into fascism. I believe we are currently in the larval stage.

You're ironically wistful for tumultuous times and fetishize widespread violence in half-ironic but probably not ironic at all posts. Just the other day you were in a panic about bearded men impersonating UPS drivers to rape people. Your faux concern for the plight of women falls utterly flat. I don't recall a time when it was ever funny. Just sad.

I have ethical qualms with things like executions and mutilating the genitals of children. I hope both are eventually discontinued worldwide. I couldn't care less if someone wants to don a skullcap and prostrate themselves on a rug. These are easily separable things when you aren't arguing in spiritual rageface.

There are groups of Christians who if given the power and influence, would turn back the clock on crime and punishment. There are groups of Muslims who moved to more liberal countries to escape that sort of thing. People can object to parts of a religion they think is harmful to society without becoming xenophobic over it. Not everything is so conveniently black and white no matter how much hardliner nationalists paint it as such.

Of course angry Baptists burning copies of Harry Potter isn't on the same level as women being arrested for riding a bicycle, but again, and for the umpteenth time, the west has already been through this and is still working on equality.

Go on, crack a joke or ask us again why we're "making excuses for Islam."