ISIS Responds to Pope Francis.

[Forty Two]

Back to the OP...

Some sections of western media follow a scripted party line about Islamic fundamentalist ideology and the terrorist actions it entails. They insist, above all "this is not about religion"

Well, from the horse's mouth so to speak, they are clearly wrong...

Are you denying the possibility that social, political and economic factors are part of this imbroglio? If so, you need to explain why Islamic terrorism of the sort we are seeing in the 21st century was non-existent for most of the 20th. How many people in the occidental world were even cognisant of such words as 'sharia', 'fatwa' and 'jihad' until Salman Rushdie incurred the wrath of some imams?

The increased contact between the west and the "Muslim world" is what has resulted in the increased violence. During the first half of the 20th century, there was far less travel and far less trade between the west and the "orient" of which the "Muslim world" was considered a part. The Muslim world was exotic and alien, and few traveled there. However, where the Muslim world butts up against the Hindu, Buddhist, Christian or secular worlds, Islam can brook no competitor. They do not have freedom of religion. Islam is the last and final word of God, spoken perfectly to, and perfectly recounted by, its prophet Muhammad (bwallahahullah-ach-tuh). In many Muslim countries, Islam is the state religion, and so when the state comes in conflict with neighbors, the religion does, too.

20th century clashes involved the then-existing contact points. Islam and Hinduism over the Pakistani partitian and Kashmir, and also internal clashes in India between the Muslim populations and Hindu populations. Muslims persecuted Buddhists, for example, in China, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, Thailand, etc.

Pretty much, to find Muslims waging wars throughout the 20th century, all you need to do is take a map, draw an outline around the "Muslim World" (roughly), and then look for various population centers. You'll find Islam-motivated bloodshed.

[Forty Two]

The religion may well be the major motivator for some of the executing terrorists, but not of the leaders.

On what basis do you say this? Which leaders are not true believers?

Religion, even among the elite and educated classes, is a strong motivator. People, for some reason, REALLY believe it. This is hard for us as secularists to understand sometimes. We don't get how people can have such fervency. But, they do.

[Forty Two]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

[JimC]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

[Animavore]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

Yup. Nail on the head. I don't want to be associated with people who call Muslims "towel heads" and "sand -". And other idiots who shout "Allah Akbar" to passing Hindu Indians, or Catholic Mauritians, because they "look" Muslim-y. I'm also aware, as an Irish person, who has heard a lot of anti-Papist stuff, even from the likes of Dawkins, that the prejudice of the religious culture an atheist is brought up in rubs off on them, whether they realise it or not. As such Protestant atheists may end up saying really stupid and bigoted things, which makes Catholics and Catholic atheists face-palm and the complete ignorance of certain comments, and I try not to be guilty of doing the same, if I can help it, by inadvertently taking shit about a religion I know only so much about.

The other part of being an Irish Catholic is that I used to go to England and Wales for my holidays growing up and have had people suspicious of me, despite the fact I thought the IRA were scum. Of course you can't tell people that, they don't give a shit. Just like the media now doesn't cover anti-ISIS marches from Muslims, because it doesn't fit in with their narrative of all Muslims and Islam being a danger. It would be hypocritical of me, as an Irish person, to tar all Muslims with one brush and claim it's their belief or culture which leads to terrorism.

I'm not sure about all of this "progressive stack" bullshit. Never heard of it. Anyway, Stewart Lee really gets to the bottom of what people actually mean when they ask why we don't criticise or joke about Islam.

[rainbow]

The religion may well be the major motivator for some of the executing terrorists, but not of the leaders.

On what basis do you say this? Which leaders are not true believers?

Religion, even among the elite and educated classes, is a strong motivator.

You have evidence for this, do you?

We do know that through history ruling classes have largely ignored the religious rules, while looking very pious in front of the 'common people'.

[pErvinalia]

So only the leaders are ISIS?

No.

Exactly. The people willing to die for their religion are ISIS too.

[pErvinalia]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

There's some truth to Coito's never ending parody of the "progressive stack".

[pErvinalia]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

Yep, that's probably true too.

[Forty Two]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

That doesn't explain why guys like Sam Harris get lambasted by the left over the Islam issue.

[Forty Two]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

Yup. Nail on the head. I don't want to be associated with people who call Muslims "towel heads" and "sand -". And other idiots who shout "Allah Akbar" to passing Hindu Indians, or Catholic Mauritians, because they "look" Muslim-y. I'm also aware, as an Irish person, who has heard a lot of anti-Papist stuff, even from the likes of Dawkins, that the prejudice of the religious culture an atheist is brought up in rubs off on them, whether they realise it or not. As such Protestant atheists may end up saying really stupid and bigoted things, which makes Catholics and Catholic atheists face-palm and the complete ignorance of certain comments, and I try not to be guilty of doing the same, if I can help it, by inadvertently taking shit about a religion I know only so much about.

The other part of being an Irish Catholic is that I used to go to England and Wales for my holidays growing up and have had people suspicious of me, despite the fact I thought the IRA were scum. Of course you can't tell people that, they don't give a shit. Just like the media now doesn't cover anti-ISIS marches from Muslims, because it doesn't fit in with their narrative of all Muslims and Islam being a danger. It would be hypocritical of me, as an Irish person, to tar all Muslims with one brush and claim it's their belief or culture which leads to terrorism.

I'm not sure about all of this "progressive stack" bullshit. Never heard of it. Anyway, Stewart Lee really gets to the bottom of what people actually mean when they ask why we don't criticise or joke about Islam.

Weird - I don't see any media here in the US which suggests a narrative of all Muslims and Islam being a danger. Quite the reverse here - the media is more apt to minimize the danger, and be quite careful in reporting on events to ensure people are not ascribing blame to Islam.

I don't understand this constant refrain about "all Muslims." Islam sucks ass. It's false. it's bullshit. It is a poor moral guide. That says nothing about "all Muslims." The same shit is said by atheists all the time about Christianity -- it's false, it's bullshit. It's a poor moral guide. There is never any hand-wringing about "all Christians."

That's the point about this Islam business. It's the only religion that has the left going to bat for it. IMO, that needs to stop. Islam is a piece of shit. Period. And, there is nothing racist about saying that.

[Forty Two]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

There's some truth to Coito's never ending parody of the "progressive stack".

It's not a parody. It's an accurate description of what the progressive stack. It only sounds like a parody because I'm saying it and you know I think it's horseshit. When progressives apply the progressive stack, it sounds all reasonable to them, because they ascribe to identity politics.

[Animavore]

Again, it simply means that a variety of other motivations can be joined to the primary religious one. I sometimes wonder why a certain political branch of atheism is so keen to deny a twisted religious motivation as a significant component of islamic terrorism...

...because they've placed Muslims high up on the progressive stack. Muslims, they think, are an oppressed group, being marginalized by white, patriarchal, capitalist oppressors. That's why they don't have a problem saying "Christianity sucks," but they qualify and hedge when asked to confirm that "Islam sucks." I've even seen activist atheists supporting mosque construction under the same circumstances where they would be outspoken against church construction. When it comes to Islam, the fight is about oppressing a minority. When it comes to Christianity, it's about woo, and religious nuttery, and the Christians are the oppressors, so knocking them down is punching up.

In some instances this is probably the case. However, much of the angst comes because the most vocal anti-islamists, certainly here in Oz, are racist red-necks whose anti-muslim fervour is inextricably connected to their racism. In an understandable effort not to get into bed with those idiots, the left sometimes lets the pendulum swing too far the other way...

Yup. Nail on the head. I don't want to be associated with people who call Muslims "towel heads" and "sand -". And other idiots who shout "Allah Akbar" to passing Hindu Indians, or Catholic Mauritians, because they "look" Muslim-y. I'm also aware, as an Irish person, who has heard a lot of anti-Papist stuff, even from the likes of Dawkins, that the prejudice of the religious culture an atheist is brought up in rubs off on them, whether they realise it or not. As such Protestant atheists may end up saying really stupid and bigoted things, which makes Catholics and Catholic atheists face-palm and the complete ignorance of certain comments, and I try not to be guilty of doing the same, if I can help it, by inadvertently taking shit about a religion I know only so much about.

The other part of being an Irish Catholic is that I used to go to England and Wales for my holidays growing up and have had people suspicious of me, despite the fact I thought the IRA were scum. Of course you can't tell people that, they don't give a shit. Just like the media now doesn't cover anti-ISIS marches from Muslims, because it doesn't fit in with their narrative of all Muslims and Islam being a danger. It would be hypocritical of me, as an Irish person, to tar all Muslims with one brush and claim it's their belief or culture which leads to terrorism.

I'm not sure about all of this "progressive stack" bullshit. Never heard of it. Anyway, Stewart Lee really gets to the bottom of what people actually mean when they ask why we don't criticise or joke about Islam.

Weird - I don't see any media here in the US which suggests a narrative of all Muslims and Islam being a danger. Quite the reverse here - the media is more apt to minimize the danger, and be quite careful in reporting on events to ensure people are not ascribing blame to Islam.

I don't understand this constant refrain about "all Muslims." Islam sucks ass. It's false. it's bullshit. It is a poor moral guide. That says nothing about "all Muslims." The same shit is said by atheists all the time about Christianity -- it's false, it's bullshit. It's a poor moral guide. There is never any hand-wringing about "all Christians."

That's the point about this Islam business. It's the only religion that has the left going to bat for it. IMO, that needs to stop. Islam is a piece of shit. Period. And, there is nothing racist about saying that.

Yes there is. As well as sectarian.

[Forty Two]

There is nothing racist about saying Islam is a piece of shit, because most Muslims, first of all, are not of a particular race. And, Islam itself is a set of beliefs, not a race. It's no more racist than saying that a particular philosophy sucks.

Islam is false. Islam, in any of its known forms, is a very poor guide to morality. It is wish-thinking, and a fantastical delusion. Allah is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

Fuck Islam. It's adherents ought to stop adhering to it, because it's horseshit.

That's not racist.

And, "sectarian?" Calling it bullshit or the like is not "sectarian." Islam is "sectarian." Ridiculing Islam is not sectarian.

[Animavore]

There is nothing racist about saying Islam is a piece of shit, because most Muslims, first of all, are not of a particular race.

You're attacking a whole group under the umbrella of Islam (not even a single thing) when you say something like that. You certainly can't be speaking about the ideology because ideologies can't be pieces of shit. They can only be followed by such.

It's no more racist than saying that a particular philosophy sucks.

But that's not what you're saying. You're saying a whole group is a piece of shit.

Islam is false. Islam, in any of its known forms, is a very poor guide to morality. It is wish-thinking, and a fantastical delusion. Allah is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.

But that's not what you're saying. You're saying a whole group is a piece of shit.

Fuck Islam. It's adherents ought to stop adhering to it, because it's horseshit.

It's sectarian.

And, "sectarian?" Calling it bullshit or the like is not "sectarian." Islam is "sectarian." Ridiculing Islam is not sectarian.

You're not just calling it bullshit, or simply ridiculing it, though. You're calling for its adherents to abandon it because you, in your bigotry, believe they should. You want it and them eradicated. Not even any toleration of it simply changing, like Christianity has done.