I continue to wonder why progressives are so protective of Islam

[bluestateguy]

Homophobic, sexist, anti-Semitic, pro-theocracy and anti-free speech. These ideas are all well within the mainstream of contemporary Islam.

Islam falls well short of the things progressives believe in.

And the fact that there are Christian fundamentalist wackos is no reason to give Islam a pass.

And it seems that whenever atheists mock or denounce evangelical Christians they are applauded by progressives, but when those same atheists (like Bill Maher) similarly mock or denounce Muslims there is either silence or anger from the American progressive left.

[Throd]

1. Underdogma.

[Snotcicles]

4. .

[trumad]

2. flame bait

[Nye Bevan]

8. And what is calling the Catholic religion "one of the most offensive organizations that has ever existed"?

And calling the Catholic Church "the Mafia on steroids"? And Pope Francis a "bigoted son of a bitch"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2503141

And that OP got 133 recs!

With 2 words you have encapsulated the OP's point perfectly.

[trumad]

14. Uhh what...this op isn't flame bait?

Watch and learn.

[Nye Bevan]

15. And your OP calling Pope Francis a "bigoted son of a bitch" was not? (nt)

[trumad]

18. nope

[Pacifist Patriot]

300. Wow

[trumad]

302. Not even close.

[Jesus Malverde]

34. DUZY Lulz

That stings.

Jesus

[RedCappedBandit]

227. lmfao

well done

this subthread.. lol

[NoGOPZone]

20. 134, not 133

I just recced it. Feel free to edit your post. And thanks for the tip

[Nye Bevan]

22. And you would probably not have added a rec to a post calling a Muslim cleric a "son of a bitch".

Hence this thread.

[NoGOPZone]

28. you could start one to see if I would

Oh, who am I kidding? I wouldn't, but only because you assumed I wouldn't. Self fulfilling prophecy

[trumad]

32. LOL

[ScreamingMeemie]

239. People really hang on to almost-2-year-old posts???

Come on people. Close your notebooks, burn them, throw them away, whatever, but that is ridiculous.

[merrily]

273. A 2013 post? Geez.

[Nye Bevan]

275. Trumad appears to be standing by his "Pope Francis is a son of a bitch" thread. (nt)

[merrily]

276. I was referring to your cataloguing of posts and hanging on to stuff, not to

whether Trumad had changed his mind or not.

[Nye Bevan]

278. It's amazing how folks here think the only way to access old DU posts is to "catalog"

and "hang on to them".

[merrily]

279. I never said it was the only way.

So much easier to disparage "folks" when you make up stuff they never posted.

[trumad]

303. trumad is hanging onto the notion that Francis is a bigot.

Nye is hanging on to the notion that he is not.

[pnwmom]

101. Yeah,right. Pointing out hypocrisy is flame bait. n/t

[roguevalley]

269. we are protective of people who happen to be muslim

Because we love people, free will and free speech. Everyone has the right to freely think and behavior that might be detrimental because of it is regulated by law. All the rest is bullshit. Hate is a right wing attribute

[pnwmom]

277. If we love people, free will and free speech we should be equally protective of all people,

including people of Christian faiths that we don't ascribe to.

[roguevalley]

289. absolutely

[pnwmom]

308. And yet

on DU I see anti-religious hate here directed toward Christians and Jews that would never be allowed against Muslims.

[Blanks]

321. Muslims are more vulnerable...

Because they are a minority (in this country) Christians are capable of standing up for one another, and there are plenty of them to do it.

Muslims are all lumped into the 'evil bomber' category and most are just as appalled by the extremist behavior as the rest of us.

[pnwmom]

336. And Jews? They are a religious minority both here and in the mideast.

But they are often attacked here.

[Blanks]

340. There's not much tolerance for anti-semitism...

Quite a lot of folks get kicked to the curb. The only posts that I see attacking Jews are hidden.

I'm not saying they don't exist, they aren't typically in the circles that I hang around.

[roguevalley]

338. brilliant point, pnwmom. I abhor all of it. I think people hate the thing they were/are and the

other don't have enough adherents here to add their disillusionment to the choir

a lot of the hate seems to be directed at what they know best. give them time.

[Logical]

171. Alert it. Or quit whining. Nt

[trumad]

218. thanks Dad

[Logical]

243. Sure son, you have been a huge disappointment! nt

[trumad]

245. Well you cheated on Mom.

[Logical]

299. :-) nt

[bahrbearian]

225. +1 This is something you would see at the Discussionist

[sibelian]

349. Then alert, dear trumad.

Alert away.

[Nye Bevan]

3. Yeah, stoning people to death for being gay isn't very progressive.

And neither is accosting women in the street for perceived immodest dress. Or denying the Holocaust. Or banning alcohol. Etc.....

[cwydro]

19. Well said. Nt

[LincolnsLeftHand]

83. How do you rec a post?

Because I'd rec this one.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

129. +1.

[Ken Burch]

161. MOST Muslims don't do those things. n/t.

[FrodosPet]

260. Therefore we cannot criticize those that do

BTW: Did you know that according to several polls, majorities of Muslims in several countries support criminal penalties, up to and including death, for the crime or sin or whatever of apostasy?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/01/64-percent-of-muslims-in-egypt-and-pakistan-support-the-death-penalty-for-leaving-islam/

By Max Fisher
May 1, 2013

The Pew Research Center's vast new study on the views and attitudes of global Muslim populations was bound to create controversy. Like the U.S. public knowledge polls that find that one-third of Americans can't name the vice president, Pew's report includes some less-than-flattering pieces of data. And while it's important not to generalize about entire populations or demographic groups based on one study, some of these numbers are difficult to ignore. One of the questions, which Pew asked of Muslims in 38 countries from Europe, Asia, Africa and the Middle East, was whether or not they support making sharia the official law in the country. In many countries, the answer was overwhelmingly yes, although Pew notes that many respondents said sharia should apply only to Muslims and, just as importantly, that "Muslims differ widely in how they interpret certain aspects of sharia, including whether divorce and family planning are morally acceptable." Many respondents reject the stricter laws and punishments for which sharia is often, fairly or unfairly, known in the West. In other words, just because some people say they support sharia law does not mean they want to make their neighbors live in a 9th-century-style caliphate. Still, amid an otherwise innocuous or even reassuring report, Pew's study found some disturbing details. One that jumped out for me was the alarmingly high share of Muslims in some Middle Eastern and South Asian countries who say they support the death penalty for any Muslim who leaves the faith or converts to another. In fact, according to the 2013 Pew Research Center report, 88 percent of Muslims in Egypt and 62 percent of Muslims in Pakistan favor the death penalty for people who leave the Muslim religion. This is also the majority view among Muslims in Malaysia, Jordan and the Palestinian territories. It's important to note, though, that this view is not widely held in all Muslim countries or even among Muslims in these regions. In Bangladesh, another majority Muslim South Asian state that has a shared heritage with Pakistan, it is about half as prevalent, with 36 percent saying they support it. Fewer than one in six Tunisian Muslims hold the view, as do fewer than one in seven Muslims in Lebanon, which has a strong Christian minority. The view is especially rare among Central Asian and European Muslims. Only 6 percent of Russian Muslims agree that converts from Islam should face death, as do 1 percent of Albanian Muslims and, at the bottom of the chart, 0.5 percent of Kazakhs.

~ snip ~

[Red State Rebel]

285. Most Christians don't do the things that a few whackos do, also..??

[trumad]

219. It's John Kennedys fault

Or maybe Biden.

[ellenrr]

372. who killed Kennedy?

[Seeking Serenity]

5. You know why. (n/t)

[whatchamacallit]

6. Yes, all 1.6 billion of them are what you describe

Thanks for the enlightened progressive view.

[joeglow3]

172. As 1 of a billion+ Catholics, I hope you see the irony in post

[whatchamacallit]

175. I really don't

Would you mind explaining? Are you saying that all Catholics are uniform in their belief and practice of the tenets of Catholicism? Honestly, your meaning eludes me.

[joeglow3]

176. Extremely negative things are said of Catholics here daily

I have not seen Catholics murdering people like we have seen this last decade from members of Islam. How many people were killed over Piss Christ? And yet, we don't see people running to the defense of Catholics when stereotypical blanket statements are made about all Catholics like we do over Islam.

So, given the different treatment, do you think all billion + Catholics are all bad?

[whatchamacallit]

177. I don't say those things

because the notion that all Catholics are exactly the same is ridiculous.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

210. Not 1.6 billion, but probably more than 1 billion on most of those.

We need to accept that homophobia, sexism and opposition to freedom of speech and religion (I'm less sure about antisemitism - it's immensely widespread, but possibly not majority) are the mainstream, majority positions among Muslims, and it is the liberals, not the bigots, who are the minority.

It's worth noting that it's probably the reverse among Western muslims, though.

[bemildred]

7. That's because the question is mis-stated, the question is why progressives support

human rights for everybody (even when they are wrong), then it makes perfect sense.

[jen1980]

29. And protect victims even more!

They have been the victims of the xians for centuries. The xians want them dead so we naturally want to protect and support them.

[bemildred]

88. Being incoherent won't help either. nt

[seveneyes]

10. Unspoken evidence exists regardless of its obviousness

Enemies or enemies and the hopeless and forlorn, shelter in any storm.

The path to salvation is not highlighted, but it is sought by many and known by few.

[Sopkoviak]

11. Perhaps it's because many can't distinguish between a so-called

Christian baker who refuses to bake a wedding cake for a gay couple and a state sponsored religion that will behead or hang that same couple.

I join in your confusion.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

31. times a thousand!

nt

[TorchTheWitch]

335. and then some!

[SlimJimmy]

115. Well stated. (nt)

[Nuclear Unicorn]

148. post rec

[leftynyc]

215. Yup

I understand the concept of not tagging an entire religion with terrorism but such care is never taken with other religions on this board. Just about every single post about a Muslim doing something heinous brings out all kinds of bullshit about how Christianity is just as bad (because hundreds of years ago they burned witches and murdered non-believers). Only Islam gets a "pass" here.

[get the red out]

226. You are absolutely right

Thank you.

[JustAnotherGen]

230. I'm in agreement

However I've seen a lumping together of every jewish person in the world with the bad apple fundies in Israel - right here at DU.

[leftynyc]

236. Oh yeah

I've seen that also. Just another way Islam gets a pass around here no other religion does.

[haikugal]

352. No one (religion) should get a pass...

And the killing by all religions is still happening....oppression as well. Islam does not get a pass, religion should not get a pass.

I think liberals try to push back against the Christian fundy Islamophobia and fall into a pit. It's religion and open to criticism.

[leftynyc]

353. Oh, you'll see trashing of

Christianity here all the time. All...the...time. It's ONLY Islam that gets a pass.

[haikugal]

356. I'm not so sure it is getting a pass...

Maybe I'm missing something.

[leftynyc]

359. You haven't been here very

long. Just watch. Everytime a news report that comes out about a Muslim or Muslim country that does something heinous, right away you'll see nonsense about how Christianity is just as bad because of the crusades, or the Spanish Inquisition, or witch burnings or some other reference to something Christians did HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO. And don't ever forget that the US (sometimes Israel) is the source of all of our problems. It's going to blow you away.

[haikugal]

366. Actually I've been here since 2006...

I think those remarks are pretty true but you don't have to go back hundreds of years for examples. Religion produces these things which I think is what people are saying in effect. I could be wrong, and I don't want to put words in people's mouths but all religions abuse people with authoritarianism. None are immune.

[sibelian]

350. Thank you....

thank you, thank you, thank you

It's been clear to me for a long time now that it's Muslims first, gays second in he Great Sympathy Competition

[Rhinodawg]

12. You can't blame an entire....

My bad.

[Scootaloo]

13. Because we're aware of what happens when an entire class of people is demonized

Especially when that class of people has no power or meaningful representation in our own society. Fundamentalist Christians have plenthy of power and influence in our society, while Muslims - fundamentalist or no - have none at all. So when a bunch of black-shirted firebrands start up yelping about how all 'those people" are to blame for the actions of three dickheads, yes, defensive lines form among actual progressives.

And yes, I am making a distinction between actual progressives, and those for whom progressivism is a fashon statement or, in yoru case, a fig leaf to justify hate.

[1StrongBlackMan]

16. +1 ...

I can't believe what I am reading on this board today.

Can we get any more reactionary?

[Scootaloo]

27. It happens every time

My second thought on the news was "And it's going to be Ann Coulter day at DU today."

[Hekate]

17. Well-spotted, Scootaloo. nt

[NuclearDem]

23. Well said. Hoofbump.

[uponit7771]

25. +1

[herding cats]

33. Brilliantly put.

When I first read this, I thought about how people use their blind hate for the religion to target all muslims for the crimes of a few. It's a bigotry some keep trying to find a way to excuse. Here in the US, and also in other parts of the western world, this bigotry has lead to people committing hate crimes against muslims at an ever increasing number since 9/11.

Anti-Muslim violence spiralling out of control in America. Sen was pushed to death by a woman who "hated Muslims", as anti-Muslim bigotry in the US sinks to violent new depths.

FBI: Dramatic Spike in Hate Crimes Targeting Muslims

FBI sees leap in anti-Muslim hate crimes / 9/11 attacks blamed for bias -- blacks still most frequent victims

9/11 Anniversary Sparks Hate Crimes Against Muslims

And as is typical, when a hate of someone not like the majority begins to take root in a society, it spreads to even more people not like the majority.

Post 9/11 Hate Crime Trends: Muslims, Sikhs, Hindus and Jews in the U.S.

There's nothing Progressive about any of those sorts of actions, and this is exactly what condemning the entire religion leads to.

[freshwest]

165. And there it is with plenty of links to back it up.

[herding cats]

178. Thank you, freshwest.

It scares me to see people missing the larger point here, of all places, but people everywhere are doing the same thing.

I'm not a person of any religious faith, so in a lot of ways with things like this I feel like an outsider involved in things which I don't really understand, but I do understand bigotry and hate all too well. Which is what is scaring me now.

[freshwest]

189. I always think it's media induced. Or RWNJ induced. To create discord and steal power.

You stated the real reason that Dems, progressives, etc. are quite angry at this subject. And I haven't seen the OP author return to answer much of this.

[Starry Messenger]

46. This. n/t

[Avalux]

53. ^^THIS^^ I wish I could Rec your post. n/t

[Alameda]

73. Thank you Scootaloo

You say it very well, and what I am seeing is truly frightening.

[hrmjustin]

78. Well said!

[Violet_Crumble]

86. So fucking true, Scoot!

Reading DU today I'm left wondering what the difference is between a few folk who claim to be left wing and Pamela Geller.Because right now I'm not seeing much at all.

[MADem]

114. You had to yank real hard to pull that out of what anyone on this thread said.

You might want to re-read, because you didn't take the point at all. No one here is excusing or ignoring murder, but the fact that you're anxiously trying to frame it as though anyone is, is...interesting, I guess.

Anytime an argument starts with "So the fact that..." it's a pretty sure bet that a shaky strawman is being constructed. Yours is just of particularly poor quality.

[Scootaloo]

120. if that's what I meant, it's what I would have said

Since I said nothing of the sort, I can only assume you're trying to justify yourself to yourself.

[JI7]

142. how about a muslim baker who would bake a cake for a gay couple ?

[freshwest]

188. How about a gay Muslim? Or one who ridicules the fundamentalists?

At times, they need support and not being broadbrushed. The vast majority of victims in any faith are from radical sects.

I grew up in an era where to be a Muslim was no big deal. My parents saw all believers as the same, so long as they followed the Golden Rule.

Each religion and even those groups not considered to be religions have this at the basis of their belief systems.

This other stuff was added on by people I consider to be cult members. And people do love their cults, it's where they can stop thinking about the range of conundrums that we are all faced with on this planet.

It is a matter of choice and that choice of belief, or the lack of belief, should be under the protecttion of the law. I grow weary with those who want govvernment to shut down others, like the fundie Tea Partiers that were sworn into Congress this month.

Life is hard enough without us judging and looking down on each other. I am only nomially a Christian who does not attend church as I find it toxic. They have lost my respect and my trust that they intend to do good by others, although I know individuals who do.

I am glad to live in a nation which is on the record for supporting the separation of church and state, even if we fail many times. The French support that model, IIRC. Now it seems the world has gone over the edge in some quarters and people really do want to do harm to others. But not all people of any sort.

I'll bet many Muslims would not discriminate or break the law like the radicals do.

[Violet_Crumble]

209. Have you considered looking into using a baker that sticks to baking?

And not letting yr child go near any bakers until further notice?

[beaglelover]

247. +1

[AgingAmerican]

322. Do Christians not kill in the name of religion?

The role of US evangelists in Uganda's 'kill the gays' bill

[Quayblue]

371. too far removed

So no one cares... Ho ho ho. *insert sarcasm smiley as I am too lazy to find it at the moment*

oh and +2

[closeupready]

108. +1,000,0001 or whatever it is, Scootaloo.

[CrawlingChaos]

109. Again, I must thank you for your posts

Thank you for speaking out against the garbage so eloquently.

[nomorenomore08]

144. Excellent post.

[cascadiance]

164. Some of my best friends are from Muslim cultures, and my teacher was traumatized by terrorists

... when I was in middle school living in Turkey, and her boyfriend at the time was kidnapped by Turkish terrorists then... Read this Rand Report about that incident of the four airmen kidnapped (one of them her boyfriend). It reads like a movie script. She (and I) were lucky that they escaped then when Turkish police came to break up a domestic violence dispute in the same apartment building. If she had quit teaching then, my life could be totally different as she was an inspiration to me then.

http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/reports/2007/R2105.pdf

Back in those days, about the only thing Americans heard about terrorism were plane hijackings by Cubans then.

Being immersed in those cultures, I knew many people some of who to this day are my best friends from earlier times who were Persians, Turks, and from other parts of that part of the world. Just because my life was almost turned upside down by a terrorist act (and the Turkish government at that time also went under martial law too) doesn't mean I would carry hate towards all Turks and all Muslims. Though for some that don't pay close enough attention, in those days, those terrorists identified more with the Red Brigade terrorist groups in Europe, than Islamic factions. Did that have me hate all people who had socialist ideologies? NO! In fact, I'm embracing that more now as I see that capitalism is failing now.

We need to step back at look at people as people, not as labeled groups to oversimplify our judgements of them. I almost had to learn the hard way then. I'm glad I didn't.

We can't judge all Christians based on the actions of the KKK or other Christian extremist groups, just because they call themselves "Christian" and do a damn bad job of it. Likewise, we shouldn't be judging so many decent Muslims by the sad acts of others.

We also are the ones that are generating the anger of those extremist groups by many of our actions of war, etc. too. Does that justify what they are doing? Of course not! But we might do well to stop provoking it!

[Ken Burch]

166. [phone]!

"Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me"

[adirondacker]

204. +1000. nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

214. thank for being a voice of reason - today much of DU might as well be Stormfront

[Puglover]

229. As usual.

Spot on.

[Marr]

259. That's it exactly. /nt

[jwirr]

264. Thank you. This makes sense. None of us condone what happened in France but it was three men

not a whole religion. As a liberal Christian I am not guilty of rw idiocy but that does not stop a lot of people from say all of us are.

Interpretation is a terrible tool of the evil. And it works all too well.

[merrily]

274. Another nail hit on the head by Scootaloo. Well done.

[YoungDemCA]

287. +100000

Another great post.

[MellowDem]

291. The OP isn't demonizing a class of people...

The OP is talking about an idea, Islam. Islam is explicitly misogynistic, homophobic and bigoted in its texts.

What your engaging in is a tired game of Strawmen that has been used by the religious right to defend religious privilege in the US for decades. Criticize Christianity, and suddenly you hate Christians etc.

[cascadiance]

345. Yes, parts of Islamic texts are a bit over the top, but so are parts of the bible too...

... when it asks for women to get raped, etc. as well. We don't judge all of Christianity based on those pieces of their texts. We should apply the same form of judgements to other religions like Islam too if we want to be fair.

Now there are extremists in all of these different religions that grab some of those extreme texts and amplify them through crude and sometimes horrific actions. But once again, just because they do that doesn't mean all followers of those religions follow the extreme pieces of it.

[MellowDem]

346. I think Christianity is shit....

And I apply the same standard to other religions. The god of the Bible commits and condones genocide, for fuck's sake. Only the privilege of a major religion allows people to Say that other parts make up for the heinous shit in there.

Most people are good in spite of these terrible religions, not because of them.
The dishonest cherry picking of these texts allows people to live half way morally, because these religions advocate terrible shit.

[haikugal]

355. Thanks for that...n/t

[cascadiance]

373. I'm an agnostic because I really can't swallow a whole religion's "teachings" as "truth"...

I can read parts of each religion, and see a lot of value in the way those have written good pieces that help shape people's lives in a positive way, but I'm still asking myself the question of what is "god given" to us.

I suppose if I ever go through an out of world experience, where suddenly things come to me that aren't explainable except for something that would be provided by a god-like entity, I might change my being an agnostic, but I feel that by questioning everything, and also looking for value in everything I take in, I feel that the inner sense I have of what makes a world community work for everyone's better is the essence of what god would want if he exists. That I have those feelings is what has me feel I also can't be an atheist, which denies the possibility of any such experience, or spiritual sense of being that I might have.

I also try to respect others that try to appreciate the good experiences of a religion, even if not multiple religions, as I feel they are looking for the same spiritual guidance of self consciousness that I do. I try not to look at any one religion as the best guide over the other, and therefore try to respect well meaning Muslims as much as I can well meaning Christians.

I also try to focus on taking down bad interpretations of religion that lead to the extremism of certain islamic groups like Al Queda, Christian groups like the KKK, or others that try to use spiritual belief to justify evil action. In my book, they themselves are evil, not the religions they are trying to coopt in giving them license for their evil.

[randys1]

328. Exactly, and each Muslim bashing (for lack of a better word) post or thread lumps all Muslims

in one group.



Sadly, ALL religion is fucked up since all of it causes far more problems than good it does.

But your post is the best I have seen in a while about this.

[ozone_man]

337. Well said! n/t

[gollygee]

361. Another +1 here

[NuclearDem]

21. A few points.

1) Muslims are a vulnerable minority in the West, making them very easy targets for hate crimes and otherization. Christians aren't; they're well-established in the cultural, religious, and political framework of the West. See also: "reverse racism", substituting white for Christian.

2) A lot of ire directed at Islam is so often blatantly two-faced. There's a select group of atheists who beat the drums for war against Islam, justifying it by claiming to stand up for women. At home, however, they treat women in secular movements like trash and go off on misogynistic tirades. For them, it's a war against religion, not defense of progressive values.

3) The obvious point: there are simply contrarians who will defend anything or anyone that falls into the role of current enemy of the West. Completely unprincipled

And before anyone implies otherwise, yes, I wholeheartedly believe Islam, as well as the other Abrahamic faiths, is incompatible with liberal democracy; however, I've no reason to treat Western Muslims any different than I would treat any other religious group, so long as they keep their religion out of our government.

[haikugal]

358. A select group of atheists...

What and who are you referring to? The atheists here ( on DU) are not as described. I'd like to know what you're talking about.

[NuclearDem]

360. Elevatorgate.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Elevatorgate

Most notably Dawkins' little entry:

Dear Muslima,
Stop whining, will you. Yes, yes, I know you had your genitals mutilated with a razor blade, and...yawn...don’t tell me yet again, I know you aren’t allowed to drive a car, and you can’t leave the house without a male relative, and your husband is allowed to beat you, and you’ll be stoned to death if you commit adultery. But stop whining, will you. Think of the suffering your poor American sisters have to put up with. Only this week I heard of one, she calls herself Skep”chick”, and do you know what happened to her? A man in a hotel elevator invited her back to his room for coffee. I am not exaggerating. He really did. He invited her back to his room for coffee. Of course she said no, and of course he didn’t lay a finger on her, but even so...And you, Muslima, think you have misogyny to complain about! For goodness sake grow up, or at least grow a thicker skin.

[haikugal]

364. Dawkins?

Is a select group of atheists? OK, whatever. Thx for the info. 😊

[NuclearDem]

365. Dawkins was the only one who went after Rebecca Watson.

Plenty of his drooling misogynistic fans did too.

[uponit7771]

24. Christianity starts with a C and not an I.... k? thx

[LadyHawkAZ]

26. because #notallreligiouspeople n/t

[on point]

30. Islam deserves to be mocked like all religions, see Charlie

Even though it is sickness, like all religions, people still have a right to practice it. Separation of church and state is what is needed to protect society from it's regressive point of view. That is, human rights, women's rights, gay rights are social rights protected by the state and primitive religious beliefs have no part in determining modern rights. Religious belies beliefs are the private delusions of their adherents

[smirkymonkey]

35. I'm not.

I am against all extremist members of any religion. All. And yes, I do consider myself a progressive, which is why I am against all extremist, fundamentalist religiously insane people. They threaten everything we stand for.

[jeff47]

36. I continue to wonder why progressives are so protective of Catholics

Homophobic, sexist, anti-Semitic, pro-theocracy and anti-free speech. These ideas are all well within the mainstream of contemporary Catholicism.

Catholicism falls well short of the things progressives believe in.

And the fact that there are Islamic fundamentalist wackos is no reason to give Catholicism a pass.

And it seems that whenever atheists mock or denounce radical Muslims they are applauded by progressives, but when those same atheists (like Bill Maher) similarly mock or denounce Catholics there is either silence or anger from the American progressive left.

(Get it yet, or do you need more help fixing your cranial-rectal inversion?)

[Throd]

37. A lot of progressives can't shit on Catholicism fast enough every chance they get.

[jeff47]

38. And this thread demonstrates a lot of "progressives" can't shit on Muslims fast enough.

I could replace "Catholic" with any other religion on the planet. We even have violent fundamentalist Buddhists now.

[Nye Bevan]

39. I will "shit on" anyone who stones people to death for being gay.

Whatever they call themselves.

Sorry.

[jeff47]

41. Then you better eat a lot of fiber. 'Cause you won't only be shitting on Muslims. (nt)

[closeupready]

119. lol, ayup.

[Violet_Crumble]

150. That was a really bad hide.

I'd love to see the jury results for that one

[closeupready]

151. Me too. It would have had to have been close.

[Violet_Crumble]

174. I'm going to ask scoot for the results.

What I find galling is that some really blatant and ugly bigotry towards and stereotyping of muslims is left alone yet something as harmless as that gets hidden. Things are pretty fucked up when that happens.

[Nye Bevan]

186. Here ya go:

On Wed Jan 7, 2015, 07:51 PM you sent an alert on the following post:

Fortunately, if there's one thing Nye is full of....
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6054496

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

YOUR COMMENTS

Passive-aggressive attack on a fellow DUer, accusing him or her of being "full of shit". Clearly attempting to avoid a hide by not using the actual phrase, but the intended meaning is clear from the 2 immediately preceding posts.

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Wed Jan 7, 2015, 07:58 PM, and voted 4-3 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Pure personal attack, that does nothing to contribute to civil or productive discussion on DU.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: So sick of the "Islam can do no wrong" crowd. This is a religion that clearly needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century.

Thank you.

Always risky to post a personal attack when you're at 4 hides. "Scoot" will now be taking a vacation from posting for a couple of weeks.

[grasswire]

192. you alerted on it yourself?

wow

[Violet_Crumble]

195. LOL. I missed that when I read the alert. If that's the case, it makes it even more pathetic n/t

[Violet_Crumble]

193. Thanks. As I thought it was a pathetic alert.

There's something really wrong when you get more offended by a perceived mild personal attack but aren't bothered at all with the blatant bigotry aimed at Muslims as a whole that's been going on at DU today. And that last juror comment sums it all up. Anyone who dares do what left-wingers are supposed to do and be opposed to all forms of bigotry is supposedly on some bandwagon where the group being discriminated against are perfect. Urgh...

Scoot did about the best post in this thread, and I'll miss his contributions to DU till his return.

[Nye Bevan]

197. You're welcome (nt)

[Nye Bevan]

221. I wouldn't say that the DU jury system is about "righting wrongs"

as much as it is about maintaining community standards. In any case, it is the jury, not I, which deserves any credit due.

[grossproffit]

222. I really appreciate when jury members take the time to give an explanation. eom

[LincolnsLeftHand]

92. So show me some stories

From the last 30 years of anyone other than Muslims stoning gays or adulterers.

[jeff47]

94. Ever hear of Matthew Sheppard? (nt)

[4Q2u2]

298. What?

What Christian Org did the killers belong to? Did they advocate for the killing of Gays?
I am pretty sure that these were not Church going folks that committed that atrocity on Matthew.
Neither did they believe they were protecting Christianity or guaranteeing a place of Honor in Heaven by killing Matthew.

They murdered that poor young man because he was Gay and they hated that. No religion involved and using that smear technique is disingenuous.

[jeff47]

324. They were churchgoing folk.

And that churchgoing was a large motivation for killing him.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

323. Matthew's killers were caught, prosecuted and sentenced to life

In other countries, they'd be handmaidens of the state to carry out the execution and hailed as patriots.

I'll leave it to you to figure out the dominant religion of those places. A very inconvenient truth.

[jeff47]

325. Yeah, we'd never let someone get away with torture, as long

as their victims were of a different religion......oh wait.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

326. Boy, you fled for cover quickly after your example was quickly picked apart

It'll be alright.

[jeff47]

339. Keep telling yourself that.

Your argument was only Muslims would stone homosexuals. Ignoring attacks on homosexuals elsewhere.

An example where someone was stoned in the US (as well as beaten) then comes down to "Oh, no, our countries punish people who do that kind of thing.

Except when we don't.

But please, keep talking about how we are so superior to others. That would never lead to something dumb like being an argument to go there and uplift those people.

Oh wait....

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

343. I never argued that

You brought up Matthew Sheppard. His killers were prosecuted and held to the fullest extent for what they did by our criminal justice system.

Elsewhere, the governments carry out the punishment for a being gay, a woman who was raped or "committed adultery", etc.. You're fine with that? Not your problem? Then I'm done talking to you. Have a nice day.

[hrmjustin]

167. Plenty of people have been killed for being gay or an adulterer by non-Muslims.

[drray23]

179. check out scott lively

This american pastor helped the ugandan government to pass a "kill the gays" law. He is going to be tried for crimes against humanity.

Plenty of extremist christians think like him in this country. If they took control of congress, supreme court and white house, we would soon drift towards extreme laws of that nature. Our extremists are not any better than the muslim extremists, they just happen to be under control for now because our country has a rule of law and is not in a rampant chaos like somalia or the like. If we had unrest, they would show their true colors.


http://www.addictinginfo.org/2014/12/08/american-pastor-who-helped-uganda-create-kill-the-gays-law-will-be-tried-for-crimes-against-humanity/

[KingCharlemagne]

187. I can attest to the truth of what you write based on my personal experiences

quite some time ago with a RW Christian evangelical who told me (in confidence, or so he thought) that all homosexuals should be gathered together and burned alive (!) I knew what he said was incredibly wrong but was so shocked I said nothing to him at the time. I did tell my brother about it and when my brother subsequently confronted said RWNJ, he tried to laugh it off and said he was 'only joking.' Thing is, he was deadly serious when he said it to me; I could tell he believed it and was not joking. That was some 30 years ago and it is still with me to this day.

If the Dominionists ever do consolidate control of a one-party state, they'll have to go through me to attack any of my LGBT comrades.

[Red State Rebel]

282. I've been a Christian all of my life and I've never heard anyone say that.

No REAL Christian faith I've seen has ever advocated killing people over a perceived sin. Over my life (57 years) I have attended Baptist, Methodist, Church of Christ, Catholic, Evangelical, Presbyterian, Missionary Baptist, and other churches. It was my nature to be curious about other types of worship when I was younger and I made it a point to visit a lot of different places. Never have I heard a message from the pulpit expounding killing gays or anyone else.

Christians are generally taught "hate the sin, not the sinner" as we are not to judge lest we be judged.

[KingCharlemagne]

290. Yes, it was only this one time, but it frankly scared the shit out of me. A little more of the

back story: this guy and I had been 'friends' of sorts while attending undergrad and majoring in English. After he and I had earned our respective B.A.s, he went on to law school while I chose grad school. As undergrads, John had been a very amiable and nice fellow and his girlfriend (who would become his fiance and subsequently his wife) Angie was also very amiable and a mainstream Catholic. Something happened to John and Angie after they graduated from undergrad; near as I can tell, they fell in with what I can only characterize as some sort of cult-like evangelical-charismatic sect. (I believe it's called 'Four Square' or some such, but can't remember now for certain.) I remember when I bumped into him and he made the comment about burning gays to death, John had this crazed look in his eye. It was truly an eerie experience.

OTOH, I now have a Methodist minister on my Facebook list who's even more radical than I (and certainly not homophobic in the slightest), so I agree with you that my experience way back when was as much the exception as the norm. But those folks are out there (my original objective in responding) and I know b/c I met one of them in person.

This whole episode took place in, IIRC, 1984 as the AIDs epidemic was starting to become public knowledge but about 15-odd years after gay liberation had really taken hold.

[amandabeech]

369. That's my experience if you leave off the Evangelical and substitute Unitarian.

And I'd add "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you."

That said, there are some crazies out there, and they tend to keep their mouths shut. Time, including both the deaths of some old hard-liners who just aren't going to change, and moderation of beliefs often through contact, will see the very large and EXTREMELY diverse group called Protestants become on average much more tolerant of LGBT people and issues.And just about everything else.

[Violet_Crumble]

91. So is it better if they drag them to death behind their pickups?

Not sure how one method of killing is worse than another.

[Throd]

44. Knock yourself out, I'm an atheist. I'm against all violent ideologies, religious and secular.

[jeff47]

49. There's militant atheists too.

Once a few more of us turn to atheism, I'm sure we'll get some violent groups too. Doing things like demanding, and later causing, the deaths of Muslims.

[Throd]

58. Nobody wants to hang out with militant atheist guy. He's a real downer.

Atheists have killed millions under the banner of Communism, so they don't get a pass either.

[jeff47]

61. Those were more statists than atheists, IMO

Was more of a worship of the state, instead of worship of a deity. Replace "the people" with "God" in most of their statements, and they sound very familiar.

[Throd]

76. Same shit, different flavor.

Some atheists like to preen themselves with the notion that they can't be violent intolerant fuckheads, like those stupid religious zealots, and that just ain't true.

I'm sure we can agree that we oppose violent ideologies and people of any stripe.

Dinner's ready, gotta go.

[F4lconF16]

60. Link to militant atheists?

If there are, please, give some evidence. I'll call them out and attack them as I would any violent group. But until then, I'm calling BS. The majority of atheists I know derive their morals and a lot of other ideas from secular humanism, which is radically opppsed to doing things like killing people for their religion.

[jeff47]

63. Reading. Try it.

Specifically, the first damn phrase in the post:

Once a few more of us turn to atheism

[Humanist_Activist]

145. There's supposed to be some population threshold that has to be reached...

and then, all of the sudden, terrorist atheists pop up?

That makes no sense.

[jeff47]

251. Radicalism feeds on itself.

Tim McVeigh alone was not radical enough to bomb the federal building in OK. Only through talking with others and becoming more and more radical did he reach the point of becoming a terrorist.

The low numbers of atheists means there's not that many radicals, which means they can't encourage each other to reach the point of violence.

No group is immune from radicalism. There's even violent fundamentalist Buddhists now. Atheists will eventually get there, as our numbers rise.

[Humanist_Activist]

316. The problem is that atheism, as a group, worldwide, isn't a minuscule minority...

and atheism itself doesn't tell people how to act, Buddhism does, that opens the door for acts of radicalism in the name of that religion, which is a group of ideologies.

Atheists can be and have been radicals, just not in atheism in particular, usually its part of a larger political or social narrative and set of beliefs.

[F4lconF16]

173. Then what evidence do you have that that will occur?

Otherwise, this is just baseless attacks on atheists.

[jeff47]

252. Radicalism feeds on itself.

Tim McVeigh alone was not radical enough to bomb the federal building in OK. Only through talking with others and becoming more and more radical did he reach the point of becoming a terrorist.

The low numbers of atheists means there's not that many radicals, which means they can't encourage each other to reach the point of violence.

No group is immune from radicalism. There's even violent fundamentalist Buddhists now. Atheists will eventually get there, as our numbers rise.

[tritsofme]

74. I've already seen that future....it involves otters...

[Pacifist Patriot]

309. Okay, your headline is in the present tense...

so that's easily dismissed. The term "militant atheist" is absurd since it's applied to those who are vocally strident, not bombing churches and mosques.

I'd like to see your crystal ball that makes militant atheism a foregone conclusion. I'm not buying it.

[pennylane100]

149. They have the right to shit on any religion,

it is not a crime.

[Violet_Crumble]

181. Not a crime but it is bigoted

If someone takes a dump solely on muslims and portrays most as being extremists then it's every bit as bigoted as someone taking a dump exclusively on Jews and portraying most as being extremists.

[pennylane100]

295. I absolutely agree with you, it is absolutely bigoted.

My response was one of the legal aspect of bigoted behavior. If such behavior was a crime, most of Obama's critics would have been in jail or fined. While that certainly is a nice thought, it would be a big loss to our rights under the first amendment.

[merrily]

272. Really? I cannot recall seeing a post slamming the entire Catholic laity.

I see criticisms of the Pope, the Vatican and others in power. Full disclosure: I don't hang out a lot in either the atheism group or the religion group, but this thread is not in either of those groups, either.

[rhett o rick]

368. Are you saying that you are not progressive? If so, what are you? nm

[egduj]

43. They're not.

Progressives shit on catholics any chance they get. But I see what you did there.

[treestar]

85. Not so. Where do Catholics out and out control the government

as Islam does in Saudi Arabia or Pakistan? And from that, Catholics have no power to stop anyone's free speech. What law does it advocate to limit free speech? I don't see any proof of the theocracy.

It is no longer anti-Semitic, as least as part of official doctrine.

Catholicism can be quite liberal of issues of poverty.

[jeff47]

93. Believe it or not, there are more countries in the world than the US and the Middle East.

For example, you might have heard of this place called "Ireland". Where Catholics dominate the country to the point where they killed a woman instead of letting her get an abortion during a non-viable pregnancy. And not too long ago, good, peace-loving Catholics bombed the hell out of Protestants.

Every religion on Earth can be characterized as the OP. That was the point, not literally Catholics.

[treestar]

152. Ireland was not a theocracy

It merely had a lot of Catholics, so the Parliamentary government passed laws as they democratically would.

The church did not kill any woman. The laws were so strict that they led to her death, and while that's terrible, it was act of the state and law and not the Catholic Church.

As for the IRA, etc., that had nothing to do with religion. Catholics and Protestants did not kill each other over religious doctrine. It was over politics. The Catholics happened to be Irish and wanted Britain out of Ireland. The Protestants there happened to want the British to govern there. They weren't killing each other over transubstantiation or confession or failure of loyalty to the Pope.

[Red State Rebel]

283. Ireland's war is more political than religious.

While the sides are generally divided by Catholic/Protestant, the differences are more political.

[Humanist_Activist]

362. That doesn't make sense, would Proposition 8 in California have passed without...

Catholic(and Mormon) church money and lobbying? No it wouldn't.

You don't need any particular church to outright control a nation as a theocracy to adversely influence it, look to Latin America for a lot of examples of that, all of them Catholic. Thankfully, in some nations, such as Brazil and Argentina, their influence is waning.

[Nye Bevan]

96. When an OP on DU calling the Catholic Church "the Mafia on Steroids" gets 134 recs

is that really progressives "being protective" of Catholics?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2503141

[jeff47]

98. Aren't you being protective of Catholics right now?

And aren't you posting on DU?

[Nye Bevan]

102. No, I am not opining on the merits of Trumad's "Pope Francis is a bigoted son of a bitch" thread.

I am merely pointing out that if progressives in general were "protective of Catholics" one would not expect such a thread to garner 134 recs and such a positive response on an ostensibly progressive discussion forum.

[jeff47]

103. Because you were responding to an OP, and not a post mocking an OP

where the specific religions named was utterly irrelevant to the point being made.

Oh wait, that's the opposite of what is happening.

So, gonna keep trying to disrupt and change the subject, or you wanna get back to this thread?

[Nye Bevan]

107. The OP in this thread was about Islam.

And you somehow went off on a tangent about progressives being protective of Catholics (your post 36).

So when you say "wanna get back to this thread", do you mean the original OP about Islam or your subthread where you brought up Catholicism?

[jeff47]

110. Again, the specific religions are not relevant.

Because every religion has its extremists that are responsible for violence.

But good job playing victim. Need help putting up your cross?

[Nye Bevan]

112. Again. I was not lamenting, nor praising, Trumad's anti-Catholic thread.

I was merely using it as a counterexample to the claim you made upthread that progressives are protective of Catholics.

[jeff47]

116. And if you'd bother reading, you'd realize that was not the claim being made.

As I've had to explicitly explain to you multiple times now.

But that would make you less of a victim, so we'll get to continue hearing about just how hard it is for Catholics.

[Nye Bevan]

118. Sorry. When you said "I continue to wonder why progressives are so protective of Catholics"

in post 36, I thought that you were claiming that progressives are protective of Catholics.

I apologize for misunderstanding your post.

[jeff47]

123. Because the post was a single sentence.

Oh wait! It was a copy-n-paste from the OP with the religions changed!

Golly, maybe it was trying to make a point about the OP?

[MellowDem]

292. Religious privilege is why...

After all, why wouldn't progressives mock a belief system that is all of the above, accurately described?

Why do so many progressives identify with such an institution and belief system? Religious privilege.

Why don't you understand this? Religious privilege.

[procon]

40. Freedom of religion is a very progressive idea

I don't have to embrace Islamic or Christian fundamentalism to understand the flaming extremists in both faiths do not represent the whole -- any more than Bill Maher speaks for every atheist -- so maybe we could try to avoid the usual incendiary tarring with such a big brush.

That's right, no free pass, and Christians have no more right to avoid public ridicule and condemnation than any other group when they choose to air such radical views that are the antithesis of today's societies.

[MohRokTah]

42. It's not that progressives are so protective of Islam

It's that progressives are protective of the notion that Muslims have every right to be just as big of dicks as anybody else, so long as they keep it cool.

Most hard core Muslims are not any bigger dicks than Hasidic Jews or some sects of Christianity. Most Muslims aren't any bigger dicks than your average Methodist, Baptist, Reformed Jew, or <insert somewhat dickish religious belief here>.

I will speak out against the misogyny, homophobia, and other idiocy of any religious group regardless. That's approaching idiotic speech with more speech.

When the rhetoric gets violent, that's when I want authorities to start watching.

When the actions get violent, that's when the nutters need to go away, for a long time or good depending.

[MADem]

124. There it is!

That whole Congress shall make no law bit...!

Live, and LET LIVE...

[stevenleser]

256. Yep, I am going to paraphrase and post on Facebook because this is how I feel. nt

[Quantess]

318. Are you really? It wasn't that great of a post.

All this talk of big dicks and even bigger dicks is pretty juvenile sounding.

[stevenleser]

319. That's why I'm paraphrasing. nt

[Quantess]

320. Oh, good. (No text)

[randys1]

329. Yep...

[cwydro]

45. Interesting. Right now, Rachel

is enumerating all of the recent attacks by "radicalized" persons.

There sure are a lot of these radical Islamist peeps.

[jeff47]

54. Go back a couple decades, and it would be dominated by Catholics

The IRA wasn't a book club.

Violence is not a unique feature of Islam. There are violent fundamentalists from every religion.

[cwydro]

62. I'm well aware of the IRA.

I'm an English citizen as well as an American.

And of course we have the mass murders of Protestants by Queen Mary. Catholic persecution before that.

We've got the Crusades.

Religion is such a blast.

But, that was then. This is now.

[jeff47]

64. And soon it will be tomorrow, and a new group will dominate violence. (nt)

[cwydro]

66. Yes,

perhaps the Quakers or the Amish will "radicalize."

Time will tell.

[jeff47]

69. I'm betting on Judaism. The right in Israel are getting pretty scary. (nt)

[cwydro]

79. I will agree with you on that. The right is out of control.

But I don't see Jewish terrorism, except state sanctioned as they are doing it now.

Not to comment on that whole I/P thing.

It makes my head hurt. I don't see an end.

[closeupready]

113. Yes, if you are willing to dimiss the hundreds of illegal Israeli settlements

in the West Bank designed to "organically" annex yet more territory to which they are not entitled, using arms to enforce their claims against an indigenous population which is prohibited from possessing arms, great.

[cwydro]

117. Well, perhaps I stated it poorly.

I meant to say that, yes, they engage in terrorism. It's just sanctioned by their state.

Kind of like our drone thingie we got going on.

[closeupready]

121. Oh, ok, thanks, understood.

[bobclark86]

305. Ask Yitzhak Rabin about that... n/t

[treestar]

87. Not about religion per se

The IRA wanted Britain out of Ireland, not because they were not Catholic, but because they were not British. The political element was more important.

[jeff47]

89. Their religion was a very important part of the "not British". (nt)

[Nye Bevan]

97. Ummm... if the Anglican Church had suddenly decided to accept transubstantiation,

and the authority of the Pope, I am pretty sure that the IRA would still have wanted to get the British out of Northern Ireland.

The Irish "troubles" were no more about religion than the American War of Independence was. I don't recall the Pope egging on the IRA in their bombing and murder campaign.

[jeff47]

99. Except a large part of Irish national identity is their Catholicism.

It's one of the things that makes them "Irish" and thus different from the British.

Now, you could desperately cling to talking about this one religion, or realize that there was a point to the post upthread beyond the specific religions mentioned.

[Nye Bevan]

104. OK. So if the UK had happened to have been a Catholic country,

the Irish in Ulster would have just been fine and dandy with being lorded over by the English.

I think I get it now. Thanks.

[jeff47]

106. No, but nice job slaughtering that strawman.

So much easier than actually having to talk about the actual discussion.

[treestar]

157. That was a valid point

Catholics don't have the kind of political power that some Muslims do in some countries. Those days were gone by the end of the 17th century for the most part.

[jeff47]

254. Ireland let a woman die instead of letting her get an abortion

Because the Catholic church says that is the right thing to do. The state murdering a woman based on religious beliefs is a very large indication of having "the kind of political power".

[treestar]

258. No, whatever happened there happened due to the Irish legal system

The Catholic Church does not run Ireland or any country at this point. Having influence over voters is another question. But not a theocracy.

In fact Ireland has divorce now, so that means they can do things the Catholic Church does not want.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Divorce_law_by_country#Ireland

Ireland[edit]
In the past divorce was not possible in Ireland due to the influence of the Roman Catholic Church on politicians. Divorce was prohibited by the 1937 Constitution. While in 1986 the electorate rejected the possibility of allowing divorce in a referendum, the prohibition was ultimately repealed by a 1995 referendum which repealed the prohibition on divorce, despite Roman Catholic Church opposition. Laws to give effect to the new position came into effect in 1997, making divorce possible for parties who are separated for four out of the preceding five years. It is more difficult to obtain a divorce in Ireland than in other jurisdictions.

A couple must be separated for four of the preceding five years before they can obtain a divorce. It is sometimes possible to be considered separated while living under the same roof.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion_in_the_Republic_of_Ireland on the law of abortion in Ireland. It is not up to the Catholic Church. It may be conservative there because a lot of people are Catholic, but that's their individual voting preference.

[jeff47]

268. Then Islam doesn't have that kind of power either.

Virtually no "Muslim" country is ruled by religious leaders. Iran being the exception.

So under your definition, Islam "doesn't have that kind of power" either. Yet you argue it does.

[treestar]

347. Yes it does

Saudi Arabia. Pakistan. Those are theocracies. Ireland is not.

Saudi Arabia has religious police.

[closeupready]

354. Boy so much ignorance in one post.

Saudi Arabia has, at worst, a regime with power shared between Wahabbist leaders and members of the Royal House of Saud.

Pakistan is a democracy. It is Islamic in the same way that China is communist.

[treestar]

370. You're claiming Saudi Arabia is not a theocracy?

Please enlighten us ignorant people on why the religious police are not a sign of that.

Please tell us all about how women have equal rights to an education in Pakistan and how Christians are treated equally.

[MADem]

128. There's also that whole CELTIC thing....

They aren't Anglo-Saxon on the Emerald Isle. That's what makes them "Irish" and made them Irish before Catholicism ever hit their shores.

[treestar]

156. Or any Catholics anywhere else

like Italy or Poland or the US, excepting only those of Irish descent (some of them).

[treestar]

155. It was part of their culture

But they were not killing Protestants because they didn't believe in the Infallibility of the Pope or Transubstantiation. The Protestants were not killing the Catholics because they did. It was over British hegemony.

[liberal_at_heart]

47. Some use religion to gain power over other people. That does not mean

the entire religion is evil. Anytime you have a group of people, there will always be some bad people in that group including atheists. I have two children who are atheists and my husband and I have taught them to stand up for themselves while simultaneously being respectful to all people. I have seen atheists on this board be very hateful towards other people, but because I know there are good atheists in this world I do not condemn all atheists. I also have an evangelical Christian father. I very strongly disagree with him on things like gay rights and women's rights, but I know there are Christians out there that fight for gay rights and women's rights. Therefore, I do not condemn all Christians either. There are millions of Muslims out there that are also fighting for gay rights, women's rights, and other progressive ideas.

[ileus]

48. We see it as the enemy of Christianity which is associated with the GOP.

[whatchamacallit]

50. Guess you could ask why they are protective of any dumbass religion that promotes oppression

including Christianity and Judiasm.

[closeupready]

51. I guess that's because you never heard of internment camps.

Or you've never been to Auschwitz.

[liberal_at_heart]

56. my atheist daughter is dating a Jewish boy. He isn't really religious but he went to a museum and

saw some of the horrible things that had happened he decided he would continue the traditions to keep the culture alive, and my daughter is very supportive of him doing that. So am I.

[closeupready]

105. Thank you for posting this.

[MrMickeysMom]

52. I think many progressive thinkers protect themselves from RELIGION...

I see a troubling connection between religious dogma and all of these wars and atrocities in the world and domestic acts of terror.

It's ALL the wackos that come from this. I don't think you can see one religion as any less worse than the other when it comes to fundamentalism and the act of violence that stem from it.

[Avalux]

55. We are not protective, we are tolerant and inclusive.

We also realize that there are baddies wearing all kinds of labels, doesn't mean they're all bad. They're people.

[Lex]

59. Yeehaw, let's go shoot 'em up instead!

[Violet_Crumble]

65. Progressives should be against broadbrush attacks on all muslims

Seems pretty simple to me

[davidsilver]

68. Against Attacks on Christians and Jews Too? Simple?

[Violet_Crumble]

75. That ones a given already

Probably less so at du when it comes to Christians coz they're by far the dominant religion in the US and other western countries, but if people were to make broadbrush attacks on all Jews based on the actions of the extremists in that religion they'd be nuked pretty quick. I think people, especially Americans, need to be able to see a difference between most muslims, and the extremists who carry out hoffirc attacks. Reading posts from a small number of DUers recently I'm not sure at all that they see a difference.

[davidsilver]

100. Although I am not an observant Jew

There are plenty of good people from both religions who are working for progressive change and to help the poor. It is, in my opinion, a small percentage who are wing nuts and Teapublicans.

[Violet_Crumble]

127. I agree with you but it's clear 19 DUers dont

That'd be the one who posted the flamebait OP as well as the predictable few who recced it. And the funny thing is there's a few of them I've seen complaining loudly about other forms of bigotry that manifest themselves at DU.

[Ms. Toad]

77. Yes. n/t

[UTUSN]

67. Has to do with: some P.C.-ism

[KingCharlemagne]

70. What does 'protective of Islam' mean? It is, after all, one of the 3 great branches of the

Abrahamic tree of faith (the other two being Judaism and Christianity).

Are you saying you're OK with this Charlie Hebdo cover?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

95. I'm not the OP, but I'm fine with that cover.

Why wouldn't I be?

[KingCharlemagne]

136. Do you speak or read French? If not, the white headline text says

"The Koran is shit" and the yellow textbox text says "It fails to stop bullets."

The cover does not say, "The Bible is shit" or "The Torah is shit." Only "The Koran is shit." In different times, we'd be calling the cover as it is 'racist' or 'bigoted.'

[SidDithers]

153. And the little pink box says "Killings in Egypt"...

The cover is is a comment about Tahrir Square.

Sid

[Ken Burch]

212. In that case, the cartoon is not only bigoted, but stupid.

A lot of the protesters in Tahrir Square (the majority, in all likllihood) weren't religious fanatics at all. And no Muslilm, to my knowledge, has ever expressed either the belief that the Koran could stop bullets OR that being strongly religious would prevent a person from being killed.

[randys1]

331. I can see why Muslims would find that insulting, but killing 12 people because of that?

I know you are not defending the violence, but I dont really give a god damn if they were insulted or not.

I insult christians all the time because most of them need insulting.

If someone kills me for that, I wont be happy about it.


We are allowing ourselves to assign value and credibility to religion where no religion, none, deserves it, then we are somewhat justifying a violent reaction to what is perceived by some as incitement.

[KingCharlemagne]

344. As far as I know, the OP never returned to respond to any of the

issues raised in his or her OP. He or she asked why progressives are 'protective of Islam'. I answered his question with a question of my own to which there was, AFAIK, no reply.

I'll let a brief excerpt from Richard Seymour's blog Lenin's Tomb speak for me:

No, Charlie Hebdo's offices should not be raided by gun-wielding fucknuggets, whatever the reason for the murder. No, journalists are not legitimate targets for killing. But no, we shouldn't line up with the inevitable statist backlash against Muslims, or the ideological charge to defend a fetishised, racialised 'secularism', or concede to the blackmail which forces us into solidarity with a racist institution.

http://www.leninology.co.uk/2015/01/charlie-hebdo.html

BTW, the entire essay whence that excerpt is extracted is well worth the time and effort to read.

[Alameda]

71. what a despicable post

I notice you have slammed ALL Muslims, while two times you were qualifying Christians. I sincerely doubt if you have much actual knowledge about Islam, yet you are comfortable condemning all of them.

[Lex]

72. bingo

[WillyT]

82. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

[CrawlingChaos]

111. + infinity

[MADem]

130. Yeah, this is just not DU's finest hour. I've seen some comments that

seem like they'd be more at home in far-right venues than here on this discussion board.

[Union Scribe]

138. I completely agree. nt

[Nye Bevan]

162. Only one hidden post in this entire thread.

By and large folks are staying within community standards.

[MADem]

170. I've seen some hair-curling (or straightening) comments in other threads.

Some very xenophobic language has found its way round this board today.

[Violet_Crumble]

180. That was a pathetic hide

If some of the blatant anti Muslim comments posted here (not anti terrorist or anti extremist) is within community standards then there isn't much difference between the standards at Du and DI

[Nye Bevan]

182. Have you been alerting on them? (nt)

[Violet_Crumble]

185. That's none of ur business n/t

[Puglover]

233. Good for you.

It was a pathetic hide.

[randys1]

330. Did YOU report/alert someone for telling YOU you were full of shit?

just curious

[Nye Bevan]

332. In the words of Violet Crumble

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6055485

[randys1]

333. so yes...i know who goes on my jury blacklist...just so you know, I would NEVER do that

now call me a republican and I will alert you instantly, but tell me I am full of shit and no problem

[Nye Bevan]

334. I would never call any DUer either of those things.

Especially if I was on 4 hides and one more would suspend me.

[hrmjustin]

183. I agree. People have no idea how damaging their comments were to DU today.

[Puglover]

232. I personally think

Discussionist has a leak.

[MADem]

246. HA! That's a thread winner!

Thank you for giving me something to laugh about! Not much going around on that score, these days...!

[Puglover]

253. Agreed.

Lately DU is a rather grim place. But hopefully it's temporary.

[YoungDemCA]

286. Very few people on DU have much knowledge about Islam

Other than poorly translated, overly simplistic, extremely biased talking points from Western media sources.

[MellowDem]

293. What a stupid post....

Full of religious privilege. Attacking a bigoted belief system isn't attacking all people personally who identify with it.

[Jamaal510]

80. I'm against

broad generalizations of any religion in general. With me, it's not so much about defending one faith or another. I resent it whenever people, for example, portray all Muslims as terrorists, all Christians as dumb, all Jews as greedy, etc. In addition, part of what it means for one to be a progressive is expressing tolerance and possessing the ability to see shades of gray.

[hrmjustin]

81. I am not protective but I am not willing to throw all Muslims under the bus because some have

been violent.

[Alameda]

84. this is why...

[sabrina 1]

122. Thank you. DU is becoming a scary place lately.

I can't imagine why anyone would even need to ask that question on a Dem forum. I have seen it asked before, but not on a Dem forum.

[SlimJimmy]

126. Do you believe that all the Muslims in the world will be rounded up and killed?

Because that's what the cartoon implies. What governmental structure will be able to accomplish this type of atrocity ... again?

[Ken Burch]

211. Maybe not all in the world. But all in Europe and the UK...a real possibility.

With perpetual U.S. military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world used to torment and immiserate those who can't actually be rounded up.

There are way too many people who see Muslims the way a lot of Europeans(and a larger-than-we'd-like-to-think number of North Americans) saw Jews in the Thirties.

[SlimJimmy]

374. In your dreams.

[Xithras]

134. There's a fundamental difference between the two..

There weren't large groups of Jews in Germany shooting innocent writers, blowing up busses and trains, and threatening to wage war against the German people if they didn't convert to Judaism. There weren't Jewish armies marching across the middle east butchering children and selling women into slavery by the tens of thousands. There weren't Jewish leaders proclaiming that the best way to foster peace is for the world to curtail their freedoms in order to appease Jewish sensibilities.

There is a world of difference between Hitlers unjustified and brutal extermination of the Jewish people, and the VERY justified criticism of the more conservative aspects of Islam that we see today.

I defend people, not bullshit religious beliefs. Hitlers actions in Germany and todays criticism of Islam are NOT comparable.

[Violet_Crumble]

135. There's not large groups of German Muslims blowing things up etc

Today's creatures who rally against and attack all Muslims are the direct descendants of brown shirts. They're fascist fuckwits that no left winger should be tryng to defend.

Be very careful with ur broadbrush stereotyping. Those who wield that clumsy brush may not like the results if it's turned on them.

[Alameda]

169. listen to yourself, you are actually justifying

hostile actions against Muslims. FYI.... How many million Muslims have died as result of just being in the "wrong place at the wrong time"....in their own country, village, home, all justified by 9/11?

[KingCharlemagne]

137. This may be the best god-damned cartoon I've seen in forever. Hits

you like a punch to the gut. Thanks for posting (and thanks for calling out the OP upthread too).

[hrmjustin]

139. Thank you for posting this! DU has not been very friendly to Muslims today.

[Ken Burch]

168. Wonderful illustration. Thanks for posting that. n/t.

[YoungDemCA]

284. +1

[ecstatic]

132. I'm trying not to broad brush like Maher

but it's getting really hard. Between the massacre at the Pakistani school and now this. But my anger isn't directed *only* at islamic extremists--I'm ready to see all extremist groups (right wing, kkk, etc) annihilated. Of course, that only makes the cycle of hatred continue. I don't know what the solution is at this point.

[still_one]

133. I think you will find a good percentage of folks on DU not giving anyone a free pass, especially if

it relates to a religious persuasion

[dem in texas]

140. True progressives stand against any type of terrorists - Remember Oklahoma City?

[Dreamer Tatum]

141. Because the RW dislikes Islam.

The Left often at least tacitly embraces anything the Right disregards.


That's pretty much it, and there isn't a lot of room for debate. Everyone on DU would rather relive the Bush years than live under Islamic rule and law. Know how I know? Because we lived through Bush and everyone is here to tell the tale.

[hrmjustin]

147. Not everyone is here.

[Dreamer Tatum]

158. Oh yes, I meant those who escaped the reeducation camps.

[hrmjustin]

160. I meant my cousin who was killed in the Iraq war.

[Dreamer Tatum]

163. touche nt

[SomethingFishy]

288. Wow, with only one word you have managed to post

the most disgusting thing I have ever read on DU.

Welcome to ignore.

[Dreamer Tatum]

304. Me admitting that people died needlessly in war is disgusting?

Good riddance. Glad you can't see this.

[KingCharlemagne]

190. I'm sorry to hear about your cousin. I tried my best to stop the madness both

before March 20, 2003 and then for 5 years thereafter. None of it made a damned bit of difference, not to your cousin nor to the countless Iraqis who aren't here any more either. Oh yeah, and the detainees the CIA tortured to death. They aren't here either.

[hrmjustin]

224. Thank you!

[Rex]

244. I apologize for that poster, they lack that ability.

All they can do is type something really fucking stupid like 'touche'.

Sorry you lost your cousin in Iraq, SOME OF US remember that life is more than some game to win against anonymous posters.

[hrmjustin]

248. Thank you.

[adirondacker]

311. Makes you wonder what some folks dream about all day.

[woolldog]

143. Great observation

It's an awful awful religion. Worse than most.

[nomorenomore08]

146. I'm not especially "protective" or reverent toward any religion.

But I'm still opposed to blanketly demonizing an entire group of people, especially a potentially vulnerably minority group as Muslims are in the West.

There's a difference between despising fundamentalists of any faith - as I do - and simply despising Muslims as people. IMO someone like Maher treads too close to the latter, even if he does make valid points along the way.

[Ken Burch]

154. Not being protective...being antiwar...

The great concern, I think, is that joining in outspoken denunciations of "Islamic extremism" will be taken by the Right as an endorsement of further U.S. military intervention in the Arab/Muslim world-perhaps even of the insane idea of bombing Iran.

Yes, religious extremism, like violent extremism of any stripe, needs to be condemned-but there's no way to moderate any form of extremism through the use of military force.

[Ken Burch]

159. What, exactly, would you have us do?

It's not as if it's possible to abolish Islam, OR to impose secularism on the Arab/Muslim world from outside-especially by Western(read American)military intervention, as many right-wingers in the US, the UK and Europe would like.

The last attempt to do that was the Imperial era...when Britain and France, in particular, ruled the vast majority of the Islamic peoples as if colonizing their lands in the name of "Western Civilization" was a natural right-and it made "secularization", rather than an act of human liberation, into an act of colonialist subjugation.

This history makes it very difficult to feel as if secular progressives in the West have any moral entitlement to condemn Islamic people for anything.

[unblock]

184. this is a ridiculously bigoted and ignorant post and i have no idea how it survived a jury

0-7 keep it, evidently. my alert was ignored because someone beat me to it, so i get the results but not the details.

there are a billion muslims on this planet and it's the not remotely fair, decent, or liberal to judge the religion or any of its adherents by the actions of a few extremists.

islam led muhammad ali to become a conscientious objector during the vietnam war. that alone is evidence that islam as a religion is not what you think it might be.

moreover, just as with any religion, there are different denominations as well as regional and individual variations in beliefs and practices.

i would say that your view of islam is consistent instead with the heavily distorted, highly negative view that the american powers that be want you to have.

[KingCharlemagne]

191. As disturbing as the OP itself is the fact that some 26 people

recomended it. And some of the comments in support of it are way over the top in pure, unbridled Islamophobia.

Thanks for alerting on this. It needed to be.

[liberal_at_heart]

194. Apparently it's perfectly acceptable to write religious bigoted posts on GD. What's not

accepted are positive religious threads. They are locked almost immediately. As much as it claims to be, this is not a progressive website or at least this forum is not progressive anyway.

[WhiteAndNerdy]

196. Based on many of the responses

that you've gotten so far, it seems that a lot of people have difficulty separating an ideology from its adherents. You didn't ask why people are so protective of Muslims, but that's how people are answering. I don't know if this reflects a real difficulty that many people have in making fine distinctions, or if it's just a dishonest way to try to shut down criticism, but either way, it's disturbing.

[liberal_at_heart]

198. The OP condemns an entire religion, not just the fundamentalists.

I know there are many, many loud atheists on DU that would love nothing more than to see all religion just disappear, but there are also many, many of us who are religious that aren't going anywhere no matter how many hate filled internet posts or cartoons are drawn to try and discredit all religion. Not that the anti-religion crowd here paid much attention but there was a thread earlier about how French Muslims have come out publicly denouncing what the terrorists did, but also saying they would continue to non violently protest the paper that so often attacks religion in its cartoons. There are millions of peace loving Muslims who condemn violence and fight for more freedom and equality within their religion.

[WhiteAndNerdy]

200. Condemning Islam is not the same thing as condemning Muslims.

Also, just for the record -- I am not an atheist and I do not want to see religion disappear. I would like to see people liberated from harmful ideologies of all kinds, whether religious or political or some other kind. Unlike the kind of atheist who would like to see all religion abolished, I believe that it is possible to have healthy religions (and other kinds of ideologies) -- I am religious myself and I believe my religion is healthy for me and would be healthy for society if it were practiced on a large scale.

No one suffers more from Islam than Muslims do. If I hated them as people, I wouldn't care about their suffering, but I do care. My problem is with the belief system and the culture it engenders, not with the believers, especially because most have been raised in the faith and never had much of a choice about whether to believe in it. I feel the same way about children raised in fundamentalist forms of Christianity because I was raised that way and I know first-hand the harm it does. That doesn't even come close to hating people who were raised in those harmful variants of Christianity -- quite the contrary.

[liberal_at_heart]

201. Female Muslims in Western countries enjoy a lot of freedom, and those who live in

Middle Eastern countries are fighting for more freedom and equality within their religion without giving up their beliefs. Just because there need to be reforms does not mean the entire religion is bad.

[WhiteAndNerdy]

205. It's not about "good" or "bad."

It's about the kind of culture an ideology produces, and whether it's healthy for individuals and societies. I think it's kind of strange that anyone would think they can change their culture without changing its foundational beliefs, don't you?

[liberal_at_heart]

206. Religions do change over time. That is one of the things that fundamentalists try to fight, but it

still happens none the less.

[bhikkhu]

199. The objection is to equating a culture with its extremists

...which is all too easy to carelessly do when one looks at a culture from the outside. There are christian fundamentalist wackos, islamic fundamentalist wackos, fundamentalist wackos of every variety really (it seems to be a basic mode-of-failure that can happen anywhere). But they don't define the cultures that they diverged from. I don't really see a lot of hypocrisy or confusion from progressives on the point.

[MFM008]

202. I lived in Libya as a kid

I remember the 'natives' being very kind to me, although i felt bad about all the poor women under the black sheets because I though they were all burned and deformed under there. ( A kids eye view of traditional muslim dress). These lunatics only call themselves "muslims", they are crazed murderers. Personally, I cant toss out an entire religion because some are raving mad...you know like some Christians and Jews.

[JonLP24]

208. I don't protect the Wahabbi cult

The others, they're just like most other followers more-or-less.

Bill Maher really comes across as clueless when discussing Islam and he generalizes.

[Enrique]

213. not a single response from the OP

all these good answers, and no acknowledgement from OP. People like to hang on to their prejudices, you can't force anyone to give them up.

[trumad]

220. like i said...

Flame bait.

[Nye Bevan]

223. 262 replies (including 11 from Trumad), 39 recs, and only one hidden post.....

Last edited Thu Jan 8, 2015, 11:55 AM - Edit history (6)

seems more like a healthy, mostly civilized discussion to me.

[trumad]

231. For Bigots...

It's quite healthy.

[Nye Bevan]

234. And calling the Catholic church "the Mafia on steroids" and the Pope "a son of a bitch"

is not bigotry?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2503141

[trumad]

240. What calling a bigot a bigot means I'm a bigot?

I can pull up many more quotes from Francis if you would like:

<snip>
But gay rights advocates say there’s nothing new about this Pope’s attitudes toward LGBT people.
The National Catholic Reporter‘s John L. Allen Jr. writes that Pope Francis has taken a strongly conservative stance in the past on the social issues Catholics hold dear, especially same-sex adoption and parenting:
Bergoglio is seen an unwaveringly orthodox on matters of sexual morality, staunchly opposing abortion, same-sex marriage, and contraception. In 2010 he asserted that gay adoption is a form of discrimination against children, earning a public rebuke from Argentina’s President, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner.

Raw Story adds that the new Pope’s staunch opposition to same-sex parenting makes him an equally firm opponent of marriage equality:

In a 2010 letter published in L’Osservatore Romano, Bergoglio asked monasteries to pray “fervently” that lawmakers in Argentina did not go through with plans to legalize same sex marriage because it would “seriously damage the family.”
“At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children,” he wrote. “At stake are the lives of many children who will be discriminated against in advance, and deprived of their human development given by a father and a mother and willed by God. At stake is the total rejection of God’s law engraved in our hearts.”
“Let us not be naive: this is not simply a political struggle, but it is an attempt to destroy God’s plan. It is not just a bill (a mere instrument) but a ‘move’ of the father of lies who seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/03/13/new-pope-same-old-homophobia/#ixzz3OEsRJwCZ

[Nye Bevan]

242. "Mafia on steroids"? Slurring an entire religion as an organized crime organization? (nt)

[trumad]

249. entire?

No--- a few---yes.

Are you denying it?

[Nye Bevan]

250. You did not use the phrase "a few" or the word "some" in your "Mafia on steroids" post (nt)

[trumad]

257. OK---how about many?

I am stunned that you are such an apologist for an organization that is anti-choice for women, Anti-LGBT, an organization that covered up child rape for years, ----that is the Catholic Church.

Yes?

[Nye Bevan]

262. Are you stunned that Joe Biden, Nancy Pelosi, Dennis Kucinich, and the Kennedys,

are all active members of this organization?

[trumad]

265. You keep using that same meme over and over and over.

and I keep saying I don't give a shit. To each their own.

I am a former member of the church who quit the church once I was old enough to understand that I was a member of an organization that goes against many of my principals.

[Nye Bevan]

266. "Meme"? Or "fact"? (nt)

[trumad]

267. Antonin Scalia is a current member as well.....

Big fucking deal.

[get the red out]

216. Me too!

Islam s the only force strong enough for many on the left to dismiss horrible treatment of gay people and women, for instance. Christians get very justifiable criticism for their hatefulness but people had better not say the same about Islam!

[pampango]

217. I suspect many of us are protective of Muslims not of Islam.

I don't think you can blame all of any group (Muslims, Russians, Catholics, Americans, ...) for the actions of a few. The vast, vast majority of Muslims, Russians, Catholics, Americans, etc. are good people who are the nationality or religion they are due to where they were born or to whom they were born. Not conditions that a baby has any control over.

They are not by nature fanatics, killers or terrorists. The vast majority of all just want to have a good job, raise a family and have a good life.

"Homophobic, sexist ... and anti-free speech". That describes authoritarian leaders who get a lot of support here too. You could add "authoritarian, 'family values' and patriotism/nationalism" to that list - which does not make it any better.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

228. Define 'protective'?

Is saying people are idiots for publishing the most offensive things they can think to draw or say about a group of people 'protective'?

Most religions around the world (as they are actually practiced and as their holy writ states) 'fall far short of' progressivism as far as I can see. Because most religions are inherently 'conservative'. They have a given changeless ideal to which they aspire. They want you to do 'x, y and z' for now and for ever, and discourage change. You have to cleave to millennia-old proscriptions. That's as conservative as you can get.

As for your first sentence, that describes Christianity pretty well too, as far as I can see. If you want to claim there are lots of Christians who don't fall under those adjectives, what you're really saying is 'There are lots of Christians who REJECT the parts of Christianity they don't like, but still claim to be 'Christians'.

[KG]

235. i don't religion to be a progressive concept.

[Capt. Obvious]

237. Mild fatwa envy on your part

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fatwa_envy

[Rex]

238. I continue to wonder why centrists are so protective of the Third Way think tank.

[ScreamingMeemie]

241. YES!!!

Let's throw them ALL in work camps and be DONE with it...!!!!1111!!!

[gwheezie]

255. I think all religions are goofy

But all the religious people I know personally are fine human beings. It's prett fucked up to murder people because of God. all religions do it though but not all religious people murder.
I just can't believe a progressive site has so many people who are wiling to stereotype an entire group. I have to mention some of my best friends are catholic.

[Orsino]

261. Because there are assholes out there who conflate extremists with believers...

...and who imagine that a religion can be bigoted and violent. It can't; that is the province of people, many or most of whom act as individuals.

But there are assholes who love the broad brush, and who might be tempted to opine that people's freedoms aren't worthy of protection.

[dawg]

263. I think progressives are protective of all people.

People should have the right to worship and believe according to their own conscience, and for many, Islam is the path they feel led to follow.

Islam is very similar to my Christian faith. Muslims are my brothers and sisters, and I believe I would be committing a sin if I were to ridicule them or disrespect their beliefs. At the very least, it is rude and counterproductive.

To judge Muslims based on the actions of a relatively small number of mentally unstable people would be like judging atheists based on Kim Jong Un.

[TBF]

270. You need to turn off the FAUX "news". nt

[LordGlenconner]

271. All religion is fucking dumb

[Iggo]

280. I've progressed beyond being protective of any religion.

[Cleita]

281. I guess I met Muslim people long before it was fashionable to hate them.

They have their problems, especially their attitude toward women and LBGT like the other Abrahmaic religions of Judaism and Christianity. But because all these religions believe in the infallibility of their doctrine and we all know they are often in error because they are as fallible as the people who invented them, they become inflexible in certain regards.

I worked at a university in a department that had a majority of Middle Easterners working in it, most of them Muslim, but not all. I got to know the women who were not that oppressed, but did get used to the cultural quirks like the single girls being escorted to and from work by their brothers or another male relative. But the married women were not.

Then the neighborhood I was living in started becoming a Persian enclave and I got to know more Muslims. Again, there were cultural differences but basically a nice and hardworking people, who were very business oriented and interested in getting the American Dream for their children, if not themselves.

So I cannot join in the hate. Most Muslims are not interested in blowing up people any more than most Irish Catholics are. Yet, the Irish also have their extremists, known as the IRA, which were very active in doing awful things back when Maggie Thatcher was busy starving Irish rebels in prison

and perpetuating other abuses on the Irish people in N. Ireland. That was in the seventies.

[SomethingFishy]

294. Are you fucking serious?

Why are you so "protective of Christianity? They are sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, pro-theocracy and anti-free speech.

They fall well short of the things progressives believe in.

The fact that there are Islamic fundamentalist wackos is no reason to give Christianity a pass.


This argument can be used against or for every moronic religion on this stupid fucking planet.

[trumad]

301. +1

[MellowDem]

306. We aren't as protective of Christianity...

On DU is the whole point.

[SomethingFishy]

312. "We" is a pretty broad term... I'm not "protective" of any religion.

It's all just a bullshit way to control others. Every single religion is just one form of control or another.

[m-lekktor]

310. ummmm that is what the OP is saying

the OP is saying "progressives" bash christianity but give islam a pass and call critics of islam racists and bigots.

[SomethingFishy]

314. No, what the OP said was that Muslims are

Homophobic, anti-semetic, anti-free speech and pro-Theocracy.

I'm saying that is true of pretty much every religion.

The OP is doing exactly what he claims everyone else is doing. Giving a pass to one religion for the same infractions he uses to curse another.

[Nye Bevan]

327. "They are sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, pro-theocracy and anti-free speech"

So obviously you would never vote for a Christian for president, right?

[SomethingFishy]

348. Well according to your ilk I have no choice

if I don't vote for the Democrat the world will end. And it's none of your fucking business who I vote for

Sexist: "Women should be subservient to their husbands."

Homophobic: Homosexuality is an abomination

Anti-Semetic: "Only Christians can go to Heaven, if you renounce your Judaism and take Jesus Christ as your personal savior we will let you in to our Heaven, otherwise burn in hell with the rest of the sinners." morons.

Pro-Theoracy: "The USA was founded by Christians For Christians and all our laws are based on the 10 Commandments."

Anti-Free Speech: "We should invade their country, kill their leaders and convert them all to Christianity"..

You need a personal relationship with god? Have one, you certainly don't need to pay some fucking snake oil salesman huckster to develop that. Religion is a money making scam used to control an ignorant populace. Avoid it at all costs..

Does that answer your question?

[alarimer]

296. Because Islam is not the problem; extremism is.

As it is in all religions. ALL religions are, to one degree or another, anti-progressive. I can't stand any of them. The problem is extremism AND the fact that so-called moderate believers don't drive out the extremists (or quit when they find some beliefs problematic).

[Albertoo]

341. Well, the text of your post says it: Islam IS the problem (other religions too)

Yes, yes, yes, a great many muslims are peaceful, average people.

The problem is not them, it's Islam, the doctrine.

The Book says to behead/stone gays, jews, blasphemers, cut the hands of thieves, etc.


Other religious texts are full of problems (violent Torah, slavery-condoning NT, etc),

but, as a text, as a doctrine, the Quran is the most problematic.

[LittleBlue]

297. They are a very small minority

in the US.

Picking on them is pointless bullying.

[KamaAina]

307. I continue to wonder why alleged progressives indulge in Islam-bashing

[Douglas Carpenter]

313. it's trendy now - awhile it go it wasn't so trendy - Their liberalism and their progressivism

is little more than a fashion statement - a chance to hangout with the cool kids

[Ykcutnek]

315. It's an embarrassment that Islam continues to get a free pass.

No matter how much oppression and savagery it has released on the world, simply because some assholes went overboard after 9/11 and some on our side feel guilty about it. Get over it, wake the fuck up, and stop with the false equivalences... the rest of us are sick of it.

More people like you should have the courage to call them out on this bullshit.

[PeaceNikki]

317. Agree. It's weird. DU (and plenty of other liberals) get so strange about Islam.

Many DUers accuse those critical of Islam of spreading RW rhetoric. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend" is a ridiculous simplistic notion. And wrong.

As a strong supporter of women and a secular society, Republicans are my adversaries. Organized religion is as well. Islam is generally an extreme example of misogyny, hate and violence - and injecting these horrible beliefs into governments and law. And I, for one, won't hold back on criticizing it just because the RW does.

We think it's hypocritical when the Christian RW wants to exclude Islam while pushing their agendas (and it is!), but I ALSO think it's hypocritical to defend Islam or pretend their harmful beliefs do not exist and I won't. I am well known on DU for my criticism of Pope Francis and the RCC and any other religious person or belief that is discriminatory or otherwise harmful to a secular society. I don't like any of it.

[Prism]

342. Some good reasons, some profoundly stupid ones

Eh, bullet points.

- We recognize Western colonialism and contemporary imperialism has played a significant role in making a hash of the Middle East. So, there is a feeling of responsibility that we "did this to them," which is actually partly right. Partly. Tribalism, religion, despotism, oligarchy, and a whole host of other reasons also contributed. But that sense of guilt and responsibility leaves us constantly questioning whether we have the right to say anything at all. Which brings us to . . .

-Multicultural relativism. A pseudo-intellectual and hilariously unserious philosophy where American Christians are just as bad as Islamic fundamentalists, and all cultures are equal! No. American Christians are hateful, and largely hilarious these days. C'mon. Gay tsunami is gold. Islamic governments still hang gay teenagers. But some people honestly refuse to see that difference. It might mean saying something vaguely kind about American Christian conservatives, and some people would rather eat their young before participating in that.

- The Right hates Muslims. Well, then we're for it! This is as far as some people go.

- Racial politics. Some people act like Muslims are a race unto themselves. Forget the varied ethnicities, from Semitic to Persian, to Indo-Pakistani, to East Asian, Africans, and everything in between. Patronizing liberals see "brown people" (which is condescendingly racist in and of itself), and all brown people are automatically oppressed by the white West and so must be defended. It's simplistic and infantile. This sentiment is all over DU. Islam is a religion and ideology, but nevermind. If you don't like Islam, you're secretly racist, and that is that.

- Muslims are a minority in America and this perception of a vulnerable, mistrusted population translates to the global stage in thinking. We should embrace, welcome, and protect American Muslims precisely because they are a vulnerable minority. However, this is not true in the rest of the world. In the rest of the world, conservative Islam is a majority and controls the levers of state. Treating global Islam as if it has the same dynamic as a local Islamic neighborhood in Chicago is just provincial American political ignorance on display.

- Self-loathing.

Eh, that about covers it. Like I said, some of this is valid, some of it is just dense.

[sibelian]

351. .

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

357. No. We're protective of Freedom of Religion.

And, Freedom from religion, simultaneously. As guaranteed in the constitution.

[karynnj]

363. I think you are mistaking the American left rejecting the demonizing of millions of

people because of their religion. The trigger for that is that the RIGHT is demonizing Islam itself and the people whose religion it is.

As to all the things you list as wrong -- no one is saying that they are perfect or should be emulated. You say those values are "mainstream" in contemporary Islam. Can you really back that up? Have you ever known Moslems as neighbors?

Yes, I know that there are quotes from the Koran which are atrocious. Yet, if look hard enough, there are some really atrocious things in both the Torah and Bible. I assume that you similarly find them homophobic and sexist. As to pro-theocracy, it more likely matters what nation the person lives in. In this country, there are good liberal politicians willing to say that their own religious believes do inform their consciences - thus their legislation - many articulate as Mario Cuomo did where the line is where they can not legislate their own religious believes.

I am annoyed and have no respect for Bill Maher, because he has so little respect for anyone not like him. I suggest instead of asking why some progressives give Islam a pass - which I don't think they do --- ask why liberals do reject the gratuitous insults towards Judaism or Christianity.

If you go on any right wing site, you will find hateful discussions of both Kerry and Obama not condemning Islam, not calling attacks by Moslems terror (even when they do in two languages as Kerry just did), or taking out of context any comment that includes Islam as one of the world's religions. In particular, they hated the effort made (mostly by Kerry) to get ME imams to condemn terrorism. The administration sees that beyond military, they need to win the battle of ideas.

It is easiest to recruit terrorists if they see their religion under attack by outsiders. It may be nothing Americans say will make a difference. However, the attack against ISIS is being done in a different way than the two major wars. To succeed, it must be a battle by the region with coalition help against ISIS. Only that will be sustainable.