• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Making Anti-Muslim Comments Bigoted[W:92,185]

Many would argue that is the same with Islam though. That is my point. The Koran calls for them to kill the infidel where they stand.

Yes, and enough of them believe that and are willing to do that to make it reasonable to be suspicious, cautious and wary of Muslims, in general. They need to start policing their own ranks a lot better if they want to change this perception.
 
None of that is relevant to the comparison I made. I knew you would have a bull**** complaint though. Excuses are just that, excuses.

Of course it is relevant. Every time the discussion involves Islam in any way, shape or form, out comes the apologia using Christianity. If something is common in Islam and extremely rare in Christianty, this does not discourage the comparisons. If actions are egregious in Islam, but merely objectionable in Christianity, this does not discourage the comparisons. If something is occuring today in Islam, but happened 200 years ago in Christianity, this does not discouraget he comparisons. THis is all part of the apologist's handbook, and should be recognized as such.

As far as knowing what a person would say, however, I am not the least bit surprised, myself, that you would respond with no content, but with mere snarkiness and stupidity.
 
Of course it is relevant. Every time the discussion involves Islam in any way, shape or form, out comes the apologia using Christianity. If something is common in Islam and extremely rare in Christianty, this does not discourage the comparisons. If actions are egregious in Islam, but merely objectionable in Christianity, this does not discourage the comparisons. If something is occuring today in Islam, but happened 200 years ago in Christianity, this does not discouraget he comparisons. THis is all part of the apologist's handbook, and should be recognized as such.

As far as knowing what a person would say, however, I am not the least bit surprised, myself, that you would respond with no content, but with mere snarkiness and stupidity.

Historically and currently, the Jewish religion and its followers are far more warlike, violent and oppressive than any other religious group, especially as a percentage of population. Would That be a better comparison?

Note I am not apologizing for anything, I leave that type thing to you. I dislike all religions. That does give me a bit of clarity since I don't have to apologize for one and condemn another for the same actions.
 
If a higher percentage of Christians condoned abortion clinic bombings perhaps it would be justified.

When a Christian bombs or kills innocent people, he's rather quickly condemned by Christians. Muslims do not speak out against their radicals. Therefore, IMO, Muslims condone such actions. This then makes them all suspect.

The problem here, Calamity, is that dishonest people simply do not care about any of that. The comparisons to Christianity are just a convenient tool they use to defend Islam, and they defend Islam because they have predermined that it is their role to do so. Having decided that others are bigots, they take on the role of champion.

It wouldn't be an issue if the comparisons they made were at all similar or equitable. It is the deliberate way they use that which is so very dissimilar and not at all equitable that reveals their dishonesty. Sure, the dishonesty stems from their agenda which they have convinced themselves is somehow noble, but it is dishonest none the less.
 
Last edited:
Is hating on radical Muslims bigoted? I think not. Is being suspicious of all Muslims until sure they are not radicals bigoted? Borderline issue, IMO.

Not anymore so than making anti-Christian, or anti-any-other-religion statements, or having any anti-any-religion bias is.

As for whether or not it's bigoted, I think it varies depending on the individual, and his reasons for those beliefs.
 
The problem here, Calamity, is that dishonest people simply do not care about any of that. The comparisons to Christianity are just a convenient tool they use to defend Islam, and they defend Islam because they have predermined that it is their role to do so. Having decided that others are bigots, they take on the role of champion.

It wouldn't be an issue if the comparisons they made were at all similar or equitable. It is the deliberate way they use that which is so very dissimilar and not at all equitable that reveals their dishonesty. Sure, the dishonesty stems from their agenda wheich they have convinced themselves is somehow noble, but it is dishonest none the less.

For those who are weak of character, the end justifies the means and they feel their dishonest argumentation is justified because their beliefs are superior to the ones they are attacking. Seems to fit the definition of bigotry, actually.
 
Historically and currently, the Jewish religion and its followers are far more warlike, violent and oppressive than any other religious group, especially as a percentage of population. Would That be a better comparison?

.

It would be a very stupid and etraordinarily dishonest comparison, but if it makes you feel better to attack Jews, then go for it.
 
Last edited:
If it's bigoted, then I'm a bigot. I have a real problem with a religion that is so corrupt that it can't stand up against members who murder and maim in the name of that religion. A religion that is afraid of its own members has some serious problems. Perhaps bigotry has its place sometimes.
 
For those who are weak of character, the end justifies the means and they feel their dishonest argumentation is justified because their beliefs are superior to the ones they are attacking. Seems to fit the definition of bigotry, actually.

It sure does. When they attack Jews as blatantly as some of them do, the name for a very specific form of bigotry does come to mind.

The fact that they feel so compelled to attack Jews so as to defend Islam indicates they identify so strongly with those they have chosen to defend that they have actually incorporated many of their attitudes towards the world in terms of the way they persecute the small minority.
 
It sure does. When they attack Jews as blatantly as some of them do, the name for a very specific form of bigotry does come to mind.

The fact that they feel so compelled to attack Jews so as to defend Islam indicates they identify so strongly with those they have chosen to defend that they have actually incorporated many of their attitudes towards the world in terms of the way they persecute the small minority.

I'm not sure what all the anti-semitic angst is about. I just know it's unflattering and reveals surly ignorance in the person expressing it.
 
not wanting anymore mosques built is bigoted
making anti-Muslim comments is bigoted since Muslims are the people

I have no idea how anybody could honestly and logically say its not bigoted?
 
Many would argue that is the same with Islam though. That is my point. The Koran calls for them to kill the infidel where they stand.

It's a bit more complicated. What you're advancing here is a common prejudice, which stems from centuries-long anti-Muslim Christian apologism, but is not really true.

I'd say Quran is more violent and can more easily abused for violence than the New Testament, but is considerably less cruel than the Old Testament.

I wrote in another thread:

Mosaic law in the OT includes many commandments to murder/kill people for various transgressions (for example for eating shellfish, when a bride turns out not to be a virgin, or when a woman was raped, but nobody heard her crying for help). Moses himself led his people on a conquest of war and genocide against the previous population of the Holy Land. The entire OT is filled with stories of blessed people murdering each other. Now don't get me wrong, I believe all this has to be explained with the context of the time when it was written.

As for Quran, it likewise contains several commandments to murder people under certain circumstances. But you are probably referring to Sura 2:191 and Sura 4:89. Those are commandments to kill infidels in war. When you look at the context, you will see that Quran makes clear these commandments only apply in case of war, when the Muslims are under attack. Sura 2:190 qualifies the following verse, by suggesting when fighting infidels, the Muslims shall act proportionally. Sura 2:192 demands from the Muslims to lay down the weapons the moment the infidels cease attacking them.

So the commandment to murder/kill people in Quran is not universal or arbitrary, but set into a context, just like the killings in the OT. There are other verses in Quran that explicitly condemn murder: For example Sura 6:151, Sura 17:33 and especially 5:32.

Of course Jesus and Mohammed were different kinds of prophets. Jesus was not at the same time prophet and worldly leader, Mohammed was. You could say Mohammed was "Jesus and Emperor Constantine in the same person" -- as the Christian leaders spreading Christianity in the first few centuries AD were not any less murderous than the early Muslims were.

So I would not say the OT is less "murderous" than Quran. The difference, of course, is that today's Jews and Christians no longer respect the archaic commandments to murder people, while many Muslims still do. That's true. Islam never had an age of enlightenment, like the West had. But according to my experience, many Muslims are rather peaceful and don't cling to the more extreme interpretations of the problematic verses in Quran. A moderate Islam is not any less possible than moderate Judaism, in theory (at least as far "moderate" goes, when it comes to monotheistic religions).


Also, you have to keep in mind that there is a difference between religious commandments and local backwards traditions that are common among certain people who happen to be Muslim.

If you're looking for Quran verses demanding (also religious) tolerance, look into Sura 30:22, 2:62, 2:111-113, and especially 2:256, 4:94 and Sura 109.
 
Last edited:
He is not hating on radical Muslims, he is hating on all of Muslims. In neither quote does he make a distinction.

As for your question, let's draw a parallel that might be illustrative. Most abortion clinic bombings and threats and shootings are done by radical Christians. Now leave aside whether you think that is really comparable to Muslim terrorism as that is irrelevant for what I am going for. If, because of those bombings and violence, some one suggested that no more Christians should be allowed in the US and no more churches should he built in order to investigate what we already have here and worked out which ones where terrorists, would you consider that bigoted?
What your "analogy" leaves off the table is scale. Violence committed in the name of Islam DWARFS violence committed in the name of Christianity.
 
I just know it's unflattering and reveals surly ignorance in the person expressing it.

The thought that Jews were somehow oppressing Germans in the 30s and 40s or Russians in the latter part of the 19th century and early 20's is so repulsive and cretinous as to reveal an agenda that can only be attributed to hatred. "Ignorant" only begins to describe the inversion of reality such odious statements reveal.
 
If I said that I don't think any more churches should be allowed to be constructed in this country, I bet the right-wingers in this thread would start flipping their **** about the first amendment.
 
I'm an American. During the last 12 years my government engaged in kidnapping, torture, mass surveillance, assassination and a war of aggression. I could use the same false arguments used against Muslims in threads like this to demonize all Americans using guilt by association. I can post polls showing that many of my countrymen supported these violent actions. I could complain that I don't hear the voices of dissent and that the opposition doesn't speak loudly enough against abuses. I could invent a bull**** narrative about atrocities are an integral part of American culture by referencing a mountain of past injustices.

The bottom line however, is that I don't consider all Americans responsible for that crap. I am individual with my own beliefs and I am not defined by the actions of people who happen to share the same nation as me. I refuse to prejudice myself against Muslims because it would legitimize prejudice against myself.
 
The thing is ...the closer you look at the Muslims and their ideology....the more it resembles the right-wing in America.
 
What about Jews? It's an ideology too, not a genetic trait, if we're not dealing with genetic arguments, but attacks on Israeli national identity/mindset and/or religion.

Actually, you're wrong. Judiasm is a religion, a culture and a race. The issue comes in when some people, often Jews themselves, try to mix all three types into a cohesive single, such that if you criticize Israel, you're an anti-Semite, etc. Much of that is a bunch of semantic nonsense.
 
The thing is ...the closer you look at the Muslims and their ideology....the more it resembles the right-wing in America.

Yet, ironically enough, it is the left that always defends their attitudes, leaving it up to the right as the only ones to criticize them for their illiberal ways.
 
The majority of Muslims I know is secular too, despite this self-description.

....
The Intentional LIE/Deception here is the is pointing Only to the "Muslims he knows", but of course he also "knows" at this point (because of scores of polls etc cited in Many. Many, previous discussions) a large Majority of Muslim are NOT secular.
That's why he puts in the provincial qualifier.. to try and deceive about a large true generalization.


......
As for Quran, it likewise contains several commandments to murder people under certain circumstances. But you are probably referring to Sura 2:191 and Sura 4:89.....

So the commandment to murder/kill people in Quran is not universal or arbitrary, but set into a context, just like the killings in the OT. There are other verses in Quran that explicitly condemn murder: For example Sura 6:151, Sura 17:33 and especially 5:32.
The peaceful verses are all Abrogated by later Violent ones.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Sur...08,d.dmg&fp=17d659bb72df4532&biw=1416&bih=687

"Most especially 5:32" is because that verse is actually Echoing the Jewish Torah, NOT declaring a universal principal.
Like "suicide is forbidden", apologists for Islam Abuse this verse.
Most simply:



German Guy said:
Of course Jesus and Mohammed were different kinds of prophets. Jesus was not at the same time prophet and worldly leader, Mohammed was. You could say Mohammed was "Jesus and Emperor Constantine in the same person" -- as the Christian leaders spreading Christianity in the first few centuries AD were not any less murderous than the early Muslims were.
You could more accurately say Muhammed was Attila the Hun/Blackbead-the-Pirate... while getting deluded revelations.
"Wordly" Mohammed never left Arabia and was reportedly Illiterate.


German Guy said:
So I would not say the OT is less "murderous" than Quran. The difference, of course, is that today's Jews and Christians no longer respect the archaic commandments to murder people, while many Muslims still do.
Yeah, the truth peeks thru.

German Guy said:
That's true. Islam never had an age of enlightenment, like the West had.
Yeah they had enlightenment, Wahhabism.
Too bad about that.

But according to my experience, many Muslims ....
There's that Same Intentional Deception.
The LIE for Islam (or PC) that is in Every one of your posts on the subject.
Despicable.

GermanGuy said:
A moderate Islam is not any less possible than moderate Judaism, in theory (at least as far "moderate" goes, when it comes to monotheistic religions).
Also, you have to keep in mind that there is a difference between religious commandments and local backwards traditions that are common among certain people who happen to be Muslim.
False.
The Koran being the Last of the 3, Specifically castigates the other two major religions, and Most of it's believers are literalists (if not "the ones you know") Despicable.
 
Last edited:
The majority of Muslims I know is secular too, despite this self-description.

....
The Intentional LIE/Deception here is the is pointing Only to the "Muslims he knows", but of course he also "knows" at this point (because of scores of polls etc cited in Many. Many, previous discussions) a large Majority of Muslim are NOT secular.



......
As for Quran, it likewise contains several commandments to murder people under certain circumstances. But you are probably referring to Sura 2:191 and Sura 4:89.....
..Sura 9:29

So the commandment to murder/kill people in Quran is not universal or arbitrary, but set into a context, just like the killings in the OT. There are other verses in Quran that explicitly condemn murder: For example Sura 6:151, Sura 17:33 and especially 5:32.
The peaceful verses are all Abrogated by later Violent ones.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Sur...08,d.dmg&fp=17d659bb72df4532&biw=1416&bih=687

"Most especially 5:32" is because that verse is actually Echoing the Jewish Torah, not declaring a universal principal.
Like "suicide is forbidden", this verse is used to mislead.
Most simply:
Sura 5:32 Refuted : "Whoever kills a human being.." - YouTube


German Guy said:
Of course Jesus and Mohammed were different kinds of prophets. Jesus was not at the same time prophet and worldly leader, Mohammed was. You could say Mohammed was "Jesus and Emperor Constantine in the same person" -- as the Christian leaders spreading Christianity in the first few centuries AD were not any less murderous than the early Muslims were.
You could more accurately say Muhammed was an Illiterate Attila the Hun while getting deluded revelations.

German Guy said:
So I would not say the OT is less "murderous" than Quran. The difference, of course, is that today's Jews and Christians no longer respect the archaic commandments to murder people, while many Muslims still do.
Yeah, the truth peeks thru.

German Guy said:
That's true. Islam never had an age of enlightenment, like the West had.
Yeah they had enlightenment, Wahhabism.
Too bad about that.


But according to my experience, many Muslims ....
There's that Same Intentional Deception.
The LIE for Islam (or PC) that is in Every one of your posts on the subject.
Despicable.

GermanGuy said:
A moderate Islam is not any less possible than moderate Judaism, in theory (at least as far "moderate" goes, when it comes to monotheistic religions).
Also, you have to keep in mind that there is a difference between religious commandments and local backwards traditions that are common among certain people who happen to be Muslim.
False.
The Koran being the Last of the 3, Specifically castigates the other two major religions, and Most of it's believers are literalists (if not "the ones you know")
Islam is a Religio-Political system, which is why Apostasy is punishable by death. It's Treason.
'Moderate Islam' is [literal] and a problem too, Reform Islam is the answer. (Manji)
 
Last edited:
The Intentional LIE/Deception here is the is pointing Only to the "Muslims he knows", but of course he also "knows" at this point (because of scores of polls etc cited in Many. Many, previous discussions) a large Majority of Muslim are NOT secular.




The peaceful verses are all Abrogated by later Violent ones.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Sur...08,d.dmg&fp=17d659bb72df4532&biw=1416&bih=687

"Most especially 5:32" is because that verse is actually Echoing the Jewish Torah, not declaring a universal principal.
Like "suicide is forbidden", this verse is used to mislead.
Most simply:
Sura 5:32 Refuted : "Whoever kills a human being.." - YouTube



You could more accurately say Muhammed was an Illiterate Attila the Hun while getting deluded revelations.

Yeah, the truth peeks thru.

Yeah they had enlightenment, Wahhabism.
Too bad about that.

There's that Same Intentional Deception.
The LIE for Islam (or PC) that is in Every one of your posts on the subject.
Despicable.

False.
The Koran being the Last of the 3, Specifically castigates the other two major religions, and Most of it's believers are literalists (if not "the ones you know")
Islam is a Religio-Political system, which is why Apostasy is punishable by death. It's Treason.
'Moderate Islam' is [literal] and a problem too, Reform Islam is the answer. (Manji)

the muslims believe in 40 virgins....you guys believe in a snake crawling down a tree and start talking to people.

You tell me which is more far fetched?
 
the muslims believe in 40 virgins....you guys believe in a snake crawling down a tree and start talking to people.

You tell me which is more far fetched?
1. Who is "you guys"?
I'm an atheist.
2. How many people Blow up (Trains, embassies, Buildings, Buddahs, Christians, counter sects of Islam, etc) killing others for 'snakes crawling down trees'?
3. Is that your only reaction/pathetic answer to a fact-filled post? Alas, yes.

(my double post above was meant to be edit of course)
 
LE.jpg


4to4.jpg
 
the answer is "yes" ... of course ...
 
Back
Top Bottom