What's Wrong With Antisemitism & Islamophobia?

[baphomet]

Unfortunately I have to get to bed now, its 7:47am and I still haven't slept so I will have to respond to that tomorrow, sorry man.

[nabraxas]

The main concern of fundamentalist Islam is with moderate Islam, and especially with those Islamic states which, if they have not precisely embraced democracy, have nevertheless tried to banish theocracy from the business of government. That fundamentalism loathes the western democracies goes without saying: or rather, it goes with a lot of saying, at the top of the voice. But the real horror, for the diehard theocrats, is the country with a large number of Muslims that has been infiltrated by the liberal ideas of the west. As a rule of thumb, you can say that the terrorists would like to wreak edifying vengeance on any predominantly Islamic country where you can see even a small part of a woman's face. Starting with Pakistan, you can see more and more of a woman's face as you move east. It was therefore predictable, after September 11, that the terrorists would bend their efforts in the same direction. I only wish that I had predicted it straight away: we would all like to be blessed with as much foresight as hindsight. As things happened, it took me a few days.....

Well, now it is, and sadly our best hope will be that some of our neighbouring countries to the north and west will draw most of the fire. Next month I have to be in Australia again, to deliver a speech in Sydney and Melbourne: a speech about libraries. In the speech, which I am composing now and have put aside to write this, I will propose, among other things, the founding in Australia of an Islamic library to which all the world's genuine Islamic scholars who are free to travel might come, there to continue the work of bringing a critical scrutiny to the sacred texts - the very work that was forcibly interrupted by the theocrats in the 19th century, an interruption that led directly to the disasters of today.

Clive James

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/oct/1...nesia.australia

Now there's a good idea which would be a part ov helping to defeat the fundamentalists.

[MindExpansion]

Have to add something Dawkins says in 'The God Delusion' and that is that there is now a stigma that means religion is above criticism, it shouldn't be because there are so many stupid troublemaking things to criticse in every religion, but it is.

Peace,

Mind

[PD.]

I hate political correctness and those who try preaching it to me far too much for me to even bother hating anyone else!

Then why do you give a fuck what others think of YOUR opinion.

[ThunderIdeal]

"to continue the work of bringing a critical scrutiny to the sacred texts - the very work that was forcibly interrupted by the theocrats in the 19th century, an interruption that led directly to the disasters of today."

he seems to be hinting that old theocrats stopped scholars from their work interpreting islam, because their findings were beginning to show the hipocrisy/powermonger/whatever of those theocrats.

what is the solution? i think we need to reverse a millenium old trend of giving power over to religions, for instance, all special treatment should stop and kids shouldn't be learning religion in school like they do. also, encourage moderate religious types because they aren't really where the danger lies.

baphomet, i'm quite sympathetic to your views, but isn't there a difference between jews and zionists? reading about israel makes me pretty mad, but i don't give have special anger for israel, it's just another bullshit vortex among many others.

hindus deserve a pat on the back here for being one religion which is very tolerant of other religions. some hindus still carry out acts of hatred, but it doesn't come close really, to what has been associated with other major religions (actually i'm not sure about buddhism)

[nabraxas]

hindus deserve a pat on the back here for being one religion which is very tolerant of other religions. some hindus still carry out acts of hatred

Unfortunately in the last 10 years under the leadership ov the ultra nationalistic Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (the power behind the BJP) intolerance has become more common.

Remember the Aussie missionary & his kids burnt to death?

It was the RSS who had Gandhi assassinated.

Here is one ov their internal memos:

http://www.truthindia.com/eventspage.html

EDIT---the legitimacy ov that memo has been questioned by some. It maybe the hindu version ov the protocols ov the elders of zion--- I'm sure baphomet can tell us something about those ;)

Edited June 25, 2008 by nabraxas

[MindExpansion]

what is the solution? i think we need to reverse a millenium old trend of giving power over to religions, for instance, all special treatment should stop and kids shouldn't be learning religion in school like they do. also, encourage moderate religious types because they aren't really where the danger lies.

Glad to see someone shares the view. Religions should not be imposed on kids, they deserve the choice, and honestly the number who would choose religion if they were given freedom of choice is probably fairly slim, if they got to make the decision later in life. This is why I believe that all the money the government gives to religiously based schools should be cut, because secularism is important, the religious groups earn by far enough to pay for their own educational institutions, but I feel that religious primary schools should be banned, sure have private schools, but not religiously based ones. Religion can be offered as an elective in year 10 to kids who by that age can make the decision themselves, and it shoudl be illegal to teach religion in schools before then, IMO children shouldn't be allowed in a church until they are 16. It is brainwashing, imprinting, it is WRONG. Take the time schools spend teaching religion and teach an extra unit of science, and maybe a morals class since people seem so unnecessarily worried that morals can only come from religion (SO WRONG!). It is so much harder to make a personal decision on a personal matter such as religion when you have had the beliefs pressed on you since you were 4, the choice should be there, the government will never do anything about this of course because like I mentioned before, and like Dawkins said, religion is now untouchable, you are criticised as a thoughtless hater if you stand against religion because 'religion is good, how can you have a problem with something that teaches us all our morals and provides us with so much happiness'...yeh well try telling the tale of religions happy and moral teachings to the kids who lost their parents to a suicide bomber or the witches burnt at the stake for no particularly good reason at all. Fucking ignorance is all that religion breeds, ignorance, naivity, an unwarrented sense of self-superiority and justification for pointless actions such as not allowing abortions (sorry to any pro-lifers but this idea that the choice isn't the mothers is just fucking wrong) not to mention the billions of dollars the church makes every year off their naive believers that could go to curing life destroying illnesses or eliminating poverty, and the money they make could honestly be used to go to africa and start building small townships and opening businesses, i mean yeah loads of other issues there but it would be a start and would help some people even if not all.

Gahhhhh the whole religions existing thing really gets to me, if you hadn't noticed. So much trouble over nothing, honestly there isn't anything I can get from religion that I can't get elsewhere. Oh well one day science will tackle all the issues and we can prove them wrong, but i forgot, every time science takes a step forward they simply alter their beliefs slightly, or take a different interpretation of one of their beliefs and say 'no no, you haven't proved us wrong at all, see we take this bible verse like this now, not like that!' unless you are a creationist, then you just ignore science like it doesnt exist. What pisses me off is the fact that science has to offer evidence to prove religion wrong, but to believers, religion does not owe any tangible evidence at all, it is simply taken as true because it IS. And it is this that also leads to it being now so taboo to criticise religion, well fuck religion, fuck all the trouble it causes, and fuck those that perpetuate the beliefs, but note that this is my view, so I can discriminate because of that and because, like white supremecy, I don't see any good coming from religion (See my earlier post for my explanation of when I think discrimination is ok).

Peace, didn't mean to personally offend anyone but these are my personal views and I won't lie about them to pussyfoot around the taboo.

Mind

[ThunderIdeal]

re: education, i wasnt really talking about catholic/moslim school but the weekly bible class thing you get when you go to public school.

private schools receiving more money than public school is FUCKING INSANE. i cannot traverse this subject further without killing people.

"the whole religions existing thing really gets to me"

lmao

i don't see religion as the root of bullshit like some people, but the view is rather justified i admit.

people should recognise a distinction between religion and mysticism (because some atheists really like to throw all believers into the same category). another distinction to be made is that some religious people believe their sacred texts should be interpreted literally, and IMO they stand to gain far less from said texts than a religious person who doesn't take this view.

[archaicrevivalist]

i hate the term anti semite

jews are not the only semites, they bogarted the fucking term!!

[ThunderIdeal]

1 A member of a group of Semitic-speaking peoples of the Near East and northern Africa, including the Arabs, Arameans, Babylonians, Carthaginians, Ethiopians, Hebrews, and Phoenicians.

2 A Jew.

3 Bible. A descendant of Shem

interesting

nax i had a quick look at the document but couldn't pinpoint any dark agenda.

[MindExpansion]

Yeh well that once a week bible class isn't much on the several times weekly religion lessons of catholic schools, it should be banned like I said above. Sure maybe have study of religion, but not religion. Study of religion for those who dont know is studying the beliefs of all different religious groups, far more about the cultures and development of religion. It is the people who take religion super seriously that I can't understand the most, the bible for example is a great place to get metaphorical stories with some life message in them, but it is not a place, for the most part, to get a literal account of history. By all means take some of the concepts, but not the literal translation, but since it is difficult to discriminate in this manner I often find it safer to simply say that religion itself is something I have issues with, mysticism and spirituality are ok by me, and its no that I don't like people who have religious beliefs, I jsut dont like their beliefs and would think it more benificial if they chose other beliefs or looked at their beliefs mroe philosophically than 'if i dont give the church money i will burn in hell' or whatever some of them think. I dont have time to rant out another big speil like i did before but maybe in a few days when i get some free time.

Peace,

Mind

Edited June 25, 2008 by MindExpansion

[~shameless~]

sorry man, I don't think your a prick, white suppremisist, you just started a thread, i replied

No tones too my replies except friendly one's,

Deconstructive=destructive= opposite of constructive (yes to that deluded sense of reality)

No matter where you live or who you are islamaphobia or antisemitism or any other types of predjudices

are destructive to the formation of any society

sure nazi germany grew and prospered but see what happens, oh yeah and the leaders of the free world are certainly without there troubles, Nth america is not going to shake their Black/white issue anytime soon

Thats all i was highlighting, thats my impression on things,

I only see flag burning, motar launching and shit on the T.V, propaganda

But i don't think, that millions of people in middle east countries are constantly thinking jihad all the time

i had an iraqi friend who visited his relatives who are muslim (in iraq),bout 2 years ago, he had a really good time

hardly a mention of the war or anything that happened because of sept 11

cheers to this country though really we are lucky to have things like this forum

[nabraxas]

nax i had a quick look at the document but couldn't pinpoint any dark agenda.

you have to kind ov read between the lines in most cases, however:

In the case of Halvad village a Muslim boy abducted a Brahmin girl. The girl was of age and the case was under investigation under the Halvad court. On the day of the court verdict, the Miyo (Muslim) was bold enough to move around the village with the Brahmin girl. The people got excited because of this. Not five, twenty five, hundred, two hundred but more than thousand people pounced on them with pipes and iron rods and in front of the court in session. The police ran away, the magistrate and his staff hid under the table to save themselves and the Muslim and the Hindu girl were beaten to death by the people and their dead bodies were left in the court room. Case of murder was registered and many people were arrested also.

The matter was recorded in the court and the magistrate also gave his statement but since thousands were involved, no one was convicted. The incident of Halvad is etched in golden letters in the proud history of Hindu Samaj. Revenge of this type is necessary against such abduction of our girls.

The word "abduction" should probably be replaced by "courted".

Christians have been increasingly targeted by the RSS/BJP :

 

[nabraxas]

"Some years ago Regis Debray wrote an article pointing out that despite the confidant predictions of 19th century materialism, religion had still perversely failed to go away -- and that perhaps it was time for the Revolution to come to terms with this mysterious persistence. Coming from a Catholic culture Debray was interested in "Liberation Theology", itself a projection of the old quasi-heresy of the "Poor" Franciscans & the recurrent rediscovery of "Bible communism". Had he considered Protestant culture he might have remembered the 17th century, & looked for its true inheritance; if Moslem he could have evoked the radicalism of the Shiites or Ismailis, or the anti-colonialism of the 19th century "neo-Sufis". Every religion has called forth its own inner antithesis over & over again; every religion has considered the implications of moral opposition to power; every tradition contains a vocabulary of resistance as well as capitulation to oppression. Speaking broadly one might say that up until now this "counter-tradition" -- which is both inside & outside religion -- has comprised a "suppressed content". Debray's question concerned its potential for realization. Liberation Theology lost most of its support within the church when it could no longer serve its function as rival (or accomplice) of Soviet Communism; & it could no longer serve this function because Communism collapsed. But some Liberation theologians proved to be sincere -- and still they persist (as in Mexico); moreover, an entire submerged & related tendency within Catholicism, exemplified in the almost Scholastic anarchism of an Ivan Illich, lingers in the background. Similar tendencies could be identified within Orthodoxy (e.g. Bakunin), Protestantism, Judaism, Islam, and (in a somewhat different sense) Buddhism; moreover, most "surviving" indigenous forms of spirituality (e.g. Shamanism) or the Afro-american syncretisms can find common cause with various radical trends in the "major" religions on such issues as the environment, & the morality of anti-Capitalism. Despite elements of romantic reaction, various New Age & post-New-Age movements can also be associated with this rough category.

Taking "religion" as a whole, including even those forms such as shamanism that belong to Society rather than the State (in terms of Clastres's anthropology); including polytheisms, monotheisms, & non-theisms; including mysticisms & heresies as well as orthodoxies, "reformed" churches, & "new religions" -- obviously the subject under consideration lacks definition, borders, coherence; & it cannot be questioned because it would only generate a babel of responses rather than an answer. But "religion" does refer to something -- call it a certain range of colors in the spectrum of human becoming -- & as such it might be considered (at least pro tem) as a valid dialogic entity & as a theorizable subject. In the triumphant movement of Capital -- in its processual moment so to speak -- all religion can only be viewed as nullity, i.e. as a commodity to be packaged & sold, an asset to be stripped, or an opposition to be eliminated. Any idea (or ideology) that cannot be subsumed into capital's "End of History" must be doomed. This includes both reaction & resistance -- & it most certainly includes the non-separative "re-linking" (religio) of consciousness with "spirit" as unmediated imaginal self-determination & value-creation -- the original goal of all ritual & worship. Religion in other words has lost all connection with worldly power because that power has migrated off-world -- it has abandoned even the State & achieved the purity of apotheosis, like the God that "abandoned Anthony" in Cavafy's poem. The few States (mostly Islamic) wherein religion holds power are located precisely within the ever-shrinking region of national opposition to Capital -- (thus providing them with such potential strange bedfellows as Cuba!). Like all other "third possibilities" religion is faced with a new dichotomy: total capitulation, or else revolt. Thus the "revolutionary potential" of religion clearly appears -- although it remains unclear whether resistance might take the form of reaction or radicalism -- or indeed whether religion is not already defeated -- whether its refusal to go away is that of an enemy, or a ghost.

Islam has seen itself as the enemy of imperial Christianity & European imperialism almost from the moment of its inception. During the 20th century it functioned as a "third way" against both Communism & Capitalism, & in the context of the new One World it now constitutes by definition one of the very few existing mass movements which cannot be englobed into the unity of any would-be Consensus. Unfortunately the spearhead of resistance -- "fundamentalism" -- tends to reduce the complexity of Islam into an artificially coherent ideology -- "Islamism" -- which clearly fails to speak to the normal human desire for difference & complexity. Fundamentalism has already failed to concern itself with "empirical freedoms" which must constitute the minimal demands of the new resistance; for example, its critique of "usury" is obviously an inadequate response to the machinations of the IMF & World Bank. The "gates of Interpretation" of the Shariah must be re-opened -- not slammed shut forever -- and a fully-realized alternative to Capitalism must emerge from within the tradition. Whatever one may think of the Libyan Revolution of 1969 it has at least the virtue of an attempt to fuse the anarcho-syndicalism of '68 with the neo-Sufi egalitarianism of the North African Orders, & to create a revolutionary Islam -- something similar could be said of Ali Shariati's "Shiite socialism" in Iran, which was crushed by the ulemocracy before it could crystallize into a coherent movement. The point is that Islam cannot be dismissed as the puritan monolith portrayed in the Capitalist media. If a genuine anti-Capitalist coalition is to appear in the world it cannot happen without Islam. The goal of all theory capable of any sympathy with Islam, I believe, is now to encourage its radical & egalitarian traditions & to substruct its reactionary & authoritarian modes of discourse. Within Islam there persist such mythic figures as the "Green Prophet" and hidden guide of the mystics, al-Khezr, who could easily become a kind of patron saint of Islamic environmentalism; while history offers such models as the great Algerian Sufi freedom-fighter Emir Abdul Qadir, whose last act (in exile in Damascus) was to protect Syrian Christians against the bigotry of the ulema. From outside Islam there exists the potential for "interfaith" movements concerned with ideals of peace, toleration, & resistance to the violence of post-secular post-rationalist "neo-liberalism" & its allies. In effect, then, the "revolutionary potential" of Islam is not yet realized -- but it is real.

I expect these ideas will meet with very little acceptance within traditionally atheist anarchism or the remnants of "dialectical materialism". Enlightenment radicalism has long refused to recognize any but remote historical roots within religious radicalism. As a result, the Revolution threw out the baby ("non-ordinary consciousness") along with the bathwater of the Inquisition or of puritan repression. Despite Sorel's insistence that the Revolution needed a "myth", it preferred to bank everything on "pure reason" instead. But spiritual anarchism & communism (like religion itself) have failed to go away. Indeed, by becoming an anti-Religion, radicalism had recourse to a kind of mysticism of its own, complete with ritual, symbolism, & morality. Bakunin's remark about God -- that if he existed we would have to kill him -- would after all pass for the purest orthodoxy within Zen Buddhism! The psychedelic movement, which offered a kind of "scientific" (or at least experiential ) verification of non-ordinary consciousness, led to a degree of rapprochement between spirituality & radical politics -- & the trajectory of this movement may have only begun. If religion has "always" acted to enslave the mind or to reproduce the ideology of the ruling class, it has also "always" involved some form of entheogenesis ("birth of the god within") or liberation of consciousness; some form of utopian proposal or promise of "heaven on earth"; and some form of militant & positive action for "social justice" as God's plan for the creation. Shamanism is a form of "religion" that (as Clastres showed) actually institutionalizes spirituality against the emergence of hierarchy & separation -- & all religions possess at least a shamanic trace.

Every religion can point to a radical tradition of some sort. Taoism once produced the Yellow Turbans -- or for that matter the Tongs that collaborated with anarchism in the 1911 revolution. Judaism produced the "anarcho-zionism" of Martin Buber & Gersholm Scholem (deeply influenced by Gustav Landauer & other anarchists of 1919), which found its most eloquent & paradoxical voice in Walter Benjamin. Hinduism gave birth to the ultra-radical Bengali Terrorist Party -- & also to M. Gandhi, the modern world's only successful theorist of non-violent revolution. Obviously anarchism & communism will never come to terms with religion on questions of authority & property; & perhaps one might say that "after the Revolution" such questions will remain to be resolved. But it seems clear that without religion there will be no radical revolution; the Old Left & the (old) New Left can scarcely fight it alone. The alternative to an alliance now is to watch while Reaction co-opts the force of religion & launches a revolution without us. Like it or not, some sort of pre-emptive strategy is required. Resistance demands a vocabulary in which our common cause can be discussed; hence these sketchy proposals.

Even assuming we could classify all the above under the rubric of admirable sentiments, we would still find ourselves far from any obvious program of action. Religion is not going to "save" us in this sense (perhaps the reverse is true!) -- in any case religion is faced with the same perplexity as any other former "third position", including all forms of radical non-authoritarianism & anti-Capitalism. The new totality & its media appear so pervasive as to fore-doom all programs of revolutionary content, since every "message" is equally subject to subsumption in the "medium" that is Capital itself. Of course the situation is hopeless -- but only stupidity would take this as reason for despair, or for the terminal boredom of defeat. Hope against hope -- Bloch's revolutionary hope -- belongs to a "utopia" that is never wholly absent even when it is least present; & it belongs as well to a religious sphere in which hopelessness is the final sin against the holy spirit: -- the betrayal of the divine within -- the failure to become human. "Karmic duty" in the sense of the Bhagavad Gita -- or in the sense of "revolutionary duty" -- is not something imposed by Nature, like gravity, or death. It is a free gift of the spirit -- one can accept or refuse it -- & both positions are perilous. To refuse is to run the risk of dying without having lived. To accept is an even more dangerous but far more interesting possibility. A version of Pascal's Wager -- not on the immortality of the soul this time, but simply on its sheer existence.

To use religious metaphor (which we've tried so far to avoid) the millennium began five years before the end of the century, when One World came into being & banished all duality. From the Judao-Christiano-Islamic perspective however this is the false millennium of the "Anti-Christ"; which turns out not to be a "person" (except in the world of Archetypes perhaps) but an impersonal entity, a force contra naturam -- entropy disguised as life. In this view the reign of iniquity must & will be challenged in the true millennium, the advent of the messiah. But the messiah is also not a single person in the world -- rather, it is a collectivity in which each individuality is realized & thus (again metaphorically or imaginally) immortalized. The "people-as-messiah" do not enter into the homogenous sameness nor the infernal separation of entropic Capitalism, but into the difference & presence of revolution -- the struggle, the "holy war". On this basis alone can we begin to work on a theory of reconciliation between the positive forces of religion & the cause of resistance. What we are offered here is simply the beginning of the beginning."- Hakim Bey

[Jesus On Peyote]

Just let darwin's theory sort it out.. no one can stop 5000+ years of human nature, cept evolution. Till then i guess we gotta wait. or mass produce LSD and put it in the water, maybe that can speed it up a little

My little pacifist opinion.

[apothecary]

Moving this topic to Spirituality.

[baphomet]

baphomet, i'm quite sympathetic to your views, but isn't there a difference between jews and zionists?

Some people (including one of my best friends) consider themselves to be 'jewish' by birth even though they claim they are not religious and know nothing about the religion. The whole concept of them being part of this master race due to birth right stems from religious judaism which makes them kind of stupid but my problem is not with them it is with the religion itself! I do not consider these people jews! Someone will no doubt say to me "who are you to define who is a jew and who is not?" and I do not want to get into semantics, let me just make this clear, I see this religion as a disease and my problem is with the infection not the unknowing host!

Whilst I am aware that Herzl (the founder of modern zionism) was not religious, zionism is the foundation of judaism, even though there are 'jews against zionism' there only problem with it is that they think they should wait till the return of the messiah before inhabiting israel. it is the belief that their sky fairy gave their ancestor the land of israel thousands of years ago and that it still belongs to them! (the chosen race) They have committed genocide in the name of zionism before and still do it to this day and in fact according to their so called 'holy' books their sky fairy has committed genocide and ordered them to commit genocide many times, like I said before he has ordered them to kill the entire population of cities including women, children, plants and animals!

“Blessed is he who smashes their little ones against the rocks” (Psalm 137:9).

In every religion you will find people who claim to belong to that religion but know virtually nothing about it, indeed many so called christians have never even read a verse of the bible, and many who call themselves christians, muslims, etc just pick and choose the bits that they agree with from these texts and disregard the rest, quite often they have a priest sort through the bible for example and pick out the luvy duvy bits like "god is love" and leave out the majority of the book which states that he is a genocidal maniac. If the text is the divinely inspired word of god, it must be taken in its entirety! Likewise the koran, torah, etc which were supposedly divinely inspired they must be taken in their entirety!!

Christians condemn human sacrifice but seem to forget that their sadistic god played a joke on moses in which he asked him to sacrifice his son but when moses went to do it god said.. "ah, I was only testing you" and he settled for an animal sacrifice instead, noah sacrificed animals to him as well and he was apparently "delighted with the smell of burning flesh"! Yet christians condemn people who do the same thing as heathens and used these things as an excuse to wipe out countless people.

Many christians say for example that god is against homosexuality and that the bible is very clear about this, the problem is that if they follow the old testament then the bible IS very clear about this! That's one reason why it is no good for anything more than kindling or toilet paper! It is for this reason also that there can be no such thing as a jewish homosexual (although many would claim the title) and people need to remember that this is a jewish text!

"If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death: their blood will be upon their own heads." (Leviticus 20:13 - NIV)

Many so called 'christian' groups claim that jesus was against homosexuality and they have got the whole world believing it too, the problem is that jesus never said a fucking thing about homosexuality and I challenge anyone to prove otherwise!

Many gay men have taken up Tibetan Buddhism as their religion not knowing that the Dalai Lama is homophobic! (lol)

It just goes to show you how most people who claim to belong to a certain religion actually know very little about it!

People claim that jesus is 'the prince of peace' but somehow missed the fact that Jesus says: Luke 12:51

"Do you suppose that I came to bring peace to the world? No! Not peace but division!"

"hindus deserve a pat on the back here for being one religion which is very tolerant of other religions"

As Nabraxas has pointed out, hindus are prone to acts of violence, as are sikhs, etc but regardless of this the hindu caste system is a good enough reason for it to be abolished completely! And more importantly for me the fact that it is used as an excuse to kill dogs (so that they can incarnate into a better form more quickly), my feelings on animal rights are extreme and I value the lives of dogs more than most humans! Even the entire hindu population of the world!! (yes I am 100% serious!)

Sina,

If you call me naive the least you can do is follow it through, please don't just bitch out on me again this time.

"I find the naivity of this comment so amusing as to be rediculous. Islamophobia in Israel is a political/influence tool of the few to manipulate many, just as anti-Semitism in Islamic countries"

I say Islamophobia is and integral part of judaism and is not just a tool of the powerful to manupulate the few, likewise anti semitism is an integral part of islam, please point out what makes me so naive in making these statements?

"You are so very not right. I think that people always follow their humanity rather than their ideals whether they like to admit it or not. Even the most radical ideologists"

So let me get this right.. the most radical ideologists who are preaching mass murder are following their humanity? (you still haven't answered this question!)

" I'm not gonna condemn Iraqi Sunni bakers for the work of Al Qaeda in Iraq (I condemn Al Qaeda and the US). I'm not gonna condemn Polish Jews for the actions of conscripted Israelis in Haifa."

So judaism isn't responsible for the atrocities committed in Haifa? And islam is not responsible for the work of al quaeda?? Is this correct? (you haven't answered this question either!!)

I asked a question before and have had no response so I will ask again, I have had people tell me this before so let me just ask is there anyone out there who still thinks that islam is a peaceful religion and it is just a small minority of people who have a perverted this religion and used it to justify violence? If so how did you come to this conclusion?? Could it be that you are just a brainwashed fool who can't think for yourself yet claim to have some kind of expanded state of consciousness???

Does everyone agree with the FACT that islamophobia is a perfectly rational fear and a logical reaction to a hateful, prejudice, backwards, dangerous belief system? And likewise anti semitism is a perfectly rational reaction to a prejudiced, racist, genocidal, religion?

Does everyone agree with the FACT that islam is completely incompatible with our way of life and muslims should not be allowed into this country?

Does anyone still believe that muslims are (quote) "peaceful, have strong morals and are disgusted/ashamed at suicide bombers etc."

If so I would like hear what it is that makes you believe such bullshit?

Edited October 16, 2008 by baphomet

[nabraxas]

muslims should not be allowed into this country?

so a part ov your solution would be to ban muslims from entering Australia. Would you stop w/muslims or include all other religions?

What would you do w/the approximately 340,392 muslims already here?

is there anyone out there who still thinks that islam is a peaceful religion and it is just a small minority of people who have a perverted this religion and used it to justify violence? If so how did you come to this conclusion??

i would guess that even if 10% ov muslims were blood thirsty suicide bombers desperate for martyrdom then there would have been over 3000 acts ov terrorism committed in Australia alone.......

Edited June 27, 2008 by nabraxas

[Auxin]

Many gay men have taken up Tibetan Buddhism as their religion not knowing that the Dalai Lama is homophobic! (lol)

Worse than that many people think the Dalai Lama is some sort of 'pope' of buddhism when in fact he is nothing more than the senior monk in one sect (galugpa sect) of the smallest school of buddhism (vajreyana) and according to the buddhist rules for monks and nuns (the vinaya) he is by definition not even a monk any more given some of the things he has done, not the least of which is being deeply involved in politics (which is forbidden to buddhist monks and nuns).

Buddhism itself, at its universal cross-sect core, has no troubles with homosexuality whatsoever. Its just a few small (and in the case of large swaths of the mahayana school- not so small) groups that adopted the bigotries of their particular region, like tibet and chunks of china.

Not once did the buddha ever say anything against homosexuality. He said that non-monastic people are free to practice their sexuality as they see fit and he advised only that they try to do so in a way that at the least is not harmful to themselves and others. Its one of the training precepts he taught as a core principal of buddhism. As for determining forms of sexuality harmful to oneself or others he gave broad guidelines with no mention of particular sexual orientations or activities, then he gave teachings on determining for yourself what is beneficial or harmful.

The school that these guys and girls may benefit more from is theravada, especially western theravada or any of the majority of southeast asian theravada sects- just so long as they werent made bigoted by adaptation to local customs.

Ajahn Brahmavamso and Sister Vayama are a great pair of theravada monastics over in western australia.

BSWA

[PD.]

I asked a question before and have had no response so I will ask again, I have had people tell me this before so let me just ask is there anyone out there who still thinks that islam is a peaceful religion and it is just a small minority of people who have a perverted this religion and used it to justify violence? If so how did you come to this conclusion?? Could it be that you are just a brainwashed fool who can't think for yourself yet claim to have some kind of expanded state of consciousness???

Does everyone agree with the FACT that islamophobia is a perfectly rational fear and a logical reaction to a hateful, prejudice, backwards, dangerous belief system? And likewise anti semitism is a perfectly rational reaction to a prejudiced, racist, genocidal, religion?

Does everyone agree with the FACT that islam is completely incompatible with our way of life and muslims should not be allowed into this country?

Does anyone still believe that muslims are (quote) "peaceful, have strong morals and are disgusted/ashamed at suicide bombers etc."

If so I would like hear what it is that makes you believe such bullshit?

LMFAO.

im gonna hold my tongue.

so a part ov your solution would be to ban muslims from entering Australia. Would you stop w/muslims or include all other religions?

What would you do w/the approximately 340,392 muslims already here? - nabraxas

Thats easy nabraxas, we kill them of course. What else can you do with blood thirsty religious nutters when you know as fact they are going to kill EVERYONE except themselves. Get them before they get you.

This whole world has gone to shit and the blame lies solely with religion.

[baphomet]

im gonna hold my tongue.

I wish you wouldn't, I ask you again, is islam really a peaceful religion? Is it really possible for a muslim to have "strong morals"?

I'm sorry nabraxas I will get to a solution eventually, I just think the discussion is a little premature for that now.

Edited June 27, 2008 by baphomet

[2b]

Sorry to jump in but...

Just a quick observation. A 'phobia' would sugest to me something you have very little personal control over (eg: arachnephobia,agrophobia, xenophobia ,etc.......) so in asking is it wrong to have i phobia , i would argue that you have little choice. Most phobias are real medically recognised conditions.

Okay you can go back to it now

[MindExpansion]

Bro, thats just starting to get racist. That is not a fact at all.

As I've said before, it isn't just the Muslims who might not have the most peaceful core at their religion, have a read of the old testament, do you realise that the 10 commandments, when written, were only supposed to apply to jews. It was perfectly fine to kill anyone who didn't believe in our Christian God. Yet these violent superiorist beliefs are at the core of the original beliefs of christianity. To me all religion is crazy, should we let religious nutters who are willing to go to extremes to defend against their religion in the country? or the world? IMO no, they are missing the point of religion if they feel they have to lay down their life for it, oooops, except in the case of CHRISTIANITY where our SAVIOUR Jesus christ gave himself for us? Valuing religion over life isn't a healthy belief yet it was one of the key events in the majority religion of this country. Many religious people need to learn serious lessons about morality and what their religion is really worth, hold your philosophy, but dont blow yourself up because someone else doesn't. I dont think it will ever happen that all religions exist in harmony and as such I think id rather see them all just disappear, because while they are all good in theory, we have been witnessing the impracticality of having religion in our society for years.

Anyway man I think your idea to stop Muslims getting in is just blatant discrimination, you cant do that, because that sort of discrimination is unreasonable, purely because certainly only a minority of muslims are extremists, just as there are christian extremists (See the issue in ireland).

I do believe that when foreigners enter another country they must respect the beliefs of that country which is why honour killings etc are not acceptable here and while some migrants may not adjust as much as they probably should the majority compromise their beliefs, which is a big ask of anyone, enough to happily and successfully integrate into the society.

Peace,

Mind

[Legba]

[~shameless~]

"Does everyone agree with the FACT that islam is completely incompatible with our way of life and muslims should not be allowed into this country?"

Nup-

i agree with legbas post.