What did President Trump say about Sweden? (page 18)

Simon

You said a good Muslim is an apostate. Or do you deny saying it? It's only a few posts back!

Saying that is completely different to saying people should be killed!

cofty

SBF knows exactly why his comment is beneath contempt.

For me the purpose of a conversation is an honest venture to exchange ideas, to learn, to inform and possibly persuade. To people like SBF it is to win, make himself look smart and denigrate his opponent by any means possible.

I loathe having to interact with you at all.

slimboyfat

Yes it's different than commending Nazis for abandoning Nazism for a few reasons:

1. In liberal democracies we respect religious minorities not stigmatise them.

2. Saying that there is literally no "good" way of being a practicing Muslim is counter-productive for inter-community relations. It doesn't show respect or seek better understanding.

3. It also happpens to be categorically and empirically false. Since there are many Muslims who live productive and good lives and are an asset to the community because of the impact their faith. And they should be commended and encouraged not stigmatised.

To state the bleeding obvious.

slimboyfat

Simon the allusion is in the form of words and the exclusion of the possibility of there being such a thing as a "good" Muslim. It's disgusting rhetoric.

In the 19th century Americans discussed whether there was a useful distinction between good and bad Indians, hostile and reservation Indians. Some expressed the view that there was no meaningful distinction and that the "only good Indian is a dead Indian".

Now some people are arguing that there is no meaningful distinction between violent extremists and those who practise Islam peacefully. Even going so far as to say the only "good" Muslim is an ex-Muslim.

If others can't see the parallel or why it's disturbing there's not much more I can say.

Simon

Yes it's different than commending Nazis for abandoning Nazism for a few reasons:

1. In liberal democracies we respect religious minorities not stigmatise them.

First mistake: Islam is not a religious minority. It is a political ideology masquerading as a religion to further it's goals of conquest by taking advantage of liberal democracies.

2. Saying that there is literally no "good" way of being a practicing Muslim is counter-productive for inter-community relations. It doesn't show respect or seek better understanding.

The problem is not with saying it, it's with the fact that it's true. Show me a "good" or "moderate" Muslim and I will show you someone failing to follow the doctrines of Islam. I'm glad they do, but Muslim they are not, whatever reason they chose to identify as such.

3. It also happpens to be categorically and empirically false. Since there are many Muslims who live productive and good lives and are an asset to the community because of the impact their faith. And they should be commended and encouraged not stigmatised.

Yes, I'm all for them. Muslim-lite or whatever you want to call them. Unfortunately, we can't call them Muslim right now unless you want to come up with a better phrase for the rest who do follow and adhere to it all: "genuine Muslim"? "true Muslim"? It just reverses the labeling of the two groups to the same result.

Some expressed the view that there was no meaningful distinction and that the "only good Indian is a dead Indian".

Now some people are arguing that there is no meaningful distinction between violent extremists and those who practise Islam peacefully. Even going so far as to say the only "good" Muslim is an ex-Muslim.

If others can't see the parallel or why it's disturbing there's not much more I can say.

The only parallel is with the turn of phrase. The content of the two sentences is vastly different.

Tell me, if someone says "the only good potato chip is a Lays / Walkers potato chip" ... is that also disturbing and encouraging ethnic violence?

Spoletta

Simon. Your idea for a topic view button seems reasonable on a surface level, but would really only gratify those wanting to hear only ideas that agree with theirs. If I only listen to Breitbart and Fox, or conversely the New York Times and CNN, I lose the ability to compare and make informed decisions about the issues involved. By being aware of both viewpoints, I can do my own research, and hopefully separate the wheat from the chaff. Too many posters here only supply links to either right or left wing sources. I trust you to monitor the threads and ban those who become too shrill or hateful.

To quote the X files "the truth is out there". There is way too much Watchtower mentality going on here. Before posting a link, people would do well to consider if it's a reputable source that others won't just dismiss out of hand.

LoveUniHateExams

@SBF

Cofty asserts: a good Muslim is an apostate or a lapsed Muslim at best.

He no doubt bases this on violent passages he's read in the Qur'an and Hadiths, articles he's read about ex-Muslims, etc.

You obviously disagree with this - that's ok.

What's not so good is your attempt to tie Cofty's statement in with that statement about 'Indians' - the sly implication being that Cofty views Muslims in the same way that white America historically viewed its aboriginal peoples.

Cofty's statement has nothing to do with native American peoples.

MeanMrMustard

I have said on a few threads : "The only good Muslim is a bad Muslim."

I like good Muslims.

Islam desperately needs a "Jesus" figure - someone to come in and sweep away Mohammad and his "excellent example of conduct" that includes just about every act the West holds in contempt.

The reform needs to comes from Muslims. It can't be done by Christians or Jews or Hindus or atheists.

The reform will be bloody. It will take decades if not hundreds of years to sweep away the religious jurisprudence built up around the current mythology.

In the mean time, I would like to not have my culture undermined.

MMM

slimboyfat

LoveUni I am saying very plainly exactly what I mean. The idea that the only way to be a "good" Muslim is to be an ex-Muslim is an attempt to deny any respectable identity to anyone who claims the label "Muslim". That is a sly tactic and disgusting rhetoric.

And I am very familiar with all the bigoted excuses for claiming there are no good Muslims.

1. "Muslim's can't be good because they believe the Quran and it's violent."

- yeah but so is the Bible it doesn't mean there are no good Christians.

2. "The Bible might be violent but Christians ignore the violent bits, so they are not the problem like Muslims are."

- oh really? Bush and Blair's "crusade" in Iraq, which they prayed about, and were convinced God supported, and now millions are dead as a result. That wasn't violent on a scale above and beyond any extremist terror attack? But no, Christians are not violent, only Muslims of course.

3. "There are practically no moderate Muslims anyway, look at all the survey evidence, they are violent monsters, open your eyes you fool,"

- I guess you can come to that warped conclusion if 1) you don't know Muslims personally and 2) you believe all the nonsense you see on right wing blogs and YouTube channels as your main source of information.

Simon

Simon. Your idea for a topic view button seems reasonable on a surface level, but would really only gratify those wanting to hear only ideas that agree with theirs.

Yes, the "echo chamber" effect is real. But sometimes there are those that you think just post nonsense and want to tune them out, even if just occasionally.

The main use is to be able to zone in on the comments by one or several authors, it's useful for instance if there is a good sub-discussion where others are trying to interfere or post off-topic comments. (or to see how a disagreement started).

What did President Trump say about Sweden?

Share this