RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S.

RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Phydeaux -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 12:07:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux See, no matter how reasonably I invite the left to discuss the actual point - they defer. Why do arabs hate the west? Is it at all possible they hate the west because their religion is at odds with western values? How exactly did I defer? Seems to me you're the one being disingenuous here. But let me help you out. Sure, religions are great ways to start wars. That's always been true. Now that I've agreed with you, how do you assess blowing up people's kids as a way to start a war? Because honestly that's always been pretty damned effective also. You are suggesting that there's no way past this religious problem and I'd argue that history shows us otherwise. Combative religions have been [mostly] tamed in other instances. Why not here? But I gotta tell you that history is not filled with examples of people ignoring getting blown up and generally trampled. Actually Jeff, I wasn't addressing you but previous posts by FactlessKen et.al. I think you have the cart before the horse. Islam has a pretty violent history of expansion well before we got into the picture. So I don't think you can attribute Islamic violence to us bombing them. We were nowhere around in 1620. And please, don't counter with what Christians do or don't do. The question is "Is muslim theology consonant with western civilization - why or why not". I advanced reasons as varied as lack of tolerance, lack of rights of women, cultural reasons....

Phydeaux -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 12:17:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 And yet when people provide facts about Arab culture that prove you wrong, you flip-flop over to 'Muslims' as though they were a single monolithic group When people call you on that, you run back to talking about Arabs. The two groups aren't the same thing, and your assertions have been debunked at both ends. quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: JeffBC quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle We are obliged to do all that to take your claims seriously, or we can reject your 'argument' (such as it is) and take reality seriously. Simple choice. chuckles And for all that, who knows? Maybe Phydeaux is right? But I, for one, think it'd be wise to stop doing all those reprehensible things and THEN see how "Arabs" feel about us. I think it's a pretty safe bet that whatever animosity might exist theologically is probably going to be exacerbated by murdering their children and generally being atrocious. See, no matter how reasonably I invite the left to discuss the actual point - they defer. Why do arabs hate the west? Is it at all possible they hate the west because their religion is at odds with western values? So there are three possible choices: You can advance the argument that muslim theology is consonant with the west, and that the conflict is a result of other factors. You can advance the argument that muslim theology might be consonant. Or you can advance the concept that perhaps muslim theology isn't consonant with western values. How we argue (and how nations should act) will then depend on which of these three choices is correct. If muslim ideology is intractably hostile to western values, then invetably there will be conflict. Frankly, I think the west is pretty screwed. Muslim immigrants as a percentage of european population is increasing rapidly. Muslims are vastly increasing their share of the world population. And islam is more and more becoming rdicalized. Powergamer: Your only attempt at debunking had nothing to do with the question of theology. Plus no quotes no attributions and I have thereby ignored it as I will continue to do absent any kind of evidence. I do not pretend that Shia muslims are the same as Sunni. Or that Sufi or Druze or anyother muslim sect you care to name are the same. However, while Muslim inheritance rules may be of vital interest to muslims, I don't think they make a hill's bit of difference to the question - is muslim theology and western civilization compatible? You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Cuz, ya see, I don't see it. Seems like several of those are fundamentally at odds. Pretty sure the supreme court doesn't like Poll taxes.

tweakabelle -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 1:24:03 AM)
quote: You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Actually you have just described the reality of life for women in 'Western civlisation' until the last century. That is to say, the situation as its was for the entirety of 'western civilisation's' history bar the last century or so. The current situation - that of legal equality, possessing the right to vote etc - came about as a result of political action by women at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. The current situation of women in the West is very much the exception rather than the rule if one views the question from a historical perspective. To put that another way, all the complaints you have about Muslim attitudes towards women - "not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law" etc. - are the historical norm in the West. That seems to answer your question about whether these 'values' are compatible with 'Western civilisation' - for most of western history, these 'values' were the very fabric of 'western civilisation'. Which underlines just how stupid and ill-informed the argument you are advancing is. It is also worth noting that the advances in status of women in 'western civilisation' were OPPOSED bitterly by the same right wing ideologues who now trumpet the superior status of women in the West in an attempt to make the rest of us share their hatred of Muslims. A glance at the USA tells us these same ideologues are still at it today, trying to turn the clock back and reverse the political/legal/social advances made by women in the West. Which underlines just how hypocritical the argument you are advancing is.

epiphiny43 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 1:48:48 AM)
What's missing is the recognition that the publicized 'Muslim' theology and culture getting press in the West now is a minority offshoot of Islam, radical Wahabism and it's fellow traveler's propaganda largely, and whatever recidivist local traditions make news in US or EU urban centers. Islam is at least as varied as Christianity and more bitterly divided then we since the Protestant/Catholic wars petered out. Islam of the deep students is far from the local traditions 'shocking' Westerners, many of which far predate Mohammad and were conspicuous by their absence during the flowering of Islamic culture in the reigns of the great Islamic rulers. Elite women's status and acceptance in the large cities of the time of Suleiman is alien to current Arabic law and practice. Each portion of Islam has it's own history, traditions, absurdities and conflicts. More so than Christianity. Saying Islam is in conflict with modern Western values ignores that what passed for Christianity for well over a millennium is at least as opposed to 'modern' Western values as well as most earlier 'traditional' Western values before the Industrial Revolution. It's hard to think of any system less Christian than modern Wall Street/Corporate Capitalism.

Politesub53 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 3:10:24 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux Laughable stuff indeed. Pay no attention to actual math. What is freakin amazing is your inability to understand exponential growth, or math, and an unwillingness to call a spade a spade. Lets use your words - doubling every decade. 4.8% in 2011 9.6% in 2021 19.2% in 2031 38.4% in 2041 76.8% in 2051 this says that the muslim population becomes a majority - not in 50 years - but in less than 40. Which is what the freak I said. And if you go to actual estimations of muslim growth in england - you know people that actually study this crap. They say the same thing. I am so tired of posts such as yours - providing no facts, no supporting evidence and then just ridiculing whose documented evidence disagrees with your position. You won't even have the intellectual honesty to say. Damn. You were right - the math really does say that. And then since you won't concede the point - you won't even bother to find competing evidence - you'll just say that I'm a racist therefore it can't be true. Or wiki is a know inaccurate site or.... You wouldnt know a fact if it bit you on the arse. Fact......The thread is about "Why dont Muslims like the U.S Fact......There are no "no go" areas for police in the UK. Fact......Sharia Law doesnt supercede UK Law Fact......More Mosques have had racist attacks on them than Churches Fact......An eighty year old Muslim was murdered by the same guys who have been planting pipe bombs outside Mosques. Fact......History proves you wrong about Islam expanding through violence. I have pointed this out in other threads. Fact......Racists back in the sixties made similar claims about the expansion of the black population. It didnt happen. Fact......There is a vast difference between Muslim immigrants taking over and second or third generation Muslims. Fact......And you will love this one..... If we stopped bombing the shit out of these places then the refugees wouldnt need to leave home Fact......Your own chart shows the growth between 1991 and 2001 has slowed pro-rata to other decades. Fact......Muslims ruled India and Spain for 700 years and are still a minority of the population Some reading for you. http://richleebruce.com/b/1st-world-islam.html Edited to fix quotes

Powergamz1 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 10:20:43 AM)
Getting desperate in your gaming... Childishly misspelling my name? Seriously? That's your big 'win'? How many more of those before you level up? I've already provided direct links to the quotes you claimed you never posted, and you ran away... now you are back claiming no quotes. How boring. You can't even explain what you mean in your supposedly 'core' question. As others have repeatedly asked... What western values? Scripture? War? McDonalds? What is 'Western'? Turkey? Bosnia? California? Or is it only white people in some imaginary suburb someplace? By 'Muslims', do you mean Arabs? Egyptians? Indonesians? Uighurs? People from various countries in Africa? quote]ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 And yet when people provide facts about Arab culture that prove you wrong, you flip-flop over to 'Muslims' as though they were a single monolithic group When people call you on that, you run back to talking about Arabs. The two groups aren't the same thing, and your assertions have been debunked at both ends. Powergamer: Your only attempt at debunking had nothing to do with the question of theology. Plus no quotes no attributions and I have thereby ignored it as I will continue to do absent any kind of evidence. I do not pretend that Shia muslims are the same as Sunni. Or that Sufi or Druze or anyother muslim sect you care to name are the same. However, while Muslim inheritance rules may be of vital interest to muslims, I don't think they make a hill's bit of difference to the question - is muslim theology and western civilization compatible? You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Cuz, ya see, I don't see it. Seems like several of those are fundamentally at odds. Pretty sure the supreme court doesn't like Poll taxes.

Phydeaux -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:06:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Actually you have just described the reality of life for women in 'Western civlisation' until the last century. That is to say, the situation as its was for the entirety of 'western civilisation's' history bar the last century or so. The current situation - that of legal equality, possessing the right to vote etc - came about as a result of political action by women at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. The current situation of women in the West is very much the exception rather than the rule if one views the question from a historical perspective. To put that another way, all the complaints you have about Muslim attitudes towards women - "not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law" etc. - are the historical norm in the West. That seems to answer your question about whether these 'values' are compatible with 'Western civilisation' - for most of western history, these 'values' were the very fabric of 'western civilisation'. Which underlines just how stupid and ill-informed the argument you are advancing is. It is also worth noting that the advances in status of women in 'western civilisation' were OPPOSED bitterly by the same right wing ideologues who now trumpet the superior status of women in the West in an attempt to make the rest of us share their hatred of Muslims. A glance at the USA tells us these same ideologues are still at it today, trying to turn the clock back and reverse the political/legal/social advances made by women in the West. Which underlines just how hypocritical the argument you are advancing is. Certainly and thats about the best argument anyone has advanced in the argument tweak. However, the question (again) isn't what happened 200 or 100 years ago. Western civilization has evolved past denying women the vote, property ownership etc. Muslim religion hasn't. Thats one of several legs of my argument. Your answer seems to boill down to - "muslim religion isn't compatible now, but it might evolve to be so in a few hundred years."

Phydeaux -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:12:49 PM)
I will say the same thing I said the last time you tried this ploy. You are welcome to advance any significant, mainstream Islamic religion to make your argument. If you question what is meant by "Western" (really??) then to simplify the question for you to answer I would say you are free to use any g-7 civilization that you wish to make your argument. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Getting desperate in your gaming... Childishly misspelling my name? Seriously? That's your big 'win'? How many more of those before you level up? I've already provided direct links to the quotes you claimed you never posted, and you ran away... now you are back claiming no quotes. How boring. You can't even explain what you mean in your supposedly 'core' question. As others have repeatedly asked... What western values? Scripture? War? McDonalds? What is 'Western'? Turkey? Bosnia? California? Or is it only white people in some imaginary suburb someplace? By 'Muslims', do you mean Arabs? Egyptians? Indonesians? Uighurs? People from various countries in Africa? quote]ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 And yet when people provide facts about Arab culture that prove you wrong, you flip-flop over to 'Muslims' as though they were a single monolithic group When people call you on that, you run back to talking about Arabs. The two groups aren't the same thing, and your assertions have been debunked at both ends. Powergamer: Your only attempt at debunking had nothing to do with the question of theology. Plus no quotes no attributions and I have thereby ignored it as I will continue to do absent any kind of evidence. I do not pretend that Shia muslims are the same as Sunni. Or that Sufi or Druze or anyother muslim sect you care to name are the same. However, while Muslim inheritance rules may be of vital interest to muslims, I don't think they make a hill's bit of difference to the question - is muslim theology and western civilization compatible? You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Cuz, ya see, I don't see it. Seems like several of those are fundamentally at odds. Pretty sure the supreme court doesn't like Poll taxes.

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:45:38 PM)
quote: Fact......And you will love this one..... If we stopped bombing the shit out of these places then the refugees wouldnt need to leave home could you please clarify this "Fact" for me? where were we bombing the shit out of prior to 9/11? see cause the ONLY place I remember us bombing the shit out of prior to 9/11 was bagdad, and that was in response to an violent invasion... BTW, your FIRST fact is INCORRECT... it's not Fact......The thread is about "Why dont Muslims like the U.S it is Fact......Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S if you are going to SPLIT HAIRS welllllllllllllllll personally I wouldn't have bothered with something as trivial as that, but you proffered it as a FACT

Powergamz1 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:52:39 PM)
In other words, you won't even answer honestly to define your terms, to allow for rational discourse on the topic. You've been given religious answers, and you switched to 'Arabs' and 'culturally'. You were given cultural, geo-political, etc. answers, and you switched to religious fanaticism. Why is that? quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux I will say the same thing I said the last time you tried this ploy. You are welcome to advance any significant, mainstream Islamic religion to make your argument. If you question what is meant by "Western" (really??) then to simplify the question for you to answer I would say you are free to use any g-7 civilization that you wish to make your argument. quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 Getting desperate in your gaming... Childishly misspelling my name? Seriously? That's your big 'win'? How many more of those before you level up? I've already provided direct links to the quotes you claimed you never posted, and you ran away... now you are back claiming no quotes. How boring. You can't even explain what you mean in your supposedly 'core' question. As others have repeatedly asked... What western values? Scripture? War? McDonalds? What is 'Western'? Turkey? Bosnia? California? Or is it only white people in some imaginary suburb someplace? By 'Muslims', do you mean Arabs? Egyptians? Indonesians? Uighurs? People from various countries in Africa? quote]ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 And yet when people provide facts about Arab culture that prove you wrong, you flip-flop over to 'Muslims' as though they were a single monolithic group When people call you on that, you run back to talking about Arabs. The two groups aren't the same thing, and your assertions have been debunked at both ends. Powergamer: Your only attempt at debunking had nothing to do with the question of theology. Plus no quotes no attributions and I have thereby ignored it as I will continue to do absent any kind of evidence. I do not pretend that Shia muslims are the same as Sunni. Or that Sufi or Druze or anyother muslim sect you care to name are the same. However, while Muslim inheritance rules may be of vital interest to muslims, I don't think they make a hill's bit of difference to the question - is muslim theology and western civilization compatible? You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Cuz, ya see, I don't see it. Seems like several of those are fundamentally at odds. Pretty sure the supreme court doesn't like Poll taxes.

Politesub53 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:55:42 PM)
Laughable........ 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, Americas inquries after 9/11 admitted that. Yes, you got me on the Muslim/Arab thing.....Just.

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 4:59:33 PM)
I am going to state this not in response to anyone in particular, but to the islamic apologists in general... when comparing thier actions, the main argument I see most often is, well christians did this and that (crusades & inquisition) aprox 1/2 a millenia ago... to that argument I say, thats like 12 yr old johnny getting caught breaking out the school house windows then saying "well other kids did it 1/2 a millenia ago", and the response being "well, we'd like you to stop but we certianly understand you're reasoning for doing it." the old well things were diferant everywhere hundreds of years ago is just a LAME argument, you can pick almost ANY topic and make that claim.... 300 years ago we didn't have air polution issues cause we didn't have cars/factories 300 years ago we didn't have search issues at airports cause we didn't have planes the list goes ON AN ON AN ON! the point is quit using ANCIENT hisotry to justify CURRENT EVENTS! everyone and everything has EVOLVED, well except islamics!

Powergamz1 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 5:01:09 PM)
And where exactly does 'the Muslim religion' deny women the right to vote? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_women%27s_suffrage_in_majority-Muslim_countries quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Actually you have just described the reality of life for women in 'Western civlisation' until the last century. That is to say, the situation as its was for the entirety of 'western civilisation's' history bar the last century or so. The current situation - that of legal equality, possessing the right to vote etc - came about as a result of political action by women at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. The current situation of women in the West is very much the exception rather than the rule if one views the question from a historical perspective. To put that another way, all the complaints you have about Muslim attitudes towards women - "not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law" etc. - are the historical norm in the West. That seems to answer your question about whether these 'values' are compatible with 'Western civilisation' - for most of western history, these 'values' were the very fabric of 'western civilisation'. Which underlines just how stupid and ill-informed the argument you are advancing is. It is also worth noting that the advances in status of women in 'western civilisation' were OPPOSED bitterly by the same right wing ideologues who now trumpet the superior status of women in the West in an attempt to make the rest of us share their hatred of Muslims. A glance at the USA tells us these same ideologues are still at it today, trying to turn the clock back and reverse the political/legal/social advances made by women in the West. Which underlines just how hypocritical the argument you are advancing is. Certainly and thats about the best argument anyone has advanced in the argument tweak. However, the question (again) isn't what happened 200 or 100 years ago. Western civilization has evolved past denying women the vote, property ownership etc. Muslim religion hasn't. Thats one of several legs of my argument. Your answer seems to boill down to - "muslim religion isn't compatible now, but it might evolve to be so in a few hundred years."

Politesub53 -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 5:03:48 PM)
That wont wash. You cant tar every Muslim as a fundamentalist, just as you cant tar every Christian as a fundementalist. How far back would you go before you consider something not to be "current events" 10 years, 20, 50 ?

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 5:38:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 That wont wash. You cant tar every Muslim as a fundamentalist, just as you cant tar every Christian as a fundementalist. How far back would you go before you consider something not to be "current events" 10 years, 20, 50 ? yet I have seen those that tell me I have to understand the reasoning behind islamic behavior do that VERY THING people draw that crusade/inqisition thing like its a gun in these discussions my point is while many may draw it like a gun, it has NO BULLETS and BTW I never said every mulsem is a fundamentalist... all I said was its not fair to compare acnient history with current events and that argument is lame at BEST it is the MOST COMMONLY used argument in these types of discussions! and I am SURE if I go back threw this thread it was used at least ONCE here!

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 5:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Politesub53 Laughable........ 9/11 had nothing to do with Iraq, Americas inquries after 9/11 admitted that. Yes, you got me on the Muslim/Arab thing.....Just. I never said it had ANYTHING to do with 9/11 that was just a time referance you poffered the FACT that a big part of the problem is "we bomb the shit out of these places" so I asked where we were bombing the shit out of prior to 9/11 which is the aprox time we actually STARTED bombing the shit out of places... the refeance to bagadad was only to acknowledge that I knew we had in fact bombed the shit of it if prior to 9/11, and also to clarify it was in response to an action (violent invasion) on thier part I am sorry if you took that to mean I thought there was some connection to iraq an 9/11, I neither said nor meant to imply it. I did notice, you didn't list ANYPLACE we were "bombing the shit out of" prior to 9/11 though

Nosathro -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 5:49:14 PM)
Actually I think they do not like American because of things like this? Arabs, Muslims, etc, etc....and I don't blame them. http://www.asiantribune.com/news/2009/10/03/rape-Iraqi-women-us-forces-weapon-war-photos-and-data-emerge

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 6:00:44 PM)
quote: How far back would you go before you consider something not to be "current events" 10 years, 20, 50 ? well let me ask you this question, it also refers to your comment about "bombing the shit out of places" would you call vietnam a CURRENT EVENT? that ended in the what mid 70's? which would be aprox 40 years ago? would you call that a current event? we bombed the shit out of N vietnam too in the 70's. now if there was a continuing CONFLICT going on there I'd allow for it to be considered in a conversation about current events just as the 6 day war has to be considered in a conversation about palistine since it has gone on continiously since prior to that are you saying the crusades should be part of a conversation because the "west" has been at war with islam for over 1/2 a millenia? if thats what you are saying, its OK, I am even willing to accept that as reasonable argument... BUT if you are saying thats the case, then I have to submiit you are then arguing FOR a known long established enemy.... and again obviously thats certianly your right to do so, just as I am sure there were SOME people who argued FOR nazism in WW2

BitYakin -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/23/2013 6:12:02 PM)
you are correct, there is nothing in the koran that either allows or disallows voting... I will say this though, at the time when the koran was written, was voting an issue? what I mean is why would the koran mention "voting" when at the time 97% of the world was ruled by dictators, kings, queens, pharohs etc etc etc sorta like why the consitution doesn't mention air travel, cause there was NO SUCH THING at the time it was written my guess, and its ONLY A GUESS, is that if voting were around at that time, it WOULD have been mentioned! I have contented that the amendmant regarding slavery in the constitution is redundant since the rights of ALL MEN were aleady covered in the constitution, just like I'll content that islamics extend the lack of rights for women to include voting, even though its not specificly mentioned quote: ORIGINAL: Powergamz1 And where exactly does 'the Muslim religion' deny women the right to vote? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_first_women%27s_suffrage_in_majority-Muslim_countries quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Actually you have just described the reality of life for women in 'Western civlisation' until the last century. That is to say, the situation as its was for the entirety of 'western civilisation's' history bar the last century or so. The current situation - that of legal equality, possessing the right to vote etc - came about as a result of political action by women at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. The current situation of women in the West is very much the exception rather than the rule if one views the question from a historical perspective. To put that another way, all the complaints you have about Muslim attitudes towards women - "not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law" etc. - are the historical norm in the West. That seems to answer your question about whether these 'values' are compatible with 'Western civilisation' - for most of western history, these 'values' were the very fabric of 'western civilisation'. Which underlines just how stupid and ill-informed the argument you are advancing is. It is also worth noting that the advances in status of women in 'western civilisation' were OPPOSED bitterly by the same right wing ideologues who now trumpet the superior status of women in the West in an attempt to make the rest of us share their hatred of Muslims. A glance at the USA tells us these same ideologues are still at it today, trying to turn the clock back and reverse the political/legal/social advances made by women in the West. Which underlines just how hypocritical the argument you are advancing is. Certainly and thats about the best argument anyone has advanced in the argument tweak. However, the question (again) isn't what happened 200 or 100 years ago. Western civilization has evolved past denying women the vote, property ownership etc. Muslim religion hasn't. Thats one of several legs of my argument. Your answer seems to boill down to - "muslim religion isn't compatible now, but it might evolve to be so in a few hundred years."

tweakabelle -> RE: Why Arabs Don't Like the U.S. (7/24/2013 12:43:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Phydeaux quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle quote: You are free to provide examples of why you think muslim theology is compatible with western civilization. Feel free to show how / why muslim jurisprudence is compatible with western civiliation. Or why rules like not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law, poll taxes for non muslims. Show me how these are good for western civilization. Actually you have just described the reality of life for women in 'Western civlisation' until the last century. That is to say, the situation as its was for the entirety of 'western civilisation's' history bar the last century or so. The current situation - that of legal equality, possessing the right to vote etc - came about as a result of political action by women at the turn of the 19th/20th centuries. The current situation of women in the West is very much the exception rather than the rule if one views the question from a historical perspective. To put that another way, all the complaints you have about Muslim attitudes towards women - "not working outside the house, remaining covered at all times, inability to own businesses, half shares of inheritance, unequal treatment under the law" etc. - are the historical norm in the West. That seems to answer your question about whether these 'values' are compatible with 'Western civilisation' - for most of western history, these 'values' were the very fabric of 'western civilisation'. Which underlines just how stupid and ill-informed the argument you are advancing is. It is also worth noting that the advances in status of women in 'western civilisation' were OPPOSED bitterly by the same right wing ideologues who now trumpet the superior status of women in the West in an attempt to make the rest of us share their hatred of Muslims. A glance at the USA tells us these same ideologues are still at it today, trying to turn the clock back and reverse the political/legal/social advances made by women in the West. Which underlines just how hypocritical the argument you are advancing is. Certainly and thats about the best argument anyone has advanced in the argument tweak. However, the question (again) isn't what happened 200 or 100 years ago. Western civilization has evolved past denying women the vote, property ownership etc. Muslim religion hasn't. Thats one of several legs of my argument. Your answer seems to boill down to - "muslim religion isn't compatible now, but it might evolve to be so in a few hundred years." Moving the goal posts after conceding a goal isn't allowed. For the duration of this thread, you have been insisting that Islamic 'values' are not compatible with Western civilisation'. You have made this specious claim repeatedly and demanded that others address it. Now that your claim has been effectively demolished, you are changing the claim and ruling out history. Dumb. My answer to your claim is not "muslim religion isn't compatible now, but it might evolve to be so in a few hundred years." My answer (detailed in post 183) is that the Muslim 'values' you listed are not only compatible with Western civilisation, but that those values have been an integral part of 'western civilisation' for almost all of Western history. Your claim is idiotic. Why do you make such nonsensical claims? Because for political/ideological reasons you wish to demonise Arabs and Muslims, and retain Israel at the centre of Western interests and support in the region. Of course that you need to invent such rubbish to promote Zionist interests tells us a lot about those interests and the integrity of Zionism's few remaining fans. If the Zionist cause was just, there would be no need whatsoever to demonise others, or to resort to fiction and invention to justify it.

Page: << < prev 8 9 [10] 11 12 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625