The Islamophobia split on the left.

[Arakhor]

The people themselves aren't problematic. A large part of the ideas and values are - especially the ones that concern legal matters. Take for example, the three following thoughts:

Depiction of certain religious figures should be forbidden by the law in general.
Apostasy from Islam should be punishable by death in general.
Homosexuality should be forbidden by the law in general.

Whilst I don't disagree with you, you could change those points to:

Teaching the Bible as science should be mandated by the law in general.
Abortion should be forbidden by the law in general.
Homosexual marriage should be forbidden by the law in general.

Now what do you have?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Simply put:

Scripture does not a religion make. The people are those who make a religion. The people determine which parts of their holy scripture fit in their moral world-view and which parts to reject. The references to Christianity or not made to blemish Christianity, they are made to illustrate how this happens around us all the time, but for some strange reason some cannot imagine Muslims are doing exactly the same.

Religion doesn't make morality. It never did. It is just used as advertising.

 

[Esmer]

thats just a rehash of love the sinner hate the sin argument from recent gay rights issues, you can accept muslims and work together , or you start with we accept you but you do know that you are wrong and foolish don't you, it depends if you want intergration into western culture or not.

I'm not going to accept the nasty parts of Islam. I don't think killing somebody because he decided to change his religion is a reasonable worldview to have - it's insane. I didn't make up those tenets - and I'm not going to pretend they aren't there either.

and the right has been busy telling us how evil Islam is,and how misguided Muslims are for about 15 years, the result is that the biggest recruitment tool for extremists is western media, your alienated and hated, just look at your local paper

You know, I don't believe that. I don't believe that if there wasn't criticism of Islam, there wouldn't be Islamic extremism either.

Do you propose I visit my Muslim neighbours tonight with a Koran with the appropriate passages bookmarked, and tell the family that if they mean to be a proper Muslims, they are doing it quite wrong?

Yes, if you could do that, that would be lovely.

Whilst I don't disagree with you, you could change those points to:

Teaching the Bible as science should be mandated by the law in general.
Abortion should be forbidden by the law in general.
Homosexual marriage should be forbidden by the law in general.

Now what do you have?

I'm atheist. I am as much against Christian values trumping secular law as I am against Islamic values trumping secular law.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Yes, if you could do that, that would be lovely.

It was a serious question.

They are followers of Islam aren't they? The point I am trying to make is that there is not a single manifestation of Islam that you can denominate as true Islam. Your issue is not with Islam, it's with parts of the Koran. If you make the point there are some truly disgusting passages in the Koran, you'd have few people arguing against you.

 

[jackelgull]

No, apparently you should tell them they shouldn't be Muslims otherwise they're subscribing to violence and all that is against good and progressive and Western.

For most Muslims though, Islam is about as much about identity as it is about religion. Strip me of my religion and you strip me of something that makes up my identity. However, that doesn't mean I practice my religion as Bin Laden practices it, because conflict goes against my conscience, and if Allah is worth worshipping, then it is fine if he is demanding, but not okay if he forces me to go against my own sense of right and wrong. And people react as if Islam isn't changing, it is, and that is why there is an extremist back lash. Because the Muslim world is trying to redefine itself and Islam is one of those ways that people are redefining themselves.

 

[Arakhor]

I'm atheist. I am as much against Christian values trumping secular law as I am against Islamic values trumping secular law.

I'd agree with you there, but some or all of those Christian values are espoused by many Westerners (and even some Western Europeans) and you can't just brush off those people as being fundamentally incompatible with Western society.

 

[Esmer]

It was a serious question.

They are followers of Islam aren't they? The point I am trying to make is that there is not a single manifestation of Islam that you can denominate as true Islam. Your issue is not with Islam, it's with parts of the Koran. If you make the point there are some truly disgusting passages in the Koran, you'd have few people arguing against you.

Well, this is pretty much my main point. Thas Islam as a set of ideas and values has large parts that are incompatible with European societies.

I'd agree with you there, but some or all of those Christian values are espoused by many Westerners (and even some Western Europeans) and you can't just brush off those people as being fundamentally incompatible with Western society.

If those people are really working towards replacing our current laws with the laws you listed, I'd call them religious extremists. And I wouldn't want them to have a say in government.

 

[jackelgull]

Is it incompatible with western society in general, or just the good parts? Because I don't mind if Islam is incompatible with the wasteful nature of western society.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well, this is pretty much my main point. That Islam as a set of ideas and values has large parts that are incompatible with European societies.

No. My point is that the Koran has a set of ideas and values that are incompatible with European societies. My point is that Islam is not equal to Koran, as the Bible is not equal to Christianity.

Your point relies on: Islam is the Koran. This is where we disagree.

 

[Esmer]

No. My point is that the Koran has a set of ideas and values that are incompatible with European societies. My point is that Islam is not equal to Koran, as the Bible is not equal to Christianity.

Your point relies on: Islam is the Koran. This is where we disagree.

Actually, many of the worse parts are found in the Hadiths rather than the Koran, but yeah, let's agree to disagree on that one. I consider the Koran essential to Islam.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I do too. But that's not what I'm arguing against.

 

[Arakhor]

I think that most Christians would agree that the Bible is essential to Christianity, but I suppose that the main difference is that since Christianity and Western society have been for so long intertwined (for long enough, being Christian was virtually synonymous with being European), people have had much longer to rationalise away the Bible's (many, many) nasty bits.

 

[Old Hippy]

Well, this is pretty much my main point. Thas Islam as a set of ideas and values has large parts that are incompatible with European societies.

but the same could be said of extreme leftist and extreme rightists, they have a lot of values that are incompatable with moderate European societies, but like most Muslims they tend to get along within the existing framework. all the critism of islam is of things that happen outside of European societies, so when attacking islams values, you are attacking values that most European muslims do not pratice and saying but we don't even respect the values that are compatable with ours because, well, your Muslims after all...

If those people are really working towards replacing our current laws with the laws you listed, I'd call them religious extremists. And I wouldn't want them to have a say in government.

demorcracey is OK, providing only the correct people get to vote, puts you in an extremist camp, should you have the right to vote ....

because I belong to a society that is dedicated to changing values and laws and influencing political parties, but would balk at saying some people should not vote if they disagree with me...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

I think that most Christians would agree that the Bible is essential to Christianity, but I suppose that the main difference is that since Christianity and Western society have been for so long intertwined (for long enough, being Christian was virtually synonymous with being European), people have had much longer to rationalise away the Bible's (many, many) nasty bits.

And a whole lot of the good bits unfortunately.

 

[Arakhor]

demorcracey is OK, providing only the correct people get to vote, puts you in an extremist camp, should you have the right to vote ....

It also ends up putting you in a similar camp to Richard Dawkins, where (similar to many fundamentalists) I believe he thinks that religious moderates are fooling themselves and religion is completely antithetical to science.

 

[jackelgull]

democracy is OK, providing only the correct people get to vote, puts you in an extremist camp, should you have the right to vote ....

because I belong to a society that is dedicated to changing values and laws and influencing political parties, but would balk at saying some people should not vote if they disagree with me...

Don't you know that is why we have free speech? It is so we can identify the crazies and marginalized them from society.

 

[Esmer]

but the same could be said of extreme leftist and extreme rightists, they have a lot of values that are incompatable with moderate European societies, but like most Muslims they tend to get along within the existing framework. all the critism of islam is of things that happen outside of European societies, so when attacking islams values, you are attacking values that most European muslims do not pratice and saying but we don't even respect the values that are compatable with ours because, well, your Muslims after all

I think the same of leftwing and rightwing extremists as I think of religious extremists.

demorcracey is OK, providing only the correct people get to vote, puts you in an extremist camp, should you have the right to vote ....

because I belong to a society that is dedicated to changing values and laws and influencing political parties, but would balk at saying some people should not vote if they disagree with me

Did I say, at some point, that they should not vote? I said they should not have a say in government. You know there's more to that, than voting? Like for example in 2006, Muslim interest groups asked for new legislation regarding stricter blasphemy laws and such. In my country we also havee groups lobbying for adapting public schools more to Islamic values. (This concerns things like sex ed, evolution theory, pork in school cantinas, gender-mixed classes etc)

That's the stuff I'm talking about.

And by the way, my understanding of the parliamentary democracy in my country is that the constitution it is based upon is there to stay and that it has the right and obligation to protect itself against extremist groups who try to replace it with something different - no matter if they're leftwing, rightwing or religious extremists. I'm German. Might have something to do with that.

And since you have dodged my other question again, let me ask you more directly:

What do YOU think should be a leftist standpoint on the Islamic laws regarding apostasy?

 

[Old Hippy]

And by the way, my understanding of the parliamentary democracy in my country is that the constitution it is based upon is there to stay and that it has the right and obligation to protect itself against extremist groups who try to replace it with something different - no matter if they're leftwing, rightwing or religious extremists. I'm German. Might have something to do with that.

And since you have dodged my other question again, let me ask you more directly:
What do YOU think should be a leftist standpoint on the Islamic laws regarding apostasy?

so we are both on the same page so to speak

Spoiler :

Let’s start with the definition of apostasy. A simple definition of apostasy is "leaving, departing away from, or deserting, one's religion." Further, the Dictionary of Quranic Terms and Concepts[5] defines apostasy:

APOSTASY

Arabic "irtidad". Traditional Islamic law prescribes the penalty of death for a Muslim who commits apostasy. The punishment is not stated in the Quran, but is said to be based on certain Hadith. The advocates and the opponents of the said penalty have, in their attempt to find Quranic support for their views, appealed to certain Quranic verses, but the fact is that none of the arguments offered do full justice to the Quranic context …

http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/apostasy.htm

my understanding is that in Germany it would not be possible, like here in Australia, or the UK, has something to do with the constitution I believe, or maybe just the general laws etc. as a leftist why should I have a standpoint about something the muslims in my society, don't practice and promote that they should abide by the laws of the land, which actually prohibit it, so I am in agreement with the muslims here, it is not allowed.

maybe you could englighten me about why it is a 'thing' in Germany though...

 

[aelf]

Well the CEO of Goldman Sachs (and thus according to the anti-banker tin foil hat crowd, the true Lord of the Universe) was born in a housing project and is the son of a post office clerk.

Maybe that motivated him, maybe not. Individual motives are indeed varied and manifold

But that is not to say that the material conditions in a society are not the root cause of most if not all social phenomena. Only the simple-minded would equate that with thinking that material concerns motivate every individual's actions.

 

[MobBoss]

There is an interesting split in my leftist media bubble video here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZyC8ya_GvU&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ. 2 people I find I often agree with have a severe split on how we discuss Islam, Muslims, and issues surrounding media, culture, politics. This reflects a broader split on this question on the left. At issue: is it correct, moral, fair to characterize Islam and Muslim beliefs as more pernicious than other religions, a root cause of violence, terrorism and oppression? Or is this bigoted, unfair and insensitive with the root of some of these problems obviously due to economic and political/historical colonial issues? I must say I am on the side of the supposed Islamophobes Harris and Maher. I will not suppress criticism of repressive, sexist, anti-liberal doctrines out of cultural sensitivity. Nor do I think it is moral to do so but in fact immoral. Where do you stand?

Nice interview of Ayaan Hirshi Ali here http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/lifting-the-veil-of-islamophobia for those who don’t mind reading.

If we hold Christianity responsible for such things as the Crusades or the Inquisition, then why shouldn't we hold Islam responsible for the terrorism done in its name today?