Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Shooting in Demark

Options
1…1618202122

Comments

  • Options
    #512
    Donkey Oaty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,533 ✭✭✭Donkey Oaty


    Bob24 wrote: »
    Sadly when people are doing this terrorists are wining their ideological war.

    This is true.

    Egginacup and others have already fallen for this propaganda.

    It is a Danish human-rights activist who has come up with the correct term for this phenomenon, which is "bigotry of low expectations".

    Here's how The Economist describes his viewpoints:
    Above all, politicians should avoid the trap of saying or implying that violence was really the fault of provocateurs, or that religious insult was to be equated with physical injury. Giving in to that sort of relativism would be letting down those followers of Islam who were brave enough to stand up for free speech, and indulging in a sort of "bigotry of low expectations", said Mr Mchangama, whose paternal forebears were Muslims from the Comoros Islands. A good point.


  • Options
    #513
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    Donkey Oaty wrote: »
    This is true.

    Egginacup and others have already fallen for this propaganda.

    It is a Danish human-rights activist who has come up with the correct term for this phenomenon, which is "bigotry of low expectations".

    Here's how The Economist describes his viewpoints:

    Thanks for the reference ... indeed a very pertinent connection with what I was saying.

    Article was easy to find on Google, but here is the link if anyone is interested:
    http://www.economist.com/blogs/erasmus/2015/02/religion-europe-and-denmark


  • Options
    #514
    smurgen
    Registered Users Posts: 6,933 ✭✭✭smurgen


    I dunno what to say anymore. These guys are the lowest of the low.I've some Muslim friends are they're genuinely lovely people.completely detached from the likes of these isis animals.
    its the first time I've been afraid of terrorism in any way shape or form.I don't give into hysteria easily but the acts of random savagery has gotten to me.
    anyone associated with them or seen to support their actions should be monitored very ,very closely.also shame on the us and the UK for creating the power vacuums to alow these guys to flourish.


  • Options
    #515
    KingBrian2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    The very term Middle East is condescending. A more valid word describing the region with greater accuracy would be the Muslim World as it encompasses the entire of North Africa, West Asia, Levant and East Mediterranean.


  • Options
    #516
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    BuilderPlumber wrote: »
    There should always be a separation of church and state. This is a problem with most Middle Eastern countries at present: nearly all identify themselves through religion be it Sunni, Shia, Hinduism or Judaism. The following Middle Eastern countries are founded on religions and emphasise a certain religion:

    Afghanistan = Sunni Islamic republic.
    Pakistan = Sunni Islamic republic.
    India = Hindu republic.
    Iran = Shia Islamic republic.
    Saudi Arabia = Wahabbist Sunni absolute monarchy.
    Other Gulf Kingdoms (Qatar, Kuwait et al): ditto as for Saudi.
    Israel = Jewish republic.
    Iraq = failed state on the verge of takeover by ISIS.
    Syria = failed state on the verge of takeover by ISIS.
    ISIS = aspiring, fascist, absolute monarchy styling itself as an 'Islamic' Caliphate.
    Libya = failed state on the verge of takeover by ISIS-style fascists.

    Turkey is perhaps the only one that is not based on or does not have a strong militant 'Islam' rebel group.

    India is a secular republic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #517
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    KingBrian2 wrote: »
    The very term Middle East is condescending. A more valid word describing the region with greater accuracy would be the Muslim World as it encompasses the entire of North Africa, West Asia, Levant and East Mediterranean.
    LOL, we'll go with "Muslim world" when we start calling the West the "Christian world".


  • Options
    #518
    Donkey Oaty
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,533 ✭✭✭Donkey Oaty


    We should bow to the Gods of Cruise Ship Intineraries and call it "The Holy Land and Beyond, including a two-night stay in Cyprus".


  • Options
    #519
    Sociopath2
    Registered Users Posts: 242 ✭✭Sociopath2


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    LOL, we'll go with "Muslim world" when we start calling the West the "Christian world".

    He's right though. Those countries are predominantly Islamic and run on Islamic principles just as the West is predominantly Christian and our laws and values are based around Christian beliefs.

    It will be better for all concerned when Islam is no longer the driving force there and Christianity is no longer the driving force here.


  • Options
    #520
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    Dan_Solo wrote: »
    LOL, we'll go with "Muslim world" when we start calling the West the "Christian world".
    The West is the Christian world; just as Ireland is a Catholic country. There are lots of atheists, muslims, jews etc. in the West but Christianity is the dominant religion; there are lots of atheists and catholics in name only in Ireland but Catholicism is the dominant religion. What's important is that they are all seen as people, equal under the law; and we must realise that no person is defined by their beliefs, and certainly not religious beliefs. Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Scientology, they all need to be fair game, no holding back, no matter how many followers each has or no matter how enlightened or modern some religions have have become compared to others. Never forget that Christianity, Catholicism; they were forced to become what they are recognised as now.


  • Options
    #521
    KingBrian2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    That is what I like about Syria. It does not pretend to be something its not. It is not a Christian country it is a Muslim country with laws for Muslims. Now once you accept that the whole Shi'ite, Sunni or Christian divide does not matter. They have Ramadan and prohibition of certain goods that we in the west take for granted. Try to foster western values on them and they will react hostile. They have to work out their own societal problems on their own. It does not help when we support the most authoritarian regimes over there eg Musharraf in Pakistan who protected Osama Bin Laden and Yemen which is falling apart.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #522
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    KingBrian2 wrote: »
    That is what I like about Syria. It does not pretend to be something its not. It is not a Christian country it is a Muslim country with laws for Muslims. Now once you accept that the whole Shi'ite, Sunni or Christian divide does not matter. They have Ramadan and prohibition of certain goods that we in the west take for granted. Try to foster western values on them and they will react hostile. They have to work out their own societal problems on their own. It does not help when we support the most authoritarian regimes over there eg Musharraf in Pakistan who protected Osama Bin Laden and Yemen which is falling apart.
    Christianity should still be the primary recipient of criticism and satire and insult in the West in the context of religions. We can never forget; and we should never forget, just because the worst of it is hopefully in the past. Now of course we should also show the same attitude towards Islam, but we should see it more as foreign aid than as the bigger threat to us in the West. Above all, what we should not do is cave to our own faux liberal tolerance and apology, and self-censor, by restricting criticism and satire of Islam; nor throw around words such as Islamophobia at any hint of offense towards Islam the religion; that does a disservice to both people of the West and the Middle East. It discourages an Islamic enlightenment, as well as forgetting that modern Christianity is only the way it is today because we had an enlightenment in the West.


  • Options
    #523
    KingBrian2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    Not all Muslim states are terrifying places. Syria, Jordon, Morocco, Lebanon, Algeria, Tunisia and Indonesia have secular Muslims that repudiate violence just like you and me.


  • Options
    #524
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    KingBrian2 wrote: »
    Not all Muslim states are terrifying places. Syria, Jordon, Morocco, Lebanon, Algeria, Tunisia and Indonesia have secular Muslims that repudiate violence just like you and me.
    Exactly. Most Muslims are peaceful and non-violent people. But Islam, like Christianity, is fundamentally a dangerous ideology.


  • Options
    #525
    Dan_Solo
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 10,087 ✭✭✭✭Dan_Solo


    Sociopath2 wrote: »
    He's right though. Those countries are predominantly Islamic and run on Islamic principles just as the West is predominantly Christian and our laws and values are based around Christian beliefs.
    I don't disagree with his observation, I do take offense at using the label, even if it is currently very accurate.


  • Options
    #526
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    K4t wrote: »
    Christianity should still be the primary recipient of criticism and satire and insult in the West in the context of religions. We can never forget; and we should never forget, just because the worst of it is hopefully in the past. Now of course we should also show the same attitude towards Islam, but we should see it more as foreign aid than as the bigger threat to us in the West. Above all, what we should not do is cave to our own faux liberal tolerance and apology, and self-censor, by restricting criticism and satire of Islam; nor throw around words such as Islamophobia at any hint of offense towards Islam the religion; that does a disservice to both people of the West and the Middle East. It discourages an Islamic enlightenment, as well as forgetting that modern Christianity is only the way it is today because we had an enlightenment in the West.

    I would definitely agree with this if we were talking about the world before globalisation kicked-in. But Islam is not foreign to Europe anymore.
    Many European countries have between 5 and 10% Muslim population, and the ratio is growing steadily. A city like Marseille is forecasted to have a majority Muslim population in a not so distant future.

    Islam definitely shouldn't be considered as something foreign to Europe.


  • Options
    #527
    nokia69
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,050 ✭✭✭nokia69


    Islam definitely should be considered as something foreign to Europe.


  • Options
    #528
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    KingBrian2 wrote: »
    Not all Muslim states are terrifying places. Syria, Jordon, Morocco, Lebanon, Algeria, Tunisia and Indonesia have secular Muslims that repudiate violence just like you and me.

    There are posters to these threads that are quite at ease with violence.


  • Options
    #529
    Bob24
    Registered Users Posts: 10,905 ✭✭✭✭Bob24


    nokia69 wrote: »
    Islam definitely should be considered as something foreign to Europe.

    Just to put numbers on what we are talking about:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe#mediaviewer/File:Islam_in_Europe-2011.svg

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/ae/Muslim_pop_Euro.JPG


  • Options
    #530
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    nokia69 wrote: »
    Islam definitely should be considered as something foreign to Europe.
    But it's not, as the other poster explained. It's too late for that even if you did want to view it as foreign or ignore it. Islam is here in the form of millions of muslims, who have every right to be here. Now more than ever we need to acknowledge Islam, and along with Christianity, criticise and satire it; make both Christians and muslims understand that no one person is valued any differently because of their religious beliefs, and that everybody is equal under the law (except in Ireland where Gay people can't marry each other!)
    reprise wrote: »
    There are posters to these threads that are quite at ease with violence.
    Then quote them and criticise or question them.


  • Options
    #531
    Nodin
    Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    nokia69 wrote: »
    Islam definitely should be considered as something foreign to Europe.

    On what grounds?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #532
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    K4t wrote: »
    Then quote them and criticise or question them.

    No point. It's wired in.


  • Options
    #533
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    K4t wrote: »
    and that everybody is equal under the law (except in Ireland where Gay people can't marry each other!)

    Silly point and off topic, however, straight people cannot marry people of the same sex either.


  • Options
    #534
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    reprise wrote: »
    No point. It's wired in.
    That's no excuse. Do something about it instead of making what could just as easily be false generalisations. Quote the post and make your argument. Or are you making it up?


  • Options
    #535
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    reprise wrote: »
    Silly point and off topic, however, straight people cannot marry people of the same sex either.
    And that's wrong. They should be allowed marry whoever they like, just as a lot of gay people already can. :)


  • Options
    #536
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    K4t wrote: »
    And that's wrong. They should be allowed marry whoever they like, just as a lot of gay people already can. :)

    Sure, why not. Whoever you like, whatever you fancy and as many as you please.


  • Options
    #537
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    reprise wrote: »
    Sure, why not. Whoever you like, whatever you fancy and as many as you please.
    I didn't say that, nor did I suggest it. Why do you want people to be allowed to be married to more than one person? What does it have to do with same-sex marriage? Seems a very odd thing to say. :)


  • Options
    #538
    KingBrian2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,363 ✭✭✭KingBrian2


    A lot of Muslims in Europe are homophobic and pro censorship. European Jews, Christians and Muslim can and do live in peace but it is of the understanding that we are all equal. Secular beliefs that unites us all.


  • Options
    #539
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    reprise wrote: »
    Sure, why not. Whoever you like, whatever you fancy and as many as you please.
    I hope you are aware that Gay people can already get married. Same sex marriage does not mean Gay people can't get married, nor does it affect different sex marriage in any way, shape or form; it simply means that two people of the same sex can get married; because they love each other, which is what marriage is all about. :)


    Is it the concept of marriage itself you oppose? Because you seem to be quite against the love part of marriage? Why don't you want people who love each other to be allowed to marry each other? :confused:


  • Options
    #540
    reprise
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,372 ✭✭✭reprise


    K4t wrote: »
    I didn't say that, nor did I suggest it. Why do you want people to be allowed to be married to more than one person? What does it have to do with same-sex marriage? Seems a very odd thing to say. :)

    :confused:

    Sorry, I am not indulging your obsession here.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #541
    K4t
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,362 ✭✭✭K4t


    reprise wrote: »
    :confused:
    reprise wrote:
    Sure, why not. Whoever you like, whatever you fancy and as many as you please.
    Maybe take your grievances and personal problems to the Marriage referendum forum?


Advertisement