Are the left being brainwashed by Islam?? - Mod warning in OP

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

From my experience I have met no moderate Muslim. You have Muslims in name only who drink alcohol, do drugs dont go to mosque & then you have the ones who go to mosque & if you question their religion or prophet their persona changes. Moderate to me is a Muslim who fits in & respects other cultures & all human beings no matter their sex or sexual orientation
As I've said, it is my experience that doesn't make me a racist/extremist or anything else

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

i thinks its difficult for a Muslim to be both devout and moderate , as discussed in this thread moderate does not refer to the support of jihad , moderate to me would be a rejection of sharia which are extreme , oppressive , degrading and discriminatory laws , totally at odd with western culture and values any Muslim who supports sharia cannot be called a moderate , and in my experience there are very few devout Muslims who will not defend sharia at he very least if they are not in full support of it.

The only Muslims i have met who are truly moderate , rational m, decent people are those who have left or are looking for a way to leave Islam, such as the girl from my masters course that myself and a number of my classmates helped gain asylum here this year. She was about a Muslim as the pope but had she gone back to Saudi she'd have been in a Burka and the property of her father / husband etc for the rest of her life. She couldn't fathom why any European woman would defend or support Islam and helped completely change the view of a number of the Irish , French and Dutch girls in our class in relation to this.

Defending Muslims is not the same as defending Islam. Unless, you can show where people are defending particulars of the Religous belief, than the statement is not an accurate one.

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

From my experience I have met no moderate Muslim.

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.

Help!!!! wrote: »

You have Muslims in name only who drink alcohol, do drugs dont go to mosque & then you have the ones who go to mosque & if you question their religion or prophet their persona changes. Moderate to me is a Muslim who fits in & respects other cultures & all human beings no matter their sex or sexual orientation
As I've said, it is my experience that doesn't make me a racist/extremist or anything else

In my expericence it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists and bigots. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.



In mine it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

Sticks & stones & all that, typical leftie break out the bigot & liar yada yada ya when someone has a different view to you

I think I found you on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-3Y3NDCT-Y

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

Sticks & stones & all that, typical leftie break out the bigot & liar yada yada ya when someone has a different view to you

My experience is just as valid as yours. Why is your experience of anymore value than mine? Interesting, how you don't like it, when I use the exact same reasoning as yours, and reject it when its used on you.

Seems you reject your own reasoning, then its aimed right back at you. Very interesting, and then you descend into childish nonsense about "typical leftie" or whatever.

If your experience is valid, then so is mine. Can't have it both ways.

Help!!!! wrote: »

I think I found you on youtube

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-3Y3NDCT-Y

Interesting accusation. I made 0 accusations based on your race, but rather on people who share you opinions. Seems to be that you are making a false accusation, unless you can back up your claim of me attacking you based on your race.

Seems to me you don't like being challanged, and reject other people experience, but we have to take your as being gospel. Pretty hypocritical.

I take it you either missed the point I am trying to make, or you copped it, and are now lashing out in anger.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

Defending Muslims is not the same as defending Islam. Unless, you can show where people are defending particulars of the Religous belief, than the statement is not an accurate one.

But how do you separate a person from their faith without actually getting to know them personally, if your just going to blanket defend Muslims that's as ill though out an approach as the extreme right looking to ban all Muslims.

You accept there are fundamental issues with Islam and the thinking and Idealogy of devout Muslims (aside from the jihadi extremists) view and values which conflict and contrast with existing western values and the even more so conflict with the liberal ideal, you would not defend Devout Catholics or Orthodox Jews in the same way so what is it about Islam that makes it different.

I maintain my position the the socially left and Muslims make very very strange bedfellows, its the equivalent or arch Capitalists defending the rights of Marxists complete polar views on many many issues. This is far from a race thing , some of the most extream / least moderate Muslims I've met have been white Bosnians

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

My experience is just as valid as yours. Why is your experience of anymore value than mine? Interesting, how you don't like it, when I use the exact same reasoning as yours, and reject it when its used on you.

Seems you reject your own reasoning, then its aimed right back at you. Very interesting, and then you descend into childish nonsense about "typical leftie" or whatever.

If your experience is valid, then so is mine. Can't have it both ways.



Interesting accusation. I made 0 accusations based on your race, but rather on people who share you opinions. Seems to be that you are making a false accusation, unless you can back up your claim of me attacking you based on your race.

Seems to me you don't like being challanged, and reject other people experience, but we have to take your as being gospel. Pretty hypocritical.

I take it you either missed the point I am trying to make, or you copped it, and are now lashing out in anger.

No but your the one that started calling me an extremist bigot & liar just because my experience & views are different to yours. I'm not the one calling you names because your views are different

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

But how do you separate a person from their faith without actually getting to know them personally, if your just going to blanket defend Muslims that's as ill though out an approach as the extreme right looking to ban all Muslims.

It pretty standard that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. Why should this standard be different for Muslims?

Walter H Price wrote: »

You accept there are fundamental issues with Islam and the thinking and Idealogy of devout Muslims (aside from the jihadi extremists) view and values which conflict and contrast with existing western values and the even more so conflict with the liberal ideal, you would not defend Devout Catholics or Orthodox Jews in the same way so what is it about Islam that makes it different.

If someone wanted to take there rights away I would. Yet, I don't see anyone trying to justify there being no moderate Jews or Catholics, by using there personal experience on this thread, hence no reason to defend those groups on this thread.

Walter H Price wrote: »

I maintain my position the the socially left and Muslims make very very strange bedfellows, its the equivalent or arch Capitalists defending the rights of Marxists complete polar views on many many issues. This is far from a race thing , some of the most extream / least moderate Muslims I've met have been white Bosnians

I never claimed it was a race thing, but again I disagree, defending the rights of individuals is very much a left wing thing to do, and shows that even when there is disagreement in people views that are being defended, that the left defends there fundamental rigths. This is not strange at all, and is the proper ting to do.

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

No but your the one that started calling me an extremist bigot & liar just because my experience & views are different to yours. I'm not the one calling you names because your views are different

Except I didn't. Go read my posts again:

wes wrote: »

You stated that there are no moderate Muslims, that is an extremist position. Do you deny that is your position or not? Simply question.

As for being right wing or not, honestly could care less. Being an immigrant doesn't stop you having biggoted opinions about other groups, and again you have stated, there are no moderate Muslims, a position you share with ISIS btw,

I said that opinions are biggoted, never said you were. I was being careful, not call you any names, and to attack the idea and not the person.

wes wrote: »

From my expericence, people who say that are extremist bigots or liars.

In my expericence it does, as people who say there are no moderate are extremists and bigots. Again, you and ISIS are on the same page there.

I never said you were a bigot or a liar, just that people who in my experience who have the same views are bigots and liars. I chose my words careful, as I didn't want to falsely accuse you of something, as I don't know you. Again, I was making a point about how someone experience doesn't really prove anything.

Again, my experience just as valid as yours, and I would ask you please read my posts carefully in future. Simply put my opinion is that views that thare are no moderates Muslims, are extremist and biggoted. My position based on my experience is just as valid as your position, but you take exception to my opinion, which has as much weight as your does.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

It pretty standard that everyone is innocent until proven otherwise. Why should this standard be different for Muslims?



If someone wanted to take there rights away I would. Yet, I don't see anyone trying to justify there being no moderate Jews or Catholics, by using there personal experience on this thread, hence no reason to defend those groups on this thread.



I never claimed it was a race thing, but again I disagree, defending the rights of individuals is very much a left wing thing to do, and shows that even when there is disagreement in people views that are being defended, that the left defends there fundamental rigths. This is not strange at all, and is the proper ting to do.

16 countries all majority Muslim including 6 of the 7 on Trumps list deny entry to Israli citizens. what is the difference ?why are the socially left not protesting the right of Israli citizens to travel or move to those 16 countries ?

Now it may seem fairly clear why Israelis might be banned from those Muslim countries as it could be said they have very conflicting view's on issues in the middle east and very different cultural values, that said ive met plenty of Jews including Israelis who have no time for Bibi or the settlements but still they would be denied entry to those 16 countries.

are you honestly telling me that devout Muslims , who believe in sharia etc... are any more compatible with western liberal values than those Israelis banned from those 16 countries

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

Except I didn't. Go read my posts again:



I said that opinions are biggoted, never said you were. I was being careful, not call you any names, and to attack the idea and not the person.



I never said you were a bigot or a liar, just that people who in my experience who have the same views are bigots and liars. I chose my words careful, as I didn't want to falsely accuse you of something, as I don't know you. Again, I was making a point about how someone experience doesn't really prove anything.

Again, my experience just as valid as yours, and I would ask you please read my posts carefully in future. Simply put my opinion is that views that thare are no moderates Muslims, are extremist and biggoted. My position based on my experience is just as valid as your position, but you take exception to my opinion, which has as much weight as your does.

I've got no problem with your opinion or anyone else's. Your post came across as if you were calling me a bigot but I apologize if I was wrong.As for peoples experiences I prefer to believe what I have seen or heard than what I'm told by the media you may think I'm making generalization's but that is your right to do so

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

16 countries all majority Muslim including 6 of the 7 on Trumps list deny entry to Israli citizens. what is the difference ?

So its ok, as long as somone else does it. Thats not much of a defence.

Walter H Price wrote: »

why are the socially left not protesting the right of Israli citizens to travel or move to those 16 countries ?

Maybe, because the Muslim ban just came into effect. Also, maybe people hold democracies to a higher standard, then dictatorships and borderline failed states.

Walter H Price wrote: »

Now it may seem fairly clear why Israelis might be banned from those Muslim countries as it could be said they have very conflicting view's on issues in the middle east and very different cultural values, that said ive met plenty of Jews including Israelis who have no time for Bibi or the settlements but still they would be denied entry to those 16 countries.

Who is defending the ban on Israelis? No one defending it at all. As it stands if you support the Muslim ban, you don't have a leg to stand on.

Walter H Price wrote: »

are you honestly telling me that devout Muslims , who believe in sharia etc... are any more compatible with western liberal values than those Israelis banned from those 16 countries

I made no such statement, and you seems to be making up a position and asking question based on it. Your arguments again, make no sense.

Sure, I may as well go on about the West Bank, and Israeli settlements, and so on. It has about as much validity.

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

I've got no problem with your opinion or anyone else's. Your post came across as if you were calling me a bigot but I apologize if I was wrong.As for peoples experiences I prefer to believe what I have seen or heard than what I'm told by the media you may think I'm making generalization's but that is your right to do so

My apologies, I taught I was being clear, that I was not attacking you personally. I will in future try and remember to add additional language to make it clear, I am attacking the opinions and not the person.

Help!!!!

wes wrote: »

My apologies, I taught I was being clear, that I was not attacking you personally. I will in future try and remember to add additional language to make it clear, I am attacking the opinions and not the person.

No probs, sometimes things written can be taken out of context. Anyway I'll go out burning crosses later to cheer myself up

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

So its ok, as long as somone else does it. Thats not much of a defence.



Maybe, because the Muslim ban just came into effect. Also, maybe people hold democracies to a higher standard, then dictatorships and borderline failed states.



Who is defending the ban on Israelis? No one defending it at all. As it stands if you support the Muslim ban, you don't have a leg to stand on.



I made no such statement, and you seems to be making up a position and asking question based on it. Your arguments again, make no sense.

Sure, I may as well go on about the West Bank, and Israeli settlements, and so on. It has about as much validity.

My only point here was Muslims are not the only group denied travel rights around the world based on their religion / country of origin ... as far as i'm concerned the socially left may as well be marching in support of the right , because that would make as much sense as their support of Muslims, it could be more then easily argued that there are plenty of moderate right leaning people

Feminists protesting burka bans, and using the american flag as a headscarf in support of an ideology that treats women as second class and rape victims as criminals is utter utter nonsense , Gay people marching in support of people who follow an ideology that still criminalizes their sexual orientation and punish it barbarically , Vegans supporting people who will only eat Halal meat i.e a slow painful death for the animal ... how does this make any sense what so ever

weisses

Help!!!! wrote: »

You do understand that people are allowed to have different points of view than you?? So lets move on theres other people on here you can go troll

So how do you come to the conclusion left people are brainwashed by Muslims again ?

Keeping in mind people can have different points of view without being labelled as brainwashed

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

My only point here was Muslims are not the only group denied travel rights around the world based on their religion / country of origin ... as far as i'm concerned the socially left may as well be marching in support of the right , because that would make as much sense as their support of Muslims, it could be more then easily argued that there are plenty of moderate right leaning people

The example you picked was dictatorships etc. If you are to hold people to those standards, then you have no business criticising Islam or anyone else imho, and again the arguement, well look someone else is doing it, is pretty poor defense, and doubly so, when its dictatorships (a lot of whom it should be noted Trump gave a free pass due to having business dealings in those countries).

Again, if the right wing peple were being attacked, I have no doubt they would be defended, and if we are going back to the US example, the ACLU has in the past defended people both left and right politically.

Ultimately, you have imho failed to address most of criticisms in regards to the ban, and are just deflecting imho. The ban has little or no merit, and the entire thing was a complete farce.

Walter H Price wrote: »

Feminists protesting burka bans,

A Burka ban is still telling a woman what they can and can't wear. You can think a burka is nuts, but defend someones right to wear one.

Walter H Price wrote: »

and using the american flag as a headscarf in support of an ideology that treats women as second class and rape victims as criminals is utter utter nonsense ,

Sorry, but that is untrue. The intent behind that was for those Women to show that they are as American as anyone else, and showing that they can be both Muslim and American, and imho attacks like yours on someone trying to integrate is imho not helpful at all. Your are implying intent that is simply not there, and that is poor form imho.

Walter H Price wrote: »

Gay people marching in support of people who follow an ideology that still criminalizes their sexual orientation and punish it barbarically , Vegans supporting people who will only eat Halal meat i.e a slow painful death for the animal ... how does this make any sense what so ever

Do you really think all the Muslims who joined the Womans march actually believed that? Again, you are just assuming everyone holds those views. Sure, not every Catholic is against abortion, but for Muslims its different, some how? Again, it seems Muslims are uniquely being singled out, while we see right wing facism like we saw in Canada given a free pass.

BTW, your hypotetical vegans wouldn't be able to associate with any meat eaters, then, as the standard for animal welfare in the US, are far worse then here in Europe. Also, you could substitute Kosher for Halaal, and I am sure there plenty of Jewish people marching alongside them as well. Also, a lot of Halaal slaughter also uses stunning in the UK for example:

What exactly does the halal method of animal slaughter involve?

Contrary to what many assume, an estimated 88% of animals killed by halal methods in Britain are stunned before slaughter

So basically, even when Muslims try to integrate into Western society, you attribute negative motives to them. IMHO, that is hugely troubling.

Help!!!!

weisses wrote: »

So how do you come to the conclusion left people are brainwashed by Muslims again ?

Keeping in mind people can have different points of view without being labelled as brainwashed

I was asking a question because I cant understand how women & lgbqt can cosy up so much with Islam

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

I was asking a question because I cant understand how women & lgbqt can cosy up so much with Islam

'Muslims' - not 'Islam'

So - 'brainwashing' seems like a sensible rationale for that situation? You seem really open to different (and freely formed) opinions alright.

CMOTDibbler

Help!!!! wrote: »

I was asking a question because I cant understand how women & lgbqt can cosy up so much with Islam

Could you understand women and lgbtq people protesting against discrimination?

alastair

wes wrote: »

TBTW, your hypotetical vegans wouldn't be able to associate with any meat eaters, then, as the standard for animal welfare in the US, are far worse then here in Europe. Also, you could substitute Kosher for Halaal, and I am sure there plenty of Jewish people marching alongside them as well. Also, a lot of Halaal slaughter also uses stunning in the UK for example

These hypothetical vegans would presumably prefer halal or kosher meat-eaters to more secular meat-eaters in any case - it narrows down the range of animals butchered for their meat.

Walter H Price

wes wrote: »

Again, if the right wing peple were being attacked, I have no doubt they would be defended, and if we are going back to the US example, the ACLU has in the past defended people both left and right politically.



A Burka ban is still telling a woman what they can and can't wear. You can think a burka is nuts, but defend someones right to wear one.



Sorry, but that is untrue. The intent behind that was for those Women to show that they are as American as anyone else, and showing that they can be both Muslim and American, and imho attacks like your on someone trying to integrate is imho not helpful at all.



Do you really think all the Muslims who joined the Womans march actually believed that? Again, you are just assuming everyone holds those views. Sure, not every Catholic is against abortion, but for Muslims its different, some how? Again, it seems Muslims are uniquely being singled out, while we see right wing facism like we saw in Canada given a free pass.

but the left are singling them out , the defend Muslims while having openly adversarial relationships with other religions and religious people . example my gay friend doesn't speak to his aunt because she is devoutly catholic , has never been outwardly homophobic twords him by his own admission but they haven't spoken since she voted against gay marriage , how many devout Muslims would have voted in favor ? yet he has no issue defending them on a regular basis.

The big difference as has been discussed it that it is very difficult to be a devout Muslim and reject sharia law as it is effectively the law according to God , therefore very difficult to be a moderate muslim , from most muslims i have spoken too perticularly ex-muslims the view is very much your in or your out there is no concept of cultural Islam , going for a few beers after mosque on a friday or showing up one a year a Eid , only going to weddings and funerals ... your either all in or your viewed as an atheist in affect and in some countries that's a crime with sever punishments but even here and in the UK its enough for family's to disown kids etc...

i don't see them as being particularly singled out or discriminated against , definitely not any more so then christians , LGBTQ people , athiests , Jews and other minority's are in Muslim majority countries , if anything the social left put them and their faith above criticism and challenge which i'm afraid is complete and utter nonsensical hypocrisy

alastair

Walter H Price wrote: »

but the left are singling them out , the defend Muslims while having openly adversarial relationships with other religions and religious people . example my gay friend doesn't speak to his aunt because she is devoutly catholic , has never been outwardly homophobic twords him by his own admission but they haven't spoken since she voted against gay marriage , how many devout Muslims would have voted in favor ? yet he has no issue defending them on a regular basis.

Does he know what way these notional Muslims voted? If not, why would he have any issue with them? Do you expect your friend to stop talking to all Catholics on account of a row he had with his auntie over the referendum? Do you expect family disagreements to have the same dynamic as social ones in any other case? I'm at a loss what point you're trying to make here.

alastair

Walter H Price wrote: »

The big difference as has been discussed it that it is very difficult to be a devout Muslim and reject sharia law as it is effectively the law according to God , therefore very difficult to be a moderate muslim

'In your opinion'.

Your opinion is rather undermined by the broad range of attitudes and understanding across the Islamic world as to what sharia actually means in contemporary application, not to mention the standard range of theological interpretations of the koran and hadiths (if you're the flavour of muslim that pays any attention to the hadiths). It's a broad canvas - you're just not seeing it.

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

'Muslims' - not 'Islam'

So - 'brainwashing' seems like a sensible rationale for that situation? You seem really open to different (and freely formed) opinions alright.

No Islam - if you look at the OP one of the organiser's of the womens march is a Muslim who tweets that there will be no interest on loans & credit cards with sharia law & the link shows a women singing Alluha Akbar so its not just for Muslims or people of colour

wes

Walter H Price wrote: »

but the left are singling them out , the defend Muslims

Except that there not. Muslims are being singled out by the right. Again, your being all topsy turvy with things.

Walter H Price wrote: »

while having openly adversarial relationships with other religions and religious people .

You have just went from people to ideology. Again, your make no sense are all over the place, confusing things.

Walter H Price wrote: »

example my gay friend doesn't speak to his aunt because she is devoutly catholic , has never been outwardly homophobic twords him by his own admission but they haven't spoken since she voted against gay marriage , how many devout Muslims would have voted in favor ? yet he has no issue defending them on a regular basis.

Your example here has no bearing on anything. An individuals conflict with there family is not the same as vague grouping like the left. You can hardly know the entirety of his relationship with his Grand mother, and regardless your friend doesn't equal the left. Again, you don't have a leg to stand on, and are imho grasphing at straws at this point.

Walter H Price wrote: »

The big difference as has been discussed it that it is very difficult to be a devout Muslim and reject sharia law as it is effectively the law according to God , therefore very difficult to be a moderate muslim , from most muslims i have spoken too perticularly ex-muslims the view is very much your in or your out there is no concept of cultural Islam , going for a few beers after mosque on a friday or showing up one a year a Eid , only going to weddings and funerals ... your either all in or your viewed as an atheist in affect and in some countries that's a crime with sever punishments but even here and in the UK its enough for family's to disown kids etc...

Again, your experience is not more valid than mine or anyone else. Personal anecdotes are proof of nothing except you personal experience.

I have personally had different experience to you, as have others on this thread, but you seem to think other experiences are invalid. Either none of it matters or it all matters. Can't have it both ways.

Walter H Price wrote: »

i don't see them as being particularly singled out or discriminated against ,

Donald Trump and Steve Bannon are doing there damnest to change that, and have already started with there Muslim ban. Well, I guess they want to go after Mexicans as well, and African Americans, but hopefully the protests have stopped there more nutty ideas.

Walter H Price wrote: »

definitely not any more so then christians , LGBTQ people , athiests , Jews and other minority's are in Muslim majority countries ,

If you have to resort to, well you see those guys over there are doing bad things, then your no better than them and in no position to criticize anyone.

Walter H Price wrote: »

if anything the social left put them and their faith above criticism and challenge which i'm afraid is complete and utter nonsensical hypocrisy

Except what you say is clearly untrue. Plenty of criticism of Islam, but the problem is that far too many go to far, and decide to attack people, which is what "the left" take issue with.

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

No Islam - if you look at the OP one of the organiser's of the womens march is a Muslim who tweets that there will be no interest on loans & credit cards with sharia law & the link shows a women singing Alluha Akbar so its not just for Muslims or people of colour

The notion that the woman might be, you know, a Muslim didn't occur to you?

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

The notion that the woman might be, you know, a Muslim didn't occur to you?

But why at a womens march? Have you watched the link??

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

But why at a womens march? Have you watched the link??

I have. Perhaps because she's a woman - protesting? A tricky concept for sure.

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

I have. Perhaps because she's a woman - protesting? A tricky concept for sure.

But what has religion got to do at a protest march where it may offend non religious people in the crowd??

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

But what has religion got to do at a protest march where it may offend non religious people in the crowd??

The protest march is against an act predominantly directed at one specific religion. Care to guess what that religion might be, and how it might possibly be reflected in said protest? Who do you imagine is going to be offended by it?

Honestly.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Help!!!! wrote: »

I was asking a question because I cant understand how women & lgbqt can cosy up so much with Islam

In your opening salvo, you highlighted a woman endorsing civil law as 'left'. Now you're highlighting all women and the LBTQ community are left.

Meanwhile, you hint Muslims are automatically rightwing.

Is it possible you assume too much?

CMOTDibbler

This thread is going around in circles so much that I think we're back on page one again.

The protests are against an action taken by the government against a minority. The government have said that it's not against a religion (not a Muslim ban), but that's pure nonsense. As evidenced by Rudy Giuiliani's indiscrete outline of its origins. I don't have the original clip, but Seth Meyers picked it up in this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_KPOqPGoxU

The Rudy bit is at about 7:10 in the above clip

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

The protest march is against an act predominantly directed at one specific religion. Care to guess what that religion might be, and how it might possibly be reflected in said protest? Who do you imagine is going to be offended by it?

Honestly.

No it was at the womens march before the travel ban it was supposed to be against Trump.
Well there are many atheists who go to these protests I'm sure they dont want to hear it being sung on megaphones

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

No it was at the womens march before the travel ban it was supposed to be against Trump.

Trump's candidacy included the banning of immigrants of what religion again?
https://www.donaldjtrump.com/press-releases/donald-j.-trump-statement-on-preventing-muslim-immigration

I'm sure there were plenty of atheists at Trump's inauguration too - and they managed to remain unoffended by the prayers etc from various denominations there. I'm sure they're grateful for your concern though.

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

Trump's candidacy included the banning of immigrants of what religion again?

I'm sure there are plenty of atheists at Trump's inauguration too - and they managed to remain unoffended by the prayers etc from various denominations there. I'm sure they're grateful for your concern though.

Immigrants from countries not religions

KingBrian2

Their is a fundamental difference between Christian dominated countries and Saudi Arabia. Hungry, Russia, Britain, Germany, France, Australia, South Africa, Ireland & Brazil don't have a crime being an atheist. The fact of the matter is Muslim majority Gulf States are all have an apostasy must die policy. If someone in the rest of the world said that they would be called out.

CMOTDibbler

Help!!!! wrote: »

Immigrants from countries not religions

Have a look at that clip I posted above. You don't need to sit through the whole thing. Go to about 7:10 in the clip and you'll hear Rudy Giuiliani explain it for you.

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

Immigrants from countries not religions

ehh, to quote that man:

Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on.

DeadHand

alastair wrote: »

The protest march is against an act predominantly directed at one specific religion

So they protested an act before it even took place. Amazing. Those are some remarkably prescient protesters.

In any case, chanting Islamic battlecrys at a protest ostensibly against misogyny is comparable to wearing an SS uniform to a protest against facism.

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

ehh, to quote that man:

So then Pakistan, Bangladesh etc should have been banned too if its against Muslims or Islam

alastair

DeadHand wrote: »

So they protested an act before it even took place. Amazing. Those are some remarkably prescient protester.

Not really. They have the gift of literacy, or at worst, recall of broadcast media.

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

So then Pakistan, Bangladesh etc should have been banned too if its against Muslims or Islam

Just helping you out with discerning the difference between a religion and a state.

alastair

DeadHand wrote: »

In any case, chanting Islamic battlecrys.

Which bit of it is the battlecry then?

Help!!!!

alastair wrote: »

Just helping you out with discerning the difference between a religion and a state.

Yeah but the ban is not on Muslims or Islam because then all these other countries would also be banned

wes

Help!!!! wrote: »

So then Pakistan, Bangladesh etc should have been banned too if its against Muslims or Islam

Watch the video posted early, they were looking for a legal way to get away with the ban, and in the case of Pakistan, they could kiss good bye there "secret" drone bases, and in the case of Saudia Arabia, Donald business interests would be obliterated by them.

They are very clear in that its a ban on Muslims. This whole defense of Trump is bizarre, he clearly states his intent, and we have legions of people falling over themselves to claim otherwise. Its gas lighting on a massive scale imho.

alastair

Help!!!! wrote: »

Yeah but the ban is not on Muslims or Islam because then all these other countries would also be banned

I'll ask again:

Trump's candidacy included the banning of immigrants of what religion again?

DeadHand

alastair wrote: »

Which bit of it is the battlecry then?

It's been heard often enough before a lot of Europeans have died lately, sadly.

alastair

DeadHand wrote: »

It's been heard often enough before a lot of Europeans have died lately, sadly.

I didn't catch that - which bit is the battlecry?

DeadHand

alastair wrote: »

Not really. They have the gift of literacy, or at worst, recall of broadcast media.

The "women's marches" took place before the temporary travel restrictions.

I wonder how such protests (complete with vagina hats) would have went down in any of the blacklisted "states".

I wonder what the death toll would be.