News1 min ago
Police Stifle Istanbul Gay Pride Rally
95 Answers
Erdogan's very popular in Germany and Holland, I understand.
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by vetuste_ennemi. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I think Chechnya's mostly Islam, isn't it? In which case doesn't that rather detract from the point TTT was trying to make?
As it happens I neither knew nor particularly cared, at the time I posted at least, what religion was dominant in Chechnya. But gay rights campaigners have sat up and taken note all the same. I think it's just a case of TTT (and others) seeing what he wants to see, and ignoring what he wants to ignore. If there's any bias in what gay rights campaigners focus on, I'd say it's on local issues over non-local ones. Because, well, obviously -- which one are you going to be able to do more about?
As it happens I neither knew nor particularly cared, at the time I posted at least, what religion was dominant in Chechnya. But gay rights campaigners have sat up and taken note all the same. I think it's just a case of TTT (and others) seeing what he wants to see, and ignoring what he wants to ignore. If there's any bias in what gay rights campaigners focus on, I'd say it's on local issues over non-local ones. Because, well, obviously -- which one are you going to be able to do more about?
That's a good point actually jim360.
A mate of mine came out with an awesome analogy which makes sense (and ties into what you said).
If you wake up, look outside your front door, and your wheelie bin had been upended with all your rubbish strewn over your front path, you'd be rightly furious.
However, if you then found out that a house five streets away ha been gutted by fire, it would make your issues seem trivial.
However, from your perspective, whilst the issue is relatively minor - it's bigger (for you) than the house fire.
A mate of mine came out with an awesome analogy which makes sense (and ties into what you said).
If you wake up, look outside your front door, and your wheelie bin had been upended with all your rubbish strewn over your front path, you'd be rightly furious.
However, if you then found out that a house five streets away ha been gutted by fire, it would make your issues seem trivial.
However, from your perspective, whilst the issue is relatively minor - it's bigger (for you) than the house fire.
Let's cut to the chase. Militant Islam is an appalling, bestial, tyranical, murderous death cult. Women are treated in the most barbaric way, as are children, LGBTs and many other sections of what liberal Western countries call society. Other major world religions, even in their purist forms, currently are not. We must fight back and now. I am truly sorry to say that, however unpalatable it may sound, we are at war.
sp, //I was only referring back to goodgoalide's point that only Islam advocates death to non-believers.//
Islam is the only mainstream religion that advocates death to non-believers. The texts you’ve quoted are long-redundant within Judaism and Christianity. Nevertheless you continue to attempt to validate your argument that Islam is no worse than any other religion in its treatment of gays, when in fact there’s no doubt that it is.
And Jim, although having dropped an ‘almighty’ clanger, does the same – and now contends that it’s just a case of some people seeing what they want to see, and ignoring what they want to ignore. He’s spot on. That’s exactly what you and he are doing, but why you’re doing it is quite beyond me. If either of you can explain that I’d be obliged.
Islam is the only mainstream religion that advocates death to non-believers. The texts you’ve quoted are long-redundant within Judaism and Christianity. Nevertheless you continue to attempt to validate your argument that Islam is no worse than any other religion in its treatment of gays, when in fact there’s no doubt that it is.
And Jim, although having dropped an ‘almighty’ clanger, does the same – and now contends that it’s just a case of some people seeing what they want to see, and ignoring what they want to ignore. He’s spot on. That’s exactly what you and he are doing, but why you’re doing it is quite beyond me. If either of you can explain that I’d be obliged.
Regarding an earlier point about 'getting away with it' if the bigotry comes from the powers that be, be it Turkey, Russia, Chechnya, Iran etc then it course they're going to get away with it : this is largely about tinpot dictators using cod religion to rule by fear or dubious moral crusades. And, as observed, a world away from nonsense about cake baking.
naomi24
[i]Islam is the only mainstream religion that advocates death to non-believers. The texts you’ve quoted are long-redundant within Judaism and Christianity. [i]
No it isn't.
The same is in the Bible.
The Bible advocates death to non-believers. Your argument is that this is now ignored by Christians. You are 100% correct there, but that doesn't mean that the Bible advocates death to non-believers.
[i]Islam is the only mainstream religion that advocates death to non-believers. The texts you’ve quoted are long-redundant within Judaism and Christianity. [i]
No it isn't.
The same is in the Bible.
The Bible advocates death to non-believers. Your argument is that this is now ignored by Christians. You are 100% correct there, but that doesn't mean that the Bible advocates death to non-believers.
naomi24
When you refer to Islam advocating death to non-believers, are you talking about chapter 9 verse 5 of the Koran?
If so, don't you think it needs to be taken in context?
My understanding is that the commandment of this verse only relates to those tribes who continued hostilities against the Muslims even after they had migrated.
In particular, reference is made to 5 tribes (‘Banu Khuza’ah, Banu Mudlij, Banu Bakr, Banu Damrah, and Banu Sulaiim) that did not honor the treaties they made with Muslims.
It doesn't relate to non-Muslims - it's about idolators (that word again)!
When you refer to Islam advocating death to non-believers, are you talking about chapter 9 verse 5 of the Koran?
If so, don't you think it needs to be taken in context?
My understanding is that the commandment of this verse only relates to those tribes who continued hostilities against the Muslims even after they had migrated.
In particular, reference is made to 5 tribes (‘Banu Khuza’ah, Banu Mudlij, Banu Bakr, Banu Damrah, and Banu Sulaiim) that did not honor the treaties they made with Muslims.
It doesn't relate to non-Muslims - it's about idolators (that word again)!
If you're determined that citing Chechnya is a faux pas on my part, then I'll just choose all the fundamentalist Christian, former colonial African countries that are busying themselves bringing in laws against homosexuality -- most notably Nigeria, where a conviction for gay sex can carry the death penalty, and Uganda, where it's "only" life imprisonment.
Describing these countries as "former colonial" is no accident, either. There's a link between these countries' attitudes to homosexuality and our own from years past. We moved past that attitude, in law at least, but it lingers on there -- driven and encouraged by fundamentalist Christian preachers from the US.
But I wasn't trying to make a religious point anyway, as I said. I was trying to make the point that not every persecution of homosexuality receives the same attention, but it's a mistake to assume that this is anything to do with gay rights campaigners turning a blind eye to one religion's sins. The community has been in uproar about what's going on (allegedly) in Chechnya, and contrary to TTT's post, that hasn't been tempered one bit by the local religion.
Describing these countries as "former colonial" is no accident, either. There's a link between these countries' attitudes to homosexuality and our own from years past. We moved past that attitude, in law at least, but it lingers on there -- driven and encouraged by fundamentalist Christian preachers from the US.
But I wasn't trying to make a religious point anyway, as I said. I was trying to make the point that not every persecution of homosexuality receives the same attention, but it's a mistake to assume that this is anything to do with gay rights campaigners turning a blind eye to one religion's sins. The community has been in uproar about what's going on (allegedly) in Chechnya, and contrary to TTT's post, that hasn't been tempered one bit by the local religion.
jim360
I can see what's happened here.
You didn't drop a clanger. Yesterday when you commented on Chechnya, your point was that gay communities have been very vocal in their condemnation of the authoritarian regime there. Basically you were hitting back at the point that gay people won't criticise Muslims, right?
I understood what you meant.
I hope naomi24 also sees it now.
By the way - nicely put jim360.
I can see what's happened here.
You didn't drop a clanger. Yesterday when you commented on Chechnya, your point was that gay communities have been very vocal in their condemnation of the authoritarian regime there. Basically you were hitting back at the point that gay people won't criticise Muslims, right?
I understood what you meant.
I hope naomi24 also sees it now.
By the way - nicely put jim360.
Jim, it’s a clanger because you assumed that Chechnya isn’t Muslim – hence your reference to the absence of discussion about it on AB.
sp, //The Bible advocates death to non-believers. Your argument is that this is now ignored by Christians. You are 100% correct there, but that doesn't mean that the Bible advocates death to non-believers.//
Pardon?
//It doesn't relate to non-Muslims - it's about idolators//
Is that what you think? Right …..
sp, //The Bible advocates death to non-believers. Your argument is that this is now ignored by Christians. You are 100% correct there, but that doesn't mean that the Bible advocates death to non-believers.//
Pardon?
//It doesn't relate to non-Muslims - it's about idolators//
Is that what you think? Right …..
Well, I suppose what Naomi's drawing on is the admission that I didn't know at the time I posted that Chechnya was an Islamic region of Russia (top of this page). It seems to me that this extra information strengthens the initial point I was making, as it's a perfect counterexample to TTT's post.
And yet the clanger is mine, not his, apparently, despite the fact that his initial claim is demonstrably false!
And yet the clanger is mine, not his, apparently, despite the fact that his initial claim is demonstrably false!
No naomi24.
That's not what jim360 meant.
This is what TTT wrote directly before jim360's post:
not at all mamy, they just don't make the same fuss about homophobia when it is, routinely, practiced by Islam that's all.
Now - please reread jim360's response within the context of the discussion.
You see?
He's refuting TTT's assertion by saying that the Chechnyan authorities ARE being criticised, no matter that it's an Islamic state.
That's not what jim360 meant.
This is what TTT wrote directly before jim360's post:
not at all mamy, they just don't make the same fuss about homophobia when it is, routinely, practiced by Islam that's all.
Now - please reread jim360's response within the context of the discussion.
You see?
He's refuting TTT's assertion by saying that the Chechnyan authorities ARE being criticised, no matter that it's an Islamic state.
I think we're both in danger of retroactively making my post look more profound than it was at the time, sp. Still, it seems that everyone jumping on me and pointing out that Chechnya is Muslim (which, as I say, I wasn't aware of when I posted originally), just serves to undermine TTT's point even more.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.