Islamophobia......

[lwien]

Hmmmm.........I wonder how long it will take before this thread gets shut down but lets see if we can keep it civil, k? I know I'm opening up a major can of worms here but it is a subject that is important enough to discuss.

Anyway, what started this thread originated with @Farid 's post in this thread http://fuckcombustion.com/threads/the-2016-presidential-candidates-thread.18407/page-128#post-960998

And I'll repeat what I said there:

Maher refuses to acknowledge this because he is to blame for spreading that same xenophobia.

I don't see Maher as being xenophobic. To me, it seems that he is more, specifically... Islamophobic rather than xenophobic.

But in regards to Islamophobia, and I know this is off topic in this thread so maybe someone should start another but I gotta say what I gotta say.

It doesn't take too much of a stretch of the imagination to see WHY Isalmaphobia exists in this country. Now that doesn't mean that I condone it in the least, but..........I totally understand why it exists.

Bill Maher takes quotes out of the Koran to demonstrate how barbaric it is and slams the Muslim religion because of it, but if you take quotes out of the Old Testament in the Bible, it, in many ways is just as barbaric.

What is true though is that considering what is going on the world today, Islamaphobia is not going to go away and you can't dilute it by simply denouncing it. What CAN be done, however, is for moderate Muslims to unite and with a singular strong, very visible message, stating that they denounce radical fundamentalism and all of it's actions. From what I have seen, the rationale that they use for not doing this is............"Why do we have to?", and my answer to that is, because you DO have to in much the same way as the Black Lives Matter movement has to. If you want to affect change, you have to go out and MAKE it happen. It can't happen with a few Imams stating their views. It has to happen in a large coordinated effort to get the attention of the press and until that happens, nothings going to change for the assumption will continue to be that if you don't denounce it LOUDLY, than you must agree with it. I'm not saying that that assumption is correct. What I am saying is that that assumption will continue to exist.

To clarify, I'm not suggesting for Muslims to denounce Islamaphobia but rather to denounce the catalyst that brought it about in the first place.

 

[cybrguy]

I'm sure it will be shut down soon, but I think it could be a worthwhile thread and I would like to see it stay.

I think you are absolutely correct, however. It is only Muslims who can do anything about Islamophobia in America, and likely around the world. I know here at least, if Muslims made a strong and obvious effort to condemn and help eradicate the bastardization of Islam that the "jihadists" and fundamental Islamic pretenders try to push on the world, much of the rest of America (and likely the world) would have their backs. But when they don't it looks like support (rightly or wrongly) and creates anger and bigoted behavior. I don't support that, but like Lwien, I understand it.

 

[lwien]

however.

Not a "however" being that I agree with you 100% percent.

 

[Farid]

I didn't want to get involved in this thread, but since I am quoted I'll just say this. My grandfather served in the US Navy in the Pacific during WWII. My mother was born in the United States and my father in Pakistan, both graduated college in the United States. I have never had my patriotism questioned until the Boston bombing. The atmosphere around here changed big time, and it has certianly had an effect on me. I go by Fred now, not Farid....

I hear what you're saying about moderate Muslims condemning extremism, but they are. I do my part by giving my vocal support to countries which are fighting ISIS. I think combating ISIS on the ground is more important than convincing American Muslims to be less extreme, and I think I can be more effective convincing other Americans to be against ISIS than I can convince conservative Muslims (or Christians or Jews or Hindus ect) to be accepting of homosexuals. The fact is I am not a practicing Muslim, so my opinion on the matter doesn't mean much to a practicing Muslim.

The FBI as well as the Muslim community do an excellent job putting a stop to violent Imams preaching in the United States. Most terrorists are radicalized overseas or over the internet these days.

That's all I really have to add, I don't think I should post much in this thread after this.

 

[cybrguy]

yeah, the "however" could be read "assuming this thread survives"...

I had a brief discussion the other day with a Muslim man I know and he actually said "Why should I have to defend my religion?". I expressed sympathy that it shouldn't be necessary, but that "should" has no part in the discussion anymore. We are long past should. We are at "how" now, and how is making sure that even ignorant people know for certain that these murdering cowards are NOT acting within the acceptable realm of behavior for Muslims. That their behavior is actually UNISLAMIC and just as unacceptable to Muslims as it is to anyone else. But it is, unfortunately, useless for me to say that or even to shout it from the rooftops. IT MUST BE MUSLIMS SAYING THIS. For emphasis, not to yell.

And I hope you feel you can post in this thread, Farid. Religious or not you represent the cultural aspects of Islam and they can help we who are NOT Muslim understand it better.

But we must keep the temp down in here or its gone.

 

[TeeJay1952]

@Farid Don't censor yourself, there enough people doing that for you.
@cybrguy & @lwien Nationality, religion, race, class, economics are all just tools of control. I am not ready to shoot anyone over a newspaper or tv report.

 

[Farid]

The issue is that with religion, everybody has their own belief of what is right and what is wrong. In all religions. For example a moderate Muslim condemns an extreme muslim for disowning his atheist mother. His explanation is that in Islam a person's mother is the most important person in a Muslim's life and to forsaken one's mother is unislamic. Then on the flip side an extreme Muslim muslim condemns a moderate Muslim for his mother's decision to be an atheist, and for associating with an atheist. Both will say they are right. Neither is going to convince the other they are right by saying they are being unislamic, they will only convince them by being a good person and a good example of their beliefs.

My brother is the perfect example. He's very religious, but he is a far better person than me. He is less prone to lie or to cheat, and he never ever tries to convert me. Him being a good example has made me appreciate his faith more than him trying to convert me ever could.

 

[Joel W.]

I fear extremists on all sides and fear itself breeds extremists. Hmm.

Extremephobia is a new word I just made up.


Edit: fuck fear and hate..

 

[lwien]

And I hope you feel you can post in this thread, Farid. Religious or not you represent the cultural aspects of Islam and they can help we who are NOT Muslim understand it better.

Totally agree. @Farid, your input here, dare I say, is almost required.

I hear what you're saying about moderate Muslims condemning extremism, but they are.

And this is EXACTLY what I am eluding to. Moderate Muslims may be condemning extremism but nobody is hearing them and until people hear them, Islamophobia will continue to exist in a very big way.

They need to be heard. They need to organize. They need to unite. They need to carry signs and march united down the streets of New York or Washington. This is the only way that they are going to get press coverage. They need to do it with the same fervor as the anti-American protests that Muslims carry out in other countries. Individual stances like what you say you do isn't going to cut it.

 

[Farid]

One thing that prevents moderates from organizing and uniting is that sectarianism in Islam is extremely frowned upon. That's why the Sunni Shia divide is such an extreme fault line. If American Muslims tried to create a "reform movement" they would effectively be forming a sect, and that would be unislamic.

Both Shia and Sunni Islam are against creating new sects. Extremist Shia think that only shias practice Islam correctly. Extremist Sunnis think that only Sunnis practice Islam correctly. The majority on both sides are moderate, and think the other side might interprets the Koran incorrectly, but they still see them as fellow Muslims.

 

[TeeJay1952]

No kidding, the guys currently holding power say no new power available.
What do most sacred scribes have in common?
They say they are the fulfillment and no other movements necessary. (Most religions.)
Pretty convenient.

 

[howie105]

The chances of me getting taken out by a terrorist is like nill compared to the statistical chances of things going sideways with a cop, getting killed at work or a whole list of health/age based threats So if I not freaked by my everyday life why should worry about a much lesser threat. Fear and loathing is a tool of manipulation so just say no.

 

[lwien]

One thing that prevents moderates from organizing and uniting is that sectarianism in Islam is extremely frowned upon.

Frowned upon?

Definition of sectarianism: excessive attachment to a particular sect or party, especially in religion

From that definition, it sounds like the dividing line between Shia and Sunni is due to sectarianism. What does protesting against the abhorrent actions of extremists have to do with creating a new sect?

btw, Farid, you are providing some great insight here. For that, I thank you.

Fear and loathing....

.........in Las Vegas?

 

[grokit]

Religious fundamentalism seems to be code for barbarism, no matter what religion it is.

Good christians don't have to "take to the streets" to denounce abortion clinic hit-men

Or do they

 

[lwien]

Good christians don't have to "take to the streets" to denounce abortion clinic hit-men

True, but they would have to "take to the streets" if pro-life activists started killing pro-choice advocates in group killings while at the same time, encouraging others to do the same.

 

[cybrguy]

It's not like Christianity doesn't have sectarian disagreement. It's just that, with the obvious exception of Northern Ireland they are usually able to disagree without violence. Sectarian violence never made sense to me, but not being a religious person maybe I am missing something that better explains it.

Most of the hostility against Muslims is clearly ignorance. How many times are Sikhs attacked because people see the Turban and think Muslim, even tho they are unrelated.

I really believe if the Muslim community could just get together and make an effort to make people understand that the pretenders are NOT MUSLIMS and are just using Islam as an excuse for hate (much like the KKK include the cross in their ceremonies) they could reduce the stress and violence and fear that results from feeling threatened...

True, but they would have to "take to the streets" if pro-life activists started killing pro-choice advocates in group killings while at the same time, encouraging others to do the same.

Lets not pretend this isn't happening. Try being a Doctor that performs abortions in today's America. How many dead abortion Docs do we have now...

 

[lwien]

Great thread so far. As long as we can keep it all objective, it'll stay active.

 

[howie105]

I really believe if the Muslim community could just get together and make an effort to make people understand that the pretenders are NOT MUSLIMS and are just using Islam as an excuse for hate (much like the KKK include the cross in their ceremonies) they could reduce the stress and violence and fear that results from feeling threatened........No part of society should have to sell itself to another part of society, once you get on that train you never know where it stops.

 

[Farid]

Frowned upon?

Definition of sectarianism: excessive attachment to a particular sect or party, especially in religion

From that definition, it sounds like the dividing line between Shia and Sunni is due to sectarianism. What does protesting against the abhorrent actions of extremists have to do with creating a new sect?

btw, Farid, you are providing some great insight here. For that, I thank you.

Thanks!

It's not sectarianism which is frowned upon exactly, I should have worded it differently. It's elaboration on the Koran which is frowned upon. The Sunni Shia divide occurred right after the death of the prophet. Shias believe that his Uncle, Ali should have taken over as the ruler of the Muslim world, Sunnis believe that his friend Abu Bakar should have taken over. Sunnis and Shias also disagree about the hierarchy of power in the Muslim world, with Shias believing in infallible Imams (similar to Catholicism).

Both believe the other side interprets the Koran wrong, but since the divide occurred so long ago when the religion was young they are the two dominant sects which have emerged. Both sides still believe elaboration on the Koran is wrong, hence why it is difficult to try and create a reform movement. There are Sufi sects as well, but their beliefs still fall within the general structure of Shia and Sunnism. For instance some Sufi sects identify as Sunni, do not believe in infallibility, but think Ali was the righteous heir to Mohammad. Others might identify as Shia, but they might not believe in infallibility.

I should also add that there are lots of stereotypes about the sects which are not true. My father, dispite being atheist, was born in Sunni Pakistan (which is especially religiously conservative compared with Arab countries). When I'd listen to him and my grandmother (who was very religious) talk about Shias, they always implied that Shias are obsessed with their sectarianism. They'd joke about how Shias always tell you when they're shia, and about how they're obsessed with Ali.

It wasn't until my father grew up that he learned a lot of his childhood friends were Shias who kept it a secret, as they didn't want to face discrimination.

On a similar note there is a stereotype that exists in the West that Sufis are hash smoking dervishes who are peace loving pacifists. While this is true for some Sufis, there are Sufi groups which are extremely violent as well. Ibrahim al-Douri is a famous Sufi who worked directly under Saddam, then went on to work for ISIS. He is supposedly still alive and under protection by ISIS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Izzat_Ibrahim_al-Douri

 

[cybrguy]

No part of society should have to sell itself to another part of society, once you get on that train you never know where it stops.

You are using should again. I don't disagree, but we have to deal with the world we have, not the one we want.

 

[Farid]

With regards to Muslims speaking out, I think a lot of Muslims see bigger issues in the world to organize against. Lots of Muslims are behind the BLM movement, and Muslims have been at the forefront of the protests to end the War in Iraq and to avoid going to war in Syria and Libya. Those are the same Muslims that would be attending these hypothetical moderate muslim rallys (you know the protesty types. I haven't got that kind of time between engineering school and work, but a lot of people do. I haven't protested anything in the streets since the 2003 Iraq war protest in DC, which probably turned me off from protesting forever).

I think a lot of those people are going to feel like ending the wars in the Middle East is the first step to ending radicalization of Muslims, so they're not going to feel compelled to protest for one thing when there are more pressing issues in their mind.

I should also add that since the war in Syria, Muslims are very much divided in their opinions of how the conflict should be ended. I value stability more than democracy and so I support the Syrian government. Others value democracy more than the stability the state offers and support the opposition. With the amount of disagreement there, the Muslim population is already extremely divided. To expect them to rally united against extremism is unrealistic, because each side wants to condemn the other side.

Personally I think Saudi Arabia is by far the biggest sponsor of terrorism in that they spread an extreme form of Islam which they cannot reign in. Osama Bin Laden is the prime example. Despite being Saudi himself the terrorist organization he created is Hell bent on destroying Saudi Arabia even though the source of its ideology comes from Saudi Arabia.

Iran has sponsored violent militias in Iraq, but they have been much better at reigning them in. For example Muqtada al-Sadr was a famous Iraqi Shia cleric who ran his own militia and an extremely lucrative looting racket following the American invasion and occupation (the executioners of Saddam famously chanted "Muqtada! Muqtada" as Saddam was brought to the gallows). When the government of Iraq finally gained stability al-Sadr left the limelight and started promoting Iraqi unity and reconciliation instead of leading the PMUs in their fight against ISIS. Iran was pragmatic enough to recognize that the fight against ISIS could not be won on sectarian lines, so changes were made with regards to Iraq. The PMUs were instructed to accept Christians and Sunnis, and divisive policy designed around putting Shias in power was replaced with policy allowing more sectarian unity.

 

[lwien]

I really believe if the Muslim community could just get together and make an effort to make people understand that the pretenders are NOT MUSLIMS and are just using Islam as an excuse for hate..

Are you saying that Muslims who believe and live by the strict fundamental teachings of the Koran and cherry pick those parts of the Koran that serve their purpose are not really Muslims? What's interesting about that is that the fundamentalists feel that Muslims who don't live by their doctrines are not really Muslims either.

And, what needs to be added here is that these things happen in other religions as well. The New Testament in Christianity gets cherry picked all the time.

 

[howie105]

You are using should again. I don't disagree, but we have to deal with the world we have, not the one we want.

Yes and as soon as people start suggesting that someone could do something to explain someone eles bad actions you are on the train.

 

[Maitri]

You are using should again. I don't disagree, but we have to deal with the world we have, not the one we want.

Heh, what's the difference between:

"but we [have to] deal with the world we have, not the one we want" and

"but we [should] deal with the world we have, not the one we want."

 

[lwien]

Heh, what's the difference between:

"but we [have to] deal with the world we have, not the one we want" and

"but we [should] deal with the world we have, not the one we want."

lol.........reminds me of my kids when they said, "But Dad, that's not fair." to which my response was, "Fair has nothing to do with this....."