Brian Ross wrote on May 7^th, 2013 at 11:48pm:


FD only accepts answers from muslims that are dogmatic and that pretend to be the ultimate authority. Thats not how islamic law works - at least not on the sorts of issues we discuss here (blasphemy, apostasy etc). The correct way to answer what islam's position is on these sorts of issues is to demonstrate that there are a range of views and interpretations. Yet FD somehow thinks that is a sign that the responder is confused or ignorant. But the truth is, giving dogmatic definite answers like Abu (apparently) did on matters which clearly are not "resolved" by the relevant islamic jurists, is the height of ignorance. Of course its understandable that someone with FDs preconceived prejudices would want to select only the "muslims" who appear irrational and chant "gar! Blasphemy - instant death - with PAIN!" - it obviously puts islam in the "right" light for him.

And yet, FD doesn't even correctly cite the only two muslims he "learns" from. Just look at his wiki - in the section on "rape", he states "Rape is permitted in Islam in the same situations that sex is permitted" - and uses as the source a thread in which he makes the claim, and in which the muslims emphatically denies the charge. FD doesn't just take the extreme views of these muslims and use them as islam's unalterable doctrine, he also twists their words around and make them say something they didn't - even if in reality they were directly denying it.

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:


I think the point he is making is that there is total silence from you about any other religion.  Islam is the only one you criticise.  Muslims are the only believers you criticise.  There maybe some things that they and their religion should be criticised for but you are completely silent about other religions.  Completely.

That silence is telling.  Very.

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:


Have you ever visited a muslim forum? muslim blog? Opinion pieces written by muslims? Have you actually ever ventured outside this forum to guage the "mood" amongst muslims, and what they actually believe? If not, then on what authority do you have to say "Muslims [collectively] believe this this and this" - purely on the say so of two individuals who claim to be muslims?

moses wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 6:19pm:


How about neither, Moses?

If you want to claim that Tamerlan Tsarnaev and his brother,  Dzhokhar were inspired by their religion then it must be perfectly correct to say that Christianity inspires Joseph Koney, inspired Anders Brievik and Eric Robert Rudolph.  OK?   

freediver wrote on May 8^th, 2013 at 12:51pm:


Absence of comment tends to prove that you have no interest in condemning these other extremists, FD.  If you really were interested, we would see at least ONE post.  I see NONE.  QED.

Quote:


"Muslims" denotes all Muslims, unless qualified, FD.  If you don't believe all Muslims believe this "poo" then qualify your comments.  Otherwise I will continue to believe you believe all Muslims are guilty.

Quote:


Never treating the subject of your comments fairly means it's bigoted, FD.  That is what you do.   No Muslim does anything good, it seems from how you write about Muslims.   

Quote:


I'll hang around.  You're talking against shadows of the past it seems, FD 'cause there isn't anybody, by your own admission, doing it NOW.

Quote:


It maybe, does that make what they said, true though?

It seems to me that your basing your entire hatred of Muslims on the word of two internet personalities.  Seems a rather slim justification, don't you think?

Quote:


I suspect you label anybody who suggests balance and fairness an "apologist".

Lets get it straight.  I am an apologist for no one.  If I feel the need to criticise someone, I shall do so but I won't do it on the basis of guilt by association which is what you're doing.  It will be because they've done something I disagree with.   If you throw the word "apologist" at me, you'd better be able to prove it.  Comprehende?

Quote:


Perhaps that is because there is total silence from other religions. I haven't seen any other group - either political, religious or any mixture thereof, marching through Sydney and Melbourne with banners calling for the death penalty over something that is clearly covered by freedom of speech. If you know of any please let me know, so I can criticise them and get Brian all confused.

You may not have noticed, but this is a politics forum. I discuss many political issues. I do not discuss the spiritual aspects of Islam, because I have no real interest. I discuss the political aspects.

There is nothing at all about that that makes me a bigot. This is just a poor substitute for a rational argument.

Quote:


What are the voices telling you?

Quote:


Yes. I am a member of that AussieMuslims site where Abu hangs out. It all seems pretty toxic.

Quote:


You may not have noticed, but I am only talking about it because you and others are. I was happy enough discussing the influence of Islam on science with Gandalf until very recently. His political views are benign enough.

Quote:


It makes it what they believe. That is the point.

Quote:


Please quote me saying I hate muslims.

Quote:


If the "offence" is imaginary, it is more than sufficient.

Quote:


If they do as absurdly and irrationally as you do, then yes. What kind of response is that anyway? Have you ever seen it used anywhere else? Would you accept it as some kind of defence against criticism of Nazism? It is irrational. You cannot even explain how frequently I would have to interject with criticisms of Christians. It is nothing but empty headed rhetoric, lacking in any substance.

Even after I point out the clear logical flaws in your arguments, you carry on with them and attempt to justify them by repeating the same fundamental logical error.

Quote:


Right, you do it on the basis of guilt by absence of evidence of non-guilt.

Quote:


Would you criticse the Muslims who marched through Sydney behing the death threat placards, without carfully couching it with "balanced" criticism of Christians who did something completely irrelevant to the topic at hand? By the way, you still have not explained why I need to balance criticism of Islam with criticism of Christianity alone and not other ideologies. Is it that you are genuinely bigoted against Christianity and project this bigotry whenever you see people discusisng other religions?

Quote:




Why do you stick so stubbornly to the empty, meaningless rhetoric? There is nothing stopping you from discussing the topic at hand.

Apologies to FD, I've jumped.