Australian Politics Forum - spineless apologetics

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #495 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 3:39pm

Soren wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

76% of Pakistanis, 79 % Afghans, 66% Palestinians, 86% Egyptians, on the other hand, disagree with you.

You would NOT be mainstream in those Muslim countries. Not even in cuddly Malaysia (62%).

True, but my point was to merely illustrate that there is a diversity of opinion on the matter. Significant diversity. Too many people talk of "sharia law" as if it is one clear and single list of rules and punishment. Particularly these two issues - apostasy and adultery - which are always singled out as the 'heart and soul' of sharia by islamic critics. To have a place like Indonesia - the largest muslim country on earth - to overwhelmingly say both stoning for adultery and execution for apostasy - shouldn't be part of sharia certainly breaks some stereotypes wouldn't you say?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47443
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #496 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 5:53pm

Quote:

According to PEW, that mob represents about 69 million people - a pretty sizable population. On the other hand, about 177 million - over twice as many people - would oppose them

Food for thought.

Those 69 million would probably happily slaughter their way through the 177 million until they got their way. Is it supposed to be reassuring for us that there are 'only' 70 million Islamofascists on our doorstep, and a mere 180 million Islamo-almost-as-fascists?

Food for thought.

Quote:

True, but my point was to merely illustrate that there is a diversity of opinion on the matter. Significant diversity. Too many people talk of "sharia law" as if it is one clear and single list of rules and punishment.

That's exactly what it is. There may be differences of opinion, just as people disagree on Australian law, yet it is one set of rules for everyone, imposed by the Caliph on the whole world, or whatever part of it Muslims are willing to settle for temporarily. And if you voice your opinion too energetically, you get your head chopped off for blasphemy. There can only be one law, except of course for Muhammed who could break them if he felt like it.

Quote:

Particularly these two issues - apostasy and adultery - which are always singled out as the 'heart and soul' of sharia by islamic critics. To have a place like Indonesia - the largest muslim country on earth - to overwhelmingly say both stoning for adultery and execution for apostasy - shouldn't be part of sharia certainly breaks some stereotypes wouldn't you say?

Indonesia would have riots on it's hands if it tried that. It is about as far from the heart of Islam as you can get, and Muslims are well versed on only oppressing people to the extent they can get away with, particularly the ones who survived their way east through India. It is telling that you have to go so far from Islam's heart to make your point.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #497 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 6:50pm

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

Indonesia would have riots on it's hands if it tried that. It is about as far from the heart of Islam as you can get, and Muslims are well versed on only oppressing people to the extent they can get away with, particularly the ones who survived their way east through India.

Are you saying Indonesia is as far from the heart of islam as you can get? The largest muslim country on earth?

Where does Turkey fit in then? A country that is as hostile towards sharia punishment as any country on earth, and as close to the "heart" of islam as you can get?

Two problems with this line of argument: 1. the fact that most of what you term the "heart" of the islamic world also doesn't have stoning or death for apostasy either and 2. by acknowledging that the largest muslim country would have riots if it attempted to institute brutal sharia punishments, you acknowledge that muslims can - and have - adopt a very hostile attitude towards instituting sharia punishment, in massive numbers.

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 5:53pm:

It is telling that you have to go so far from Islam's heart to make your point.

Not at all. Look at the survey - muslim countries all over the world - including many from the "heart" of the islamic world reject stoning and death for apostasy. Or you can just look at which countries actually have stoning and death for apostasy - bugger all. Most countries in the middle east do not, and would probably have riots if they tried to institute them as well.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47443
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #498 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm

Quote:

Are you saying Indonesia is as far from the heart of islam as you can get? The largest muslim country on earth?

I'm not sure why this is so complicated.

Quote:

Where does Turkey fit in then?

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

Quote:

Two problems with this line of argument: 1. the fact that most of what you term the "heart" of the islamic world also doesn't have stoning or death for apostasy either and

They are all backwards in their own special way. And the people support it, even if they don't get it.

Quote:

by acknowledging that the largest muslim country would have riots if it attempted to institute brutal sharia punishments, you acknowledge that muslims can - and have

No I don't. Over 10% of the country are non-Muslim. Furthermore, many of the nominal Muslims would object because they would be the ones getting their head chopped off (not because they support freedom of religion). Look at Iraq - nearly all of them support Shariah law, but they fight to the death to prevent it, because as you pointed out earlier - they disagree on exactly what it is. People who want to chop other people's heads off for apostasy or blasphemy suddenly have a bout of common sense when they are being labelled the blasphemer.

Quote:

Not at all. Look at the survey - muslim countries all over the world - including many from the "heart" of the islamic world reject stoning and death for apostasy.

No sure how you managed to put a positive spin on that one Gandalf.

76% of Pakistanis, 79 % Afghans, 66% Palestinians, 86% Egyptians, on the other hand, disagree with you.

That's about as backwards as you can get.

Quote:

Not at all. Look at the survey - muslim countries all over the world - including many from the "heart" of the islamic world reject stoning and death for apostasy. Or you can just look at which countries actually have stoning and death for apostasy - bugger all.

No thanks to Islam of course. And it is actually quite a few. Again, not sure how you can keep a straight face while trying to put a positive spin on that.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47443
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #499 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:52pm

Soren wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:42pm:

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 1:28pm:

You say you are following Mohammad's message yet you reject death for apostasy and blasphemy

Soren just posted an interesting survey.

Apparently 72% of Indonesian muslims who also support sharia agree with me on apostasy. 56% of Bangladeshis and 71% of Tunisians.

76% of Pakistanis, 79 % Afghans, 66% Palestinians, 86% Egyptians, on the other hand, disagree with you.

You would NOT be mainstream in those Muslim countries. Not even in cuddly Malaysia (62%).

Interestingly, I think Brian used Malaysia as an example of what "real" Muslims think. According to the survey, 60% of them support stoning people to death for adultery, and 62% support death for apostasy. Brian knows they are just regular people who want to live their lives like us, because none of his servants beheaded him in his sleep. Unlike the Pew trust, Brian does not actually have to ask Muslims what they think. He is too busy telling everyone else what they think to stop and ask them.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #500 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 8:05pm

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 3:39pm:

Soren wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 3:29pm:

76% of Pakistanis, 79 % Afghans, 66% Palestinians, 86% Egyptians, on the other hand, disagree with you.

You would NOT be mainstream in those Muslim countries. Not even in cuddly Malaysia (62%).

True, but my point was to merely illustrate that there is a diversity of opinion on the matter.

Diversity of opinion- we all know how shallow and useless this diversity-mongering is. It's a lazy mental tick, this diversity BS.

What matters is this - which forces prevail? You can have a hundred diverse opinions but the one that has the most committed followers is the one that prevails. Look at the Bolsheviks - small band, ensnared a whole empire. Nazis - a small band of brown shirts in 1919. Mao - a small group of dedicated commies. Jesus - 12 disciples. Female suffragettes, Kopernicans, abolitionists, etc. Same story.

It doesn't matter what the 'diversity' is. Conviction counts for more. And the immoderates in every context, negative or positive, win hands down when it comes to conviction. Moderates, BY DEFINITION, take conviction far less seriously.

So please do not try the 'oh, but there is diversity' line. The sharia-enforcing hardliners are setting the Muslim agenda, not the 'moderates'.

BTW, Islam means submission, not diversity. Now there's a very large clue for those who are still wondering. What is the Islamically diverse opinion on the meaning of submission? Any Muslims who thing it means equality and freedom?

Do let us know.

Back to top

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #501 - Dec 16^th, 2013 at 9:49pm

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

No I don't. Over 10% of the country are non-Muslim. Furthermore, many of the nominal Muslims would object because they would be the ones getting their head chopped off (not because they support freedom of religion). Look at Iraq - nearly all of them support Shariah law, but they fight to the death to prevent it, because as you pointed out earlier - they disagree on exactly what it is. People who want to chop other people's heads off for apostasy or blasphemy suddenly have a bout of common sense when they are being labelled the blasphemer.

Seriously??

Is it really that hard to acknowledge that muslims can and have created and embraced prosperous and stable secular societies?

When Indonesia breaks into the top ten world economies as a thriving secular democracy - which they will in the coming years - what contortions will you perform to convince yourself that this won't be a great muslim success story?

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

|dev|null

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4434
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #502 - Dec 17^th, 2013 at 10:07am

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

Where does Turkey fit in then?

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

So, how did Turkey become Muslim, if it is not where "historical Islam reached"? Obviously at some point in the past (history), Turkey became Muslim, therefore your statement is nonsense! Cheesy

Back to top

"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013.

"we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions."
Freediver, 2007.

IP Logged

Soren Gold Member Offline Posts: 25654 Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #503 - Dec 17^th, 2013 at 12:43pm \|dev\|null wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 10:07am: freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm: Quote: Where does Turkey fit in then? It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached. So, how did Turkey become Muslim By conquest of course.
Back to top	IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47443
At my desk.

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #504 - Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:24pm

Quote:

Is it really that hard to acknowledge that muslims can and have created and embraced prosperous and stable secular societies?

The Muslim world has a great diversity, a rich tapestry even, of oppression. Some have been dragged, kicking and screaming, into the 19th century. Left to their devices, Muslims just poo on each others plate.

Quote:

When Indonesia breaks into the top ten world economies as a thriving secular democracy - which they will in the coming years - what contortions will you perform to convince yourself that this won't be a great muslim success story?

It is a success relative to many other Muslim countries. But it is still a shithole. I notice you didn't use the word freedom. I would welcome them joining the civilised world, but I'm not going to hold my breath.

Quote:

So, how did Turkey become Muslim, if it is not where "historical Islam reached"?

Read it again, HB.

Back to top

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!

IP Logged

|dev|null

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4434
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #505 - Dec 17^th, 2013 at 3:52pm

Soren wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 12:43pm:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 10:07am:

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

Where does Turkey fit in then?

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

So, how did Turkey become Muslim

By conquest of course.

And this occurred when? Sometime in history? Cheesy

Back to top

"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013.

"we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions."
Freediver, 2007.

IP Logged

\|dev\|null Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4434 Gender:	Re: spineless apologetics Reply #506 - Dec 17^th, 2013 at 3:53pm freediver wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 1:24pm: Quote: So, how did Turkey become Muslim, if it is not where "historical Islam reached"? Read it again, HB. I did. Still makes no smacking sense!
Back to top	"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013. "we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions." Freediver, 2007. IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17499
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #507 - Dec 18^th, 2013 at 11:21am

|dev|null wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 10:07am:

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

Where does Turkey fit in then?

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

So, how did Turkey become Muslim, if it is not where "historical Islam reached"? Obviously at some point in the past (history), Turkey became Muslim, therefore your statement is nonsense! Cheesy

Turkey became Islamic after muslims conquered it, so much for that myth muslims only fight in self defence.

It's interesting listening to a Turk and Arab arguing, the Turks will concede they were conquered by Arab muslims yet remind them they went on to become their masters.

Islamic source on the conquest of Constantinople which is called Istanbul today-
www.islamweb.net/emainpage/index.php?page=articles&id=28648

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

Baronvonrort

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 17499
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #508 - Dec 18^th, 2013 at 11:28am

polite_gandalf wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 9:49pm:

Seriously??

Is it really that hard to acknowledge that muslims can and have created and embraced prosperous and stable secular societies?

When Indonesia breaks into the top ten world economies as a thriving secular democracy - which they will in the coming years - what contortions will you perform to convince yourself that this won't be a great muslim success story?

So which are the prosperous and stable secular societies created by muslims?

Indonesia persecutes Ahmadi muslims,Indonesia persecutes atheists like Alexander Aan,there have been a few hundred churches burnt down by muslim mobs,are there any churches left in Bekasi,is this an example of stable secular democracy?

If Indonesia can realise what you claim does that mean we will stop giving them $646 million dollars in aid every year?

As for Turkey did the last Caliph Kemal Attaturk dismantle the caliphate system of fascist government used by muslims since Profit Mo's days, did he order muslims to shave their beards and remove their hijabs?

Back to top

Leftists and the Ayatollahs have a lot in common when it comes to criticism of Islam, they don't tolerate it.

IP Logged

|dev|null

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4434
Gender: male

Re: spineless apologetics
Reply #509 - Dec 18^th, 2013 at 3:42pm

Baronvonrort wrote on Dec 18^th, 2013 at 11:21am:

|dev|null wrote on Dec 17^th, 2013 at 10:07am:

freediver wrote on Dec 16^th, 2013 at 7:44pm:

Quote:

Where does Turkey fit in then?

It is much closer, however it is also on the border of where historical Islam reached.

So, how did Turkey become Muslim, if it is not where "historical Islam reached"? Obviously at some point in the past (history), Turkey became Muslim, therefore your statement is nonsense! Cheesy

Turkey became Islamic after muslims conquered it, so much for that myth muslims only fight in self defence.

So, what were their predecessors in Turkey, wasn't it the Byzantines, doing? Even so, the point is moot. Muslims conquered Turkey at some point in history, right? Therefore, FD's original statement is nonsense! Cheesy

Back to top

"Pens and books are the weapons that defeat terrorism." - Malala Yousefzai, 2013.

"we will never ever solve violence while we grasp for overly simplistic solutions."
Freediver, 2007.

IP Logged