If Music Could Talk

IkarisOne wrote:

Spiff wrote:

IkarisOne wrote:

Silent Majority wrote:Muslims ≠ jihadists.

Ah, the reality-based people who don't paint with a broad brush and who have the ability to understand complex situations without resorting to hateful stereotypes.

There, I fixed it for you.

So you're also saying the Jihadists aren't Muslims. OK.

The gunmen shouted "we have avenged the Prophet Muhammad", witnesses say.

I don't think anyone said that. I think Maj and Spiff were saying that Muslims aren't Jihadists. I mean obviously some are, but so are some white people (Anders Breivik being an obvious example).

Religions are bullshit and basically large cults. I can't waste my time sticking up for any of them. Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise. We are on the verge of a vicious right wing xenophobic backlash in Europe.

BostonBeaneater wrote:Religions are bullshit and basically large cults. I can't waste my time sticking up for any of them. Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise. We are on the verge of a vicious right wing xenophobic backlash in Europe.

That's exactly what I am afraid of. The Left is so weak and docile, they are doing nothing but emboldening the extremists. They have to start to standing up these bad elements within the Muslim community without being afraid of looking racist, because if they don't the real racists will take over. And the first people they will smash are the liberals. And we're getting very close to that day.

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

Eh, besides the fact that I'm skeptical that this is a fair demand, the reality is that they do.

If categorically opposing terrorism and extremists isn't enough, what should folks do?

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

Why is it incumbent on non-radical Muslims to rein in the lunatics? We don't tell non-radical Christians that they have a responsibility to control the crazies in their religion. Mainstream Muslims have enough shit on their plate to deal with—the radicals with whom they share their religion, the fucknuts who treat all Muslims as terrorists—without also being told, in essence, this shit is on you now. I get wanting them to speak up, but when there isn't a whole lot of sympathy for Muslims in Europe, asking them to put them in a situation of being shot from both sides is asking a lot.

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

How loudly and often are you denouncing the atrocities done in the name of American citizens?

IkarisOne wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:Religions are bullshit and basically large cults. I can't waste my time sticking up for any of them. Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise. We are on the verge of a vicious right wing xenophobic backlash in Europe.

That's exactly what I am afraid of. The Left is so weak and docile, they are doing nothing but emboldening the extremists. They have to start to standing up these bad elements within the Muslim community without being afraid of looking racist, because if they don't the real racists will take over. And the first people they will smash are the liberals. And we're getting very close to that day.

Well, the first thing they'll do is run the Jews and Muslims out of town or into the ground. After that they'll move onto homosexuals, liberals, book burning, and the usual fascist flair that seems to suit them. "Never Again" is bullshit. The happens again and again and France seems ripe for it with England and Germany close behind.

Dr. Medulla wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

Why is it incumbent on non-radical Muslims to rein in the lunatics? We don't tell non-radical Christians that they have a responsibility to control the crazies in their religion. Mainstream Muslims have enough shit on their plate to deal with—the radicals with whom they share their religion, the fucknuts who treat all Muslims as terrorists—without also being told, in essence, this shit is on you now. I get wanting them to speak up, but when there isn't a whole lot of sympathy for Muslims in Europe, asking them to put them in a situation of being shot from both sides is asking a lot.

I do. Everyone in know who was raise Catholic has voted with their feet and left the church both spiritually and culturally. Now look, the church is changing with a move to the left.

I do not think all Muslims are terrorist. I don't think it is at all wrong to call Jihadism what I see it as. I think it's ok to damn it without inserting PC caveats all over the place to make people feel better.

Silent Majority wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

How loudly and often are you denouncing the atrocities done in the name of American citizens?

Fairly loudly. I hate the government.

BostonBeaneater wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

Why is it incumbent on non-radical Muslims to rein in the lunatics? We don't tell non-radical Christians that they have a responsibility to control the crazies in their religion. Mainstream Muslims have enough shit on their plate to deal with—the radicals with whom they share their religion, the fucknuts who treat all Muslims as terrorists—without also being told, in essence, this shit is on you now. I get wanting them to speak up, but when there isn't a whole lot of sympathy for Muslims in Europe, asking them to put them in a situation of being shot from both sides is asking a lot.

I do. Everyone in know who was raise Catholic has voted with their feet and left the church both spiritually and culturally. Now look, the church is changing with a move to the left.

I do not think all Muslims are terrorist. I don't think it is at all wrong to call Jihadism what I see it as. I think it's ok to damn it without inserting PC caveats all over the place to make people feel better.

Okay, then I can ask you, as SM alluded to above, what are you doing about all the assholes who treat all Muslims the same—which is to say, as terrorists and savages? It's a bit of a dodge to call those who want a more productive and nuanced approach as being PC. On the one side, you have morons who equate jihadism with Islam, Islam with jihadism, a Venn diagram with no overlap. If I say, hold on, it's the radical in radical Muslim that's what's important, not the Muslim, why am I being PC? The problem on the non-Muslim side isn't from those who seek not to offend; it's those who damn all Muslims as violent monsters.

BostonBeaneater wrote:Religions are bullshit and basically large cults. I can't waste my time sticking up for any of them. Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise. We are on the verge of a vicious right wing xenophobic backlash in Europe.

The Koran doesn't kill people Jihadists do.

Dr. Medulla wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:

Dr. Medulla wrote:

BostonBeaneater wrote:Those regular average peaceful Muslims I've heard about better start making a lot of noise.

Why is it incumbent on non-radical Muslims to rein in the lunatics? We don't tell non-radical Christians that they have a responsibility to control the crazies in their religion. Mainstream Muslims have enough shit on their plate to deal with—the radicals with whom they share their religion, the fucknuts who treat all Muslims as terrorists—without also being told, in essence, this shit is on you now. I get wanting them to speak up, but when there isn't a whole lot of sympathy for Muslims in Europe, asking them to put them in a situation of being shot from both sides is asking a lot.

I do. Everyone in know who was raise Catholic has voted with their feet and left the church both spiritually and culturally. Now look, the church is changing with a move to the left.

I do not think all Muslims are terrorist. I don't think it is at all wrong to call Jihadism what I see it as. I think it's ok to damn it without inserting PC caveats all over the place to make people feel better.

Okay, then I can ask you, as SM alluded to above, what are you doing about all the assholes who treat all Muslims the same—which is to say, as terrorists and savages? It's a bit of a dodge to call those who want a more productive and nuanced approach as being PC. On the one side, you have morons who equate jihadism with Islam, Islam with jihadism, a Venn diagram with no overlap. If I say, hold on, it's the radical in radical Muslim that's what's important, not the Muslim, why am I being PC? The problem on the non-Muslim side isn't from those who seek not to offend; it's those who damn all Muslims as violent monsters.

First of all, I choose not to be a person who treats all Muslims the same. I try to take everyone as a piece of human garbage on first take and weed out the good people from there. In the end I care more about the cartoonists right to live above the hate speech that flows from the very many social groups the cartoonists make fun of.

As we were discussing, I am very worried for those average Joe Muslims in France. When their radical cousins shoot cartoonist you might see average Joe's kebab shop burn, his place of prayer bombed, and his ability to walk the streets threatened. Let's keep our eyes on the prize here. I mentioned being overly PC and I think it's valid. I want a free flow discuss that is made without that minefield.

BostonBeaneater wrote:First of all, I choose not to be a person who treats all Muslims the same. I try to take everyone as a piece of human garbage on first take and weed out the good people from there. In the end I care more about the cartoonists right to live above the hate speech that flows from the very many social groups the cartoonists make fun of.

Obviously I'm with you on the right to life point, but I'm a bit more guarded about valourizing the work those cartoonists did. The argument that they were satirists and therefore upholding the principles of free speech is a bit dubious given that they went after Muslims, who in no conceivable way are a group representing the powerful (that is, satire goes after power, not the marginalized). It's not hard to understand the anti-immigrant bigots in France, left and right, championing their work. That's not to defend their murder by any means, but neither were they clearly above the hate speech you cite. This is about the illegitimacy of violence, not freedom of expression.

As we were discussing, I am very worried for those average Joe Muslims in France. When their radical cousins shoot cartoonist you might see average Joe's kebab shop burn, his place of prayer bombed, and his ability to walk the streets threatened. Let's keep our eyes on the prize here. I mentioned being overly PC and I think it's valid. I want a free flow discuss that is made without that minefield.

Fair enough. My point is that it is not our place as non-Muslims to tell peaceful Muslims what they have to do. It's great when there can be free exchange across groups, but it's inappropriate to assume that we have a moral leg to stand on to tell them it's their responsibility. Instead, non-Muslims should be more concerned with the assholes in our own midst who think all Muslims are the same.

Good to see posters agreeing with the Catholic League.

http://www.catholicleague.org/muslims-right-angry/

Charlie Hebdo offended everyone, by the way. It didn't single out Muslims.

IkarisOne wrote:Good to see posters agreeing with the Catholic League.

http://www.catholicleague.org/muslims-right-angry/

Killing in response to insult, no matter how gross, must be unequivocally condemned. That is why what happened in Paris cannot be tolerated.

I'm with them.

But neither should we tolerate the kind of intolerance that provoked this violent reaction.

You disagree with the second statement?