hard2miss Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Criticism is good when it is based on solid knowledge. It is a fact. On this forum people who criticise Islam know nothing about this religion. Do you think maybe the Atheists that use humour about the Prophet are not contemplating what is meant by Verse 9:123 - "Believers, make war on the infidels who dwell around you." ? Maybe they should not be overly concerned about what is called to have done to them in the holy book ? Maybe they are ignorant, or maybe they are not ignorant enough ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plekhanov Posted January 31, 2012 Author Share Posted January 31, 2012 Criticism is good when it is based on solid knowledge. It is a fact. On this forum people who criticise Islam know nothing about this religion. Sure I recall you whining about other people "generalising" about groups of people before, yet strangely now you seem to think it's perfectly ok to do so. Could this by any chance have something to do with whether or people being generalised about happen to be members of a group you belong to? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Are you not aware that for Muslims the depiction of any prophet (including Jesus Christ) is strictly forbidden? Thats a rule for the muslims to follow. The rest of us dont need to unless its under threat of death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 No, I'm trying to explain as simply as I can that because most paedophiles are white doesn't mean all white people are paedophiles. Because some black people are rapists doesn't mean all blacks are rapists. Because some muslims have terrible attitudes to homosexuality does not support plekanov's assertion that "common islamic teaching" is that homosexuals should be treated in any particular way. Plekanov is just as much a blinkered racist as someone who made similar assertions about whites or blacks. Pig ignorant. My bold. I just lurve your view on things:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 How do you know Mohammed didn't enjoy alcohol? He might have even participated in homosexual behaviour for all we know. Opium was the thing of the day and many religious leaders had their experiences with God whilst high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Is it racist to criticise Islam? http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2010/09/is-it-racist-to-criticize-islam.html Try not to be stupid all your life. What was you at LSE, Chief Pencil Sharpener? There are some interesting people in that link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrMoran Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Ignorance and islamophobia. It's too much for one person. Hey, you may be ignorant but i dont think you are an islamophobe;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 No, I'm trying to explain as simply as I can that because most paedophiles are white doesn't mean all white people are paedophiles. Because some black people are rapists doesn't mean all blacks are rapists. Because some muslims have terrible attitudes to homosexuality does not support plekanov's assertion that "common islamic teaching" is that homosexuals should be treated in any particular way. Plekanov is just as much a blinkered racist as someone who made similar assertions about whites or blacks. Pig ignorant. That’s only because you are taking your figures from a predominantly white country. You will probably fids more non whites have what we would consider underage sex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffragette1 Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Am doing this from my phone so can't do the multi quotes. Visual depictions of Mohammed are permitted in Shia Islam. I find the fact that an academic institution (and supposedly one of the best) is now self-censoring deeply worrying and ironic. Universities are seats of learning where open, rigorous and probing enquiry and critiquing should being promoted. Curtailing freedom of speech/expression in my view, undermines academic integrity which should be the ethos of such places. The fact that a very vocal minority hold such influence should be of concern to us all. Ferno - you are bang out if order. Accusing Plek of racism is at best, laughable, at worst unbelievable offensive, never mind erroneous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrSmith Posted January 31, 2012 Share Posted January 31, 2012 Ang on 1 minute something has just occurred to me, something that has grounds for appeal on this judgement. Can this Atheist group not say that they find that Islam is offensive by its very nature with its 'Kill all none believers' verses, and there for take sod all notice of all Muslims that wish to silence them ? I would love to see this debated in a court of law, I reckon it could be argues that people have a right to make satire of things that are offensive to them because other alternative options are not open to them in law, and in fact are illegal now with all the pandering that has gone off. A religion of peace would not find offence at satire, as seen by the lack of Christian protest to this and other stuff. I would think it a reasonable argument that if the written wards of an atheist are offensive to theists then the written words of theists can be offensive to atheists, and should also be banned. The Bible and Quran should be re written in a none offensive way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.