LOL CJ Morgan

You are tying yourself in knots.

"As ever, I'm arguing for tolerance and against the promotion of communal hatred."

But what does that MEAN?

--Should Islam be immune from critique, analysis, satire and scorn?

--Should I not be allowed to say I consider Islam to be loathsome?

--Should Philip Tang and HermaYutic not be allowed to compare Islam unfavourably with Christianity?

If it does not mean these things then what are you going on about?

For the time being at any rate we live in a democracy in which free speech is permitted. Thanks to the Supreme Court of Victoria, Victoria's blasphemy law aka the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act, has become a dead letter for now. How long this benign state of affairs will last is anybody's guess.

Certainly it will not last if the Islamists have their way:

See:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE52P60220090326

Quote:

GENEVA (Reuters) - A United Nations forum on Thursday passed a resolution condemning "defamation of religion" as a human rights violation, despite wide concerns that it could be used to justify curbs on free speech in Muslim countries.

End Quote

Now CJ Morgan,

--Do you support legislation that criminalises disrespect for religion?

--Do you agree that disrespecting someone's religion is a "human rights violation"?

--Would you like to see something akin to the UNHRC resolution legislated in Australia?

If your answer to these question is "no" – and I don’t see how you could give any other answer - then no matter how much you may disapprove of what has been said on this thread you must concede that it is all within the bounds of normal democratic discourse.

So what exactly is your problem with what you read here?

Instead of hurling your favourite epithets, Islamophobe, hater, etc, at posters, do you think that for once in your life you could be SPECIFIC?

BTW calling me a "hater" is besides the point. I freely confess to hating Islam which does NOT mean I would condone depriving Muslims of their civil liberties.

Steven, as I've said repeatedly, as far as I'm concerned you and your fellow haters are free to say whatever you like about Islam or anything else, and I'd oppose any law that sought to restrict your freedom to do so.

<< So what exactly is your problem with what you read here? >>

My problem is that the only possible result of your constant vilification of Islam is that it will further alienate any Muslims who are exposed to it. The endless expression of your hatred for their religion will not cause it to go away, nor will it convince any Muslim that their faith is misplaced. Rather, it's far more likely to fuel the antipathies of any Muslim fundies who are exposed to your hateful Islamophobic rants. Personally, I'd rather live in a polite and inclusive society where people tolerate each other's beliefs and worldviews, rather than obnoxiously attacking them at every opportunity.

What exactly is your problem with those of us who point this out to you?

Would you like people like me to be banned from pointing out how hateful your constant vilification of Islam is, and its most likely consequences?

These are rhetorical questions, because in engaging with you I know I'm just providing a soapbox from which you will undoubtedly spout some more of your hatred. Since hatred is by definition unreasonable, no amount of rational discussion is likely to influence you and your cohorts.

You Islamophobes are very much part of the problem, not part of any solution. Ciao for now.

CJ Grogan,

"Since hatred is by definition unreasonable, no amount of rational discussion is likely to influence you and your cohorts."

No CJ,
Yours is just a PC sound-byte.
Hatred is not by definition unreasonable.
If somebody hurt my children it would not be unreasonable for me to hate them.
Furthermore, you don't engage in rational discussion.
This is your flawed reasoning:
They are spewing hatred.
Hatred is by definition unreasonable.
They are therefore unreasonable and I needn't engage in rational discussion with them.

Can't you see that Islam is a threat to your "polite and inclusive society where people tolerate each other's beliefs and worldviews"?
(That's a "rhetorical question" BTW, because it's clear that you can't)
Do you want a society where cartoons have to be run past a committee of Mohammedan's before they can be published?
(Perhaps you do, it certainly seems so)
This is the logical outcome of your approach.
Look at the Mohammed cartoons for goodness sake.
By your logic, they would be deemed "hateful" because they "fuel(led) the antipathies of ... Muslim fundies" (your definition of hateful).
But how can we know anything is "hateful" until we run it past a committee of stakeholders?

While claiming to defend the right to free speech you denounce as hateful...free speech!
Why?
Because it is a threat to your polite and inclusive society,
your utopian fiction which can only be achieved if all the "haters" (those who don't agree with you) stop hating.

"You Islamophobes are very much part of the problem, not part of any solution."
No CJ,
Islam and its useful idiots are the problem.

Man is a Religious Animal. He is the only Religious Animal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion — several of them. He is the only animal that loves his neighbour as himself and cuts his throat if his theology isn't straight.

-- Mark Twain

C J Morgan

"My problem is that the only possible result of your constant vilification of Islam is that it will further alienate any Muslims who are exposed to it"

So you fear they are easily driven to terrorism if anyone disagrees with their faith? they cannot take criticism of their beliefs? They are that pathetic? I thought they were like normal people with a few nutcases giving them all a bad rap. So they are not well balanced people that can understand there will always be people who think their religion is a fairytale. Christians are balanced enough but muslims not? Is that what you mean?

Odd

CJ Morgan

You call it "vilification of Islam"

I call it exposing a vile totalitarian ideology for what it is.

Are you going to deny that Islam is a totalitarian ideology?

Not the only totalitarian ideology in the world but still one of the more threatening ones.

You call me a problem.

I consider anyone who tries to appease totalitarians a problem.

TheMissus:

Well said.

rstuart

Thank you for that quote from Mark Twain.

Kyoko,

The following relate to stories of Muslim on Muslim violence.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5hTqVtKu1UBBdo3jq5EqicWnOos_g

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — The Taliban blew up a girls' school on Monday in northwest Pakistan, where troops are battling the militants, police said.

Islamist insurgents opposed to co-education have destroyed hundreds of schools, mostly for girls, in the northwest of the country in recent years as they wage a fierce insurgency to enforce sharia law.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gAnuj0YG52hDGSrzIpzy-OG-d4HQ

PESHAWAR, Pakistan — Pakistan's main Taliban faction on Wednesday claimed responsibility for a suicide attack that killed 43 people at a Shiite parade in Karachi, one of the group's most-wanted commanders told AFP.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/18/AR2009121802048.html

Relating to the ongoing genocide in Sudan:

"Because the regime's mass burning of villages in Darfur has ended and mortality rates have plummeted, some have concluded that the worst is done. African Union officials have even claimed that the war in Darfur is over, while Scott Gration, President Obama's special envoy for Sudan, referred in June to the ongoing violence in Darfur as "remnants of genocide." But the government is blocking all independent avenues of reporting, so there is no way to know the level of targeted violence or its perpetrators.

"For example, mass rape is one of the main weapons of genocide, and there is ample anecdotal evidence that it is still occurring in Darfur. But in March the regime expelled over a dozen nongovernmental organizations, many of which provided support and protection for survivors of rape, so there no longer is any systematic reporting of sexual assaults"