Dear stevenlmeyer,

What you are doing is setting up a strawman. You asked, "Do you want to bring back blasphemy laws that outlaw criticism of religion?" Since I made it plain I was not talking about belief systems that is a stupid and irrelevant question. I don't think you are stupid. I think you know what you are doing.

Yes, all prejudice against a person because that person is a member of a particular ethnic or religious group is essentially alike. islamophobia and antisemitism are essentially alike.

There is no word in our society for hatred of Christians because we live in Christian dominated societies. In Roman times before Christianity became the official religion Christians were called atheists because they did not believe in or worship the Roman gods.

I look forward to your attempt at an explanation for your attempt to convert objections to prejudice against individuals because of their religious identification to objection to criticism of their belief systems.

As far as I am concerned Islam, Judaism and Christianity are basically nonsense. There is no big daddy in the sky.

However, prejudice and discrimination against Jews, Muslims and Christians because they are Jews, Muslims and Christians stink.

I think you answered your own question, Constance.

>>Now, what is your problem with the term, Londonistan? Why on earth do you so weirdly react to this term? Are you paranoid or something? Didn't you know that London is the Islamists hub of Europe?<<

It's all about the power of the slogan, on which topic you commented:

>>Slogans not reality. Oh is that what it is? And they are not true - oh how deep!<<

Somehow, you have picked up on a slogan - "Londonistan" - which confirms and amplifies all your existing prejudices. This, of course, being the reason that Melanie Phillips wrote her book with that title in the first place.

If it had been a sober, rational and carefully-reasoned analysis of Islam in the capital, no-one would have read it. So she gave it a catchy title, filled it with anti-Islamic polemic, and sold lots.

Good for her.

But that still doesn't mean that it reflects reality. It just means that she knows how to mass-market to the fearful and the simple-minded.

And that is why I try to put these things into context, for people who haven't been to London recently, and therefore cannot have the faintest clue how inaccurate it all is.

Oh, and just for the record.

>>Again you seem to have trouble reading, and I am not going to bother reiterating any I've already said. You're getting boring<<

But you haven't actually said anything, Constance, so there's nothing to reiterate. You're getting very defensive.

David f

See my comment on:

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=11002

LOL ;-)

Dear stevenlmeyer,

Prejudice and discrimination against Jews, Muslims and Christians because they are Jews, Muslims and Christians stink.

The above is true whether the prejudice is called antisemitism, islamophobia or something else.

Do you disagree with the above statements.

David F

My Concise Oxford Dictionary gives two definitions for “prejudice”.

1. Preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience > unjust behavior formed on such a basis

2. Chiefly Law - harm or injury that results or may result from some action or judgment

With regard to the first my opinion of Islam, which is that it stinks, is based on reason and actual experience. It is therefore not prejudice.

You may disagree with my opinion. Presented with the same data you may come to a different conclusion. But you cannot accuse me of prejudice in the sense of having a preconceived idea.

You may accuse me of conducting my investigations into Islam in bad faith. If you do, so be it. There is obviously no way I can prove that I did not act in bad faith.

So far as the second meaning of prejudice is concerned, I have made it abundantly clear many times that people should NOT be prejudiced – ie sufer any harm or loss - because of their beliefs and opinions. This should apply BOTH to Muslims AND to people like me who believe that Islam is loathsome.

In that second sense of the word “prejudice” I agree with your statement that:

“Prejudice and discrimination against Jews, Muslims and Christians because they are Jews, Muslims and Christians stink.”

But with the following rider:

“Prejudice and discrimination against people who detest Judaism, Islam and / or Christianity because they detest Judaism, Islam and / or Christianity ALSO stinks.”

Now that I have answered your question perhaps you can do me the courtesy of answering mine in my post of Sunday, 19 September 2010 12:39:07 PM

Dear stevenlmeyer,

You asked:

1. ... Why should Islamophobia be despicable but not "Christian-o-phobia" or "Hindu-phobia"?

2. Do you want to bring back blasphemy laws...?

3. ... is it only people who detest Islam who have some sort of character defect?

Your first two questions are strawmen. I have not maintained that "Christian-o-phobia" or "Hindu-phobia" are not despicable, and I would like to eliminate all blasphemy laws.

I despise parts of all belief systems that I am familiar with. I think any kind of belief should be only held provisionally as long as no evidence contradicts it. If we are talking of belief systems, the belief that god is a real estate dealer who parcels certain areas of land to certain tribes and that virgins are impregnated by supernatural entities are as ridiculous as anything I know that is found in Islam. Admittedly if I knew more about Islam I would probably find more to despise there.

I also object to the belief system called Marxism and think the Marxist horrors are a direct result of the Marxist ideology.

All belief systems have something that compels the allegiance of their adherents. The compelling forces I would consider either bad or good depending on what they are.

However, it is one thing to despise a belief system and another to despise the human beings who hold that belief. I am not sure you make that distinction.

Although all the main religions have offensive elements I rank them from least offensive to most offensive as follows:

1. Buddhism
2. Judaism
3. Islam
4. Christianity
5. Hinduism

Buddhism seems to have more peaceful elements than the other religions. Judaism has a tradition of questioning. Islam and Christianity rank below Buddhism and Judaism because missionary religions are inherently more intolerant and controlling. I rank Christianity below Islam because of its belief in a humanoid god with magical powers who returned from the dead seems completely ridiculous. I rank Hinduism at the bottom because of the caste system which discriminates even among its own followers.

Why do you think Islam is worse than the others?