L.N. wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:44 am
Since when is gender equality and women's empowerment a question of "political correctness"?
So you really think your PC nit-picking about a well-established idiom somehow advanced the cause of women's empowerment? Really?
If you really want to advance the cause of women's empowerment then speak out against the brutality of Sharia Law, female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.
When "political correctness" involves miguidedly placing emphasis on feelings, over the types of brutality described above, then something is very wrong.
L.N. wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:44 am
So we can expect the Islam-bashing to continue then, correct?
You can expect the Terms of Service to be executed, independently of your incessant complaining and moralising.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
LN: I believe it is not our place to dismiss all the the teachings of Islam as "very unfortunate."
Will you tolerate "dismissing most of the teachings of Islam as very unfortunate?" Or maybe some of the teachings... or perhaps very icky or...?
Please let us know what our 'place' is, for you seem to have a clear notion of that; for we would not wish to offend L.N. and the Muslims on the site.
Good and evil have no fixed form. It's as easy to turn from doing bad to doing good as it is to flip over the hand from the back to the palm. It's simply up to us to do it. Master Hsuan Hua.
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:51 amSo you really think your PC nit-picking about a well-established idiom somehow advanced the cause of women's empowerment? Really?
Yes. You can choose to speak however you wish. If you choose to use gender-charge idioms, that is your decision.
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:51 amIf you really want to advance the cause of women's empowerment then speak out against the brutality of Sharia Law, female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.
This is whataboutism. It also is further Islam bashing which, in my opinion, should have no place on a discussion forum devoted to Dhamma. The horrible things listed above occur. If your neighborhood mosque proposed a meeting with Buddhists for dialogue and finding connections with other paths, would you really put these at the top of your agenda?
Your whataboutism is a diversionary tactic to change the subject and divert attention away from what you have perceived as criticism of yourself. This is exactly what Trump does.
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:51 amWhen "political correctness" involves miguidedly placing emphasis on feelings, over the types of brutality described above, then something is very wrong.
More whataboutism.
L.N. wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:44 am
So we can expect the Islam-bashing to continue then, correct?
You can expect the Terms of Service to be executed, independently of your incessant complaining and moralizing.
I understand you do not welcome my perspective. I understand that TOS will continue to be interpreted to allow reprehensible and unfair commentary about other faiths. I do not understand how you think this promotes Dhamma discussion.
Will wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 12:58 amWill you tolerate "dismissing most of the teachings of Islam as very unfortunate?" Or maybe some of the teachings... or perhaps very icky or...?
Please let us know what our 'place' is, for you seem to have a clear notion of that; for we would not wish to offend L.N. and the Muslims on the site.
I understand that you wish to have the unfettered ability to bash other faiths on this forum, and you have it, so why does it matter? Just say what you want, regardless of the potential harm your words might have. No need to feel any sense of personal responsibility for what you say.
Those activities I spoke of are activities endorsed, promoted and encouraged by the teachings of Islam.
I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.
If you're happy to give a free pass to such barbarism because speaking against it might hurt someone's feelings, then I'm glad I don't share your priorities.
Metta,
Paul.
"Whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things."
L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah
retrofuturist wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 10:42 pm
Greetings,
Just a few comments...
I'm not particularly interested in other religions, but when (as has been pointed out above) it is written into the scriptures of certain religions that infidels (i.e. most people on Earth) are to be killed, is it somehow "lacking in compassion" or "intolerant" to state that such a view is unacceptable? Did the Buddha not speak out against Wrong View, especially when it was so diabolical and genocidal?..... call out Islamists for their extremism, violence, intolerance of infidels and efforts to enforce the brutality of Sharia Law on others.....
Acknowledge that the majority of victims of Islam are actually Muslims. If you weren't aware of that, let it sink in for a few moments before you lash out at someone for being critical of Islam.
What scripture calls for the killing of all “infudels?” Certainly not the Koran’s “there is no compulsion in religion.” Are you referring to the genocide in Myanmar or the Buddhist monk led attacks on Hindus, Christians, and Muslims in Sri Lanka? Those have been justified by quoting scripture. Well, we all know who quotes (selectively and out of context) scripture in the old saying.
It is indeed intolerant to falsely ascribe such a belief to a whole religion when it is so easy to determine that it is false. If someone claimed that Jews sacrifice Christian children on Passover would we not assume that person was an intolerant anti-Semite or repeating historic anti-Semitic slanders?
Sharia law is a catch all term for legal systems with varying applications ranging from identical to kosher hygienic laws to contract law to felonies and more as such it cannot be called brutal or kind. I assume you are all aware that genital mutilation is not supported by Sharia, women’s rights in Sharia were far superior to those in contemporaneous European law, and that societies based on it were far more religiously tolerant by law than European societies (hence Jews expelled from Spain fled to Turkish rule).
Most Muslims would not agree that they are victims of Islam or that “Islamist” meant terrorist. It is a term often used by those wishing to smear all followers of Islam, although this may not be your intent It is very, very true and well known that the vast majority of the victims of ISIS, Al Quaeda and similar lunatic thugs, who wish to impose their own savage rule on Muslims have been Muslim as have been those who died fighting them.
All Muslims are not saints; all Muslims are not devils.
Last edited by Caodemarte on Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
Those activities I spoke of are activities endorsed, promoted and encouraged by the teachings of Islam.
I wish it were otherwise, but it's not.
If you're happy to give a free pass to such barbarism because speaking against it might hurt someone's feelings, then I'm glad I don't share your priorities.
I don't give a free pass to them. However, I would choose not to highlight them on a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma. I understand you feel very strongly otherwise and believe it is your personal duty to be the judge of Islam. I understand you value this much more than creating a friendly, welcoming place where a Muslim would feel invited and, perhaps hear the Dhamma.
In the context of the persecution of Rohingya Muslims at the hands of self-identified Buddhists, I believe the position you have adopted is extremely unfortunate. I understand we can expect the disparagement of other faiths to continue unabated here on DW, with the blessing of the administrator, as it apparently has for years. This is a real misuse of what otherwise is a great resource.
chownah wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:30 am
L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah
Given that this is a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma, we can find avenues elsewhere to decry these foul practices. By emphasizing them in virtually every discussion of Islam here, we paint a very poor picture of Buddhist tolerance for other faiths.
chownah wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:30 am
L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah
Since all these actions have actually occurred in the US whose media I do read and have been publically promoted as being based on Christianity, are you referring to the US? India or Sri Lanka, perhaps, or any other country where the unscrupulous rationalize their crimes in the name of religion. I think it will be more difficult to find a society free of such crimes and such justifications.
chownah wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:30 am
L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah
Since all these actions have actually occurred in the US whose media I do read and have been publically promoted as being based on Christianity, are you referring to the US? India or Sri Lanka, perhaps, or any other country where the unscrupulous rationalize their crimes in the name of religion. I think it will be more difficult to find a society free of such crimes and such justifications.
Am I referring to what? Did you read my post. I am referring to a hypothetical example.
chownah
chownah wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:30 am
L.N.,
Given a HYPOTHETICAL example of a society where its moral attitude is derived from its religion and which espouses female genital mutilation, child brides, the stoning of rape victims, women being used as chattel and sex slaves, women being blown up and otherwise killed or dislocated through acts of terror, subjugation, lesbians being thrown off cliffs and buildings etc.........given this HYPOTHETICAL example, then what are we to do? Are we to remain silent? Are we to force others to remain silent?
chownah
Given that this is a Buddhist discussion forum devoted to discussing Dhamma, we can find avenues elsewhere to decry these foul practices. By emphasizing them in virtually every discussion of Islam here, we paint a very poor picture of Buddhist tolerance for other faiths.
The discussion here is not limited to discussing the dhamma.
There are muslims who do not support the abhorrant actions mentioned. It would be good if someone could find out how they self identify as muslim and don't support those acts.....and then post it here.
chownah
When reading some of these posts it becomes clear some of these people have never had any Muslim friends, and when you hear there opinions, it becomes clear why they don't have any Muslim friends. It is a position of weakness in one's faith to criticize other religions, if you are secure in your beliefs you should not need to criticize everyone else's beliefs.
18 years ago I made one of the most important decisions of my life and entered a local Cambodian Buddhist Temple as a temple boy and, for only 3 weeks, an actual Therevada Buddhist monk. I am not a scholar, great meditator, or authority on Buddhism, but Buddhism is something I love from the Bottom of my heart. It has taught me sobriety, morality, peace, and very importantly that my suffering is optional, and doesn't have to run my life. I hope to give back what little I can to the Buddhist community, sincerely former monk John
perkele wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:07 pm
the numerous islamic terror organizations and apparently relatively widespread sympathy for them among muslims here and there throughout the world certainly don't help...
The terror organisations have been historically created & funded by the British & American empires, starting from WW1, when the British supported the violent fundamentalist Wahhabi Saudi against the secular Ottoman Empire. This is where the problem lies. The American terror (death squads) has been unleashed in countless countries.
binocular wrote: ↑Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:12 pmWhy should mainstream Islam be seen as more authoritative than the Islam of the Talibans?
Mainstream Islam is secular; as described in the Koran & as demonstrated throughout Islamic history. It should particularly be noted Buddhism, while sometimes persecuted, remained in existence in the Islamic Empire up to around the 12 century, until it was destroyed by the Mongols, who were recent converts to Islam & originally appeared to be Buddhists. In their invasions of the Islamic Empire, before moving on to India, the Mongols slaughtered many Muslims & Persians. See link for starters then DYOR: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecuti ... by_Muslims
Taliban Islam was assorted lunatics & pyschopaths recruited, trained, funded & armed by the USA; similar to ISIS. Naturally, for some Americans, due to cognitive dissonance, Taliban is more authoritative because it is 'Made In the USA', both militarily & by mass media.
In the field of psychology, cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort (psychological stress) experienced by a person who simultaneously holds two or more contradictory beliefs, ideas, or values. The occurrence of cognitive dissonance is a consequence of a person performing an action that contradicts personal beliefs, ideals, and values; and also occurs when confronted with new information that contradicts said beliefs, ideals, and values.
There is always an official executioner. If you try to take his place, It is like trying to be a master carpenter and cutting wood. If you try to cut wood like a master carpenter, you will only hurt your hand.
lyndon taylor wrote: ↑Mon Nov 20, 2017 3:57 amWhen reading some of these posts it becomes clear some of these people have never had any Muslim friends, and when you hear there opinions, it becomes clear why they don't have any Muslim friends. It is a position of weakness in one's faith to criticize other religions, if you are secure in your beliefs you should not need to criticize everyone else's beliefs.
I very much agree with this. We are on a Buddhist discussion forum. It is not clear to me how these criticisms and negative comments about Islam and other faiths are in any way appropriate in this forum. There are other avenues available. As far as I can tell, the post in which it is suggested that Muhammad be urinated upon is still visible here on DW. Very discouraging.
