Mass Shooting at Florida Gay Bar

[kail]

The mental issues that makes them attracted to the same gender. Those are what I was referring to. I already explained why it isn't normal.

Problem is you (and others with the same mindset) have yet to point out what the "issue" is. What problems are caused when two men or women decide to have sex with each other? What problems are caused by the attraction in the first place?

You can call many things abnormal, because it doesn't reflect the majority. Being left-handed would be considered abnormal by that logic. Is that a mental issue?

[Trassk]

There were outside influences that made those people have both genatalia. Most likely the sins of the mother?

The mental issues that makes them attracted to the same gender. Those are what I was referring to. I already explained why it isn't normal.

homosexuality was declassifed as being a mental disorder in 1973. Seems like the medical community woke up to how retarded it was to believe it was so back then.

Also, I don't think having someone who follows a theocracy should be someone who determines someone elses mental status. Believing in things you have no means of proving to exist to be real isn't something the mental health community looks on well at.

- - - Updated - - -

Problem is you (and others with the same mindset) have yet to point out what the "issue" is. What problems are caused when two men or women decide to have sex with each other? What problems are caused by the attraction in the first place?

You can call many things abnormal, because it doesn't reflect the majority. Being left-handed would be considered abnormal by that logic. Is that a mental issue?

Don't forget, it was that same mind set that white slave owners had in believing that all dark skinned people who wanted to not be a slave were mentally unwell.

[kail]

Don't forget, it was that same mind set that white slave owners had in believing that all dark skinned people who wanted to not be a slave were mentally unwell.

After looking at his post history, starting to think I just ingested some holy bait in this thread.

[Trassk]

After looking at his post history, starting to think I just ingested some holy bait in this thread.

Does that then count as a troll paladin? Oooh new secret race/class update!

[Canpinter]

No, that would just mean they aren't Catholic.

The problem is you folks have no idea what a "core tenet" actually is, and want to blatantly prejudice and slander hundreds of millions of completely innocent people based on the actions of a few.

What you folks are essentially doing is making the same false and hateful argument made by, say, some Baptists (to just pick a sect at random), when they say that no other branches of Christianity are "real Christians", because of differences on non-core elements of theology. When the truth is that no matter how widely varied they are, they're all "Christian", and none of them is "more Christian" than any other.

who decides what is and isn't a core tenet then you?

[Canpinter]

It's funny reading this in a way.

One side is missing the forest for the trees, the other side is missing the trees for the forest. Though there are few that get it.

An ideology can have parts of it that are toxic, and just because some/most of the people that follow the said ideology do not follow the toxic parts, does not mean the ideology, or the people that adhere to the toxic parts are than immune to criticism. We can't quote scripture, but the homophobia is enshrined in the ideology we are taking about. Criticizing it is not a phobia, or predjudice, it is healthy criticism and arbitration in how it relates to liberal (small L) ideals.

its also important to note that just because we come from a culture that isn't perfect on these issues doesn't mean we cant point out significantly worse offenders.

[THE Bigzoman]

But none of the other religions from said region are engaging in terrorism. If you want to say its a problem with Arab Muslims, then that's fine. But to say it has just nothing to do with religion is just crazy talk. These ignorant fools were corrupted by others who intentionally misinterpret the words of a holy book. Religion is at the very core of the issue, but the issue is not the fault of the religion.

It wasn't misinterpreted. If it were, the majority of Muslims would be misinterpreting it.

Homosexuality is criminalized in the majority of Muslim nations. There doesn't seem to be a strong relationship between the prevalence/severity of an Islamic nations' anti-gay laws and its GDP--assuming we can use both as a measure for a nations' socioeconomic/geopolitical standing--because Saudi Arabia, India, and Qatar make the list despite being the Muslim world's economic gems:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_i...slim_countries

Still not a very strong premise, I know. A nation's laws aren't the best indicator for a society's values because laws are controlled by a small elite to a certain degree. I understand any doubts you've had so far; I thought the same thing.

So I looked for any kind of polling data that was done among Muslim populations to see their responses, and the PEW research center did a ton of polling in 2013:

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/t...iety-overview/

See the Faith and Morality section, specifically the table titled "Wide belief that certain behaviors are morally wrong." If you're reading this before clicking the source, you'll probably know what awaits you on the other side.

What of muslims in the west? CNN Polling indicates they're a religious right in the making:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/04/11/europe...vey/index.html


I understand the reluctance to point the finger at Islam. People will use criticism against ideas to harm individuals that believe them even if the individuals themselves did nothing wrong. That's why i'll always respect individual muslims. Their ideas, like every other idea, religion, hypothesis, social theory, and policy proposal, is fair game though, especially if it's mainstream.


I'm kind of sick of people interepting attacks against a set of ideas as an attack against believers of said ideas (not you, but a very specific subset of people who live and breathe to defend non-whties unconditionally). It's dishonest and fucking bullshit. These people are literally coddling tomorrow's religious dicks.

[Spectral]

I'm kind of sick of people interepting attacks against a set of ideas as an attack against believers of said ideas (not you, but a very specific subset of people who live and breathe to defend non-whties unconditionally). It's dishonest and fucking bullshit. These people are literally coddling tomorrow's religious dicks.

Watching the subset of people you mention here try to reconcile what happened in Orlando with their standard oppressed-oppressor narrative has been truly bizarre. Harping on guns has provided a bit of an escape hatch, but when pressed on what the motive was, it seems like the main thing that worries the broader left is that people will be bigoted against Muslims. Sure, it's pretty hard to blame white Christians for an Afghan-American Muslim shooting up a Latino gay club, but a number of blog posts I've read still manage to go on weird rants about how American Christians created the cultural atmosphere that caused the slaughter.

[Deleted]

Problem is you (and others with the same mindset) have yet to point out what the "issue" is. What problems are caused when two men or women decide to have sex with each other? What problems are caused by the attraction in the first place?

You can call many things abnormal, because it doesn't reflect the majority. Being left-handed would be considered abnormal by that logic. Is that a mental issue?

Interesting aside but being a lefty has been at times seen to be "the devil's work". It runs through christian countries' languages and culture when you look: stuff that is just is "right"; the Italian for the left side of anything is la sinistra (sinister) for just a couple of examples. An Italian colleague of mine is 39, he had his left hand tied to his chair to force him to write with the other hand only 30 years ago by nutjub nun teachers.

All cultures have believed crazy nonsensical shit right up until now. We just whittle out this bullshit over time.

[Endus]

It's funny reading this in a way.

One side is missing the forest for the trees, the other side is missing the trees for the forest. Though there are few that get it.

An ideology can have parts of it that are toxic, and just because some/most of the people that follow the said ideology do not follow the toxic parts, does not mean the ideology, or the people that adhere to the toxic parts are than immune to criticism. We can't quote scripture, but the homophobia is enshrined in the ideology we are taking about. Criticizing it is not a phobia, or predjudice, it is healthy criticism and arbitration in how it relates to liberal (small L) ideals.

The point is that there is no single homogenous "ideology" to target in this way. The elements you're attacking are not universally held by all Muslims, and therefore they are not part of the "ideology" of those Muslims.

I'm using quotes because you really mean "religion", and you think that if you refer to it as an "ideology", it's somehow different. It isn't.

You're operating under the conceptualization that there is one true Islam that is set in stone, and believers pick and choose what parts they abide by. That's simply not correct. There's a wide range of interpretations and observances, and all are equally valid and "real".

Which is why I keep asking why it's so hard to just take issue with homophobia, rather than attacking all of Islam, and all Muslims by extension, even those who aren't homophobic.

I'm kind of sick of people interepting attacks against a set of ideas as an attack against believers of said ideas (not you, but a very specific subset of people who live and breathe to defend non-whties unconditionally). It's dishonest and fucking bullshit. These people are literally coddling tomorrow's religious dicks.

We're talking about a religion, which only exists in any real sense in the faith of its followers. If you're attacking that faith for its "ideas", you're making an argument about those followers.

And it isn't about "coddling" anyone. When have I ever argued you should put up with homophobia? It's reprehensible. I'm just saying that the people you should take issue with over that are those who actually express homophobic views, and not a wider swath of people with a shared characteristic. Because when you attack Islam as a religion, you're doing the latter.

Same reason I don't blame all Christians for the acts of pedophile priests or people who bomb abortion clinics. I blame those individual priests (and those who shield them), or the actual bombers. I really don't see why that's somehow unreasonable, and we have to target innocents as well.

[Mormolyce]

An ISIS aligned radical being born in the US is proving the point. When you immigrate too much you don't have control over which ideologies and cultures gain citizenship.

So if he was an immigrant you could claim "aha he was an immigrant!" but if he's not you... still claim "aha! Too much immigration!"?

Nice Morton's Fork.

- - - Updated - - -

Watching the subset of people you mention here try to reconcile what happened in Orlando with their standard oppressed-oppressor narrative has been truly bizarre. Harping on guns has provided a bit of an escape hatch, but when pressed on what the motive was, it seems like the main thing that worries the broader left is that people will be bigoted against Muslims. Sure, it's pretty hard to blame white Christians for an Afghan-American Muslim shooting up a Latino gay club, but a number of blog posts I've read still manage to go on weird rants about how American Christians created the cultural atmosphere that caused the slaughter.

It's kind of understandable that the two get confused, considering Muslim extremists and Christian extremists believe essentially the same things. And the latter is much more common in the US.

[Canpinter]

The point is that there is no single homogenous "ideology" to target in this way. The elements you're attacking are not universally held by all Muslims, and therefore they are not part of the "ideology" of those Muslims.

I'm using quotes because you really mean "religion", and you think that if you refer to it as an "ideology", it's somehow different. It isn't.

You're operating under the conceptualization that there is one true Islam that is set in stone, and believers pick and choose what parts they abide by. That's simply not correct. There's a wide range of interpretations and observances, and all are equally valid and "real".

Which is why I keep asking why it's so hard to just take issue with homophobia, rather than attacking all of Islam, and all Muslims by extension, even those who aren't homophobic.



We're talking about a religion, which only exists in any real sense in the faith of its followers. If you're attacking that faith for its "ideas", you're making an argument about those followers.

And it isn't about "coddling" anyone. When have I ever argued you should put up with homophobia? It's reprehensible. I'm just saying that the people you should take issue with over that are those who actually express homophobic views, and not a wider swath of people with a shared characteristic. Because when you attack Islam as a religion, you're doing the latter.

Same reason I don't blame all Christians for the acts of pedophile priests or people who bomb abortion clinics. I blame those individual priests (and those who shield them), or the actual bombers. I really don't see why that's somehow unreasonable, and we have to target innocents as well.

Here is the problem the homophobia in this case is caused by islam and not just one sect, most sects are very antigay to one degree or another. Unless you deal with the root cause you are just treating the symptom.

[Deleted]

You're cherry-picking. Unless you support destroying the USA and the EU for being predominantly Christian, based on the example set by other predominantly Christian nations such as Uganda, your claims regarding the Muslim world are rank hypocrisy.

There are no valid grounds for attacking innocents who don't individually share those specific beliefs. And that's what you are explicitly and deliberately doing, when you target an entire faith.

My dear Endus, I want to share a picture with you.



Best regards,
Soulslaver

[Spectral]

<snip>You are denying the written parts of the ideas, as codified in holy scripture, as not existing.

Not only is it blatant denial of what's in the relevant holy book, it's blatant denial of what Muslims actually say when polled on the matter. It's not hateful stereotype to notice that 90%+ of a given group hold belief. It takes a ridiculous level of universalism to trot out what amounts to, "well, they don't really believe that" style explanation.

[Trassk]

I'm not subscribed to repzions channel, but he hits the right notes here.

- - - Updated - - -

Not only is it blatant denial of what's in the relevant holy book, it's blatant denial of what Muslims actually say when polled on the matter. It's not hateful stereotype to notice that 90%+ of a given group hold belief. It takes a ridiculous level of universalism to trot out what amounts to, "well, they don't really believe that" style explanation.

Pretty much yes. As its said half the population of muslims in the uk alone want homosexuality to be made illegal, these are people who brought their beliefs in from another country and is now trying to force sharia law on the uk.

This bullshit of #notallmuslims is an failed attempt at trying to ignore the truth of what this religion does and what it gets people to think.

[Joni85]

Pretty much yes. As its said half the population of muslims in the uk alone want homosexuality to be made illegal, these are people who brought their beliefs in from another country and is now trying to force sharia law on the uk.

I'm not in the UK, but in the US at least muslim beliefs on homosexuality look to be pretty much in line with a lot of the other religious groups

[Deleted]

I'm not subscribed to repzions channel, but he hits the right notes here.

What a brave young man. The regressive hivemind will surely be triggered by this.
The western world becomes closer to Brave New World day by day.

[Deleted]

Same reason I don't blame all Christians for the acts of pedophile priests or people who bomb abortion clinics. I blame those individual priests (and those who shield them), or the actual bombers. I really don't see why that's somehow unreasonable, and we have to target innocents as well.

Muslim extremists vastly outnumber Christian extremists and predators in modern times.

Now why is that? Why do you keep pushing this same narrative when the math is clear as daylight?

You don't want to blame the entire religion itself. Ok. But the fact remains we have people who call themselves Muslims killing people en mass on what seems like a regular basis.

[dragonvalor]

I'm not subscribed to repzions channel, but he hits the right notes here.

- - - Updated - - -



Pretty much yes. As its said half the population of muslims in the uk alone want homosexuality to be made illegal, these are people who brought their beliefs in from another country and is now trying to force sharia law on the uk.

This bullshit of #notallmuslims is an failed attempt at trying to ignore the truth of what this religion does and what it gets people to think.

As does other religions however despite what America thinks Sharia Law isn't going to occur in uk

[THE Bigzoman]

The point is that there is no single homogenous "ideology" to target in this way. The elements you're attacking are not universally held by all Muslims, and therefore they are not part of the "ideology" of those Muslims.

I'm using quotes because you really mean "religion", and you think that if you refer to it as an "ideology", it's somehow different. It isn't.

You're operating under the conceptualization that there is one true Islam that is set in stone, and believers pick and choose what parts they abide by. That's simply not correct. There's a wide range of interpretations and observances, and all are equally valid and "real".

Which is why I keep asking why it's so hard to just take issue with homophobia, rather than attacking all of Islam, and all Muslims by extension, even those who aren't homophobic.



We're talking about a religion, which only exists in any real sense in the faith of its followers. If you're attacking that faith for its "ideas", you're making an argument about those followers.

And it isn't about "coddling" anyone. When have I ever argued you should put up with homophobia? It's reprehensible. I'm just saying that the people you should take issue with over that are those who actually express homophobic views, and not a wider swath of people with a shared characteristic. Because when you attack Islam as a religion, you're doing the latter.

Same reason I don't blame all Christians for the acts of pedophile priests or people who bomb abortion clinics. I blame those individual priests (and those who shield them), or the actual bombers. I really don't see why that's somehow unreasonable, and we have to target innocents as well.

If people take attacks against their ideas as attacks against them, that sounds like a personal problem. Perhaps they should live elsewhere?

It's partially the reason why the west advanced while the Muslim world did nothing post Ottoman-Turks: The west was more welcoming to ideas that challenged even their deepest beliefs.