Counter-Protests Outnumber Anti-Muslim Marches in Several Cities Across U.S.

[NineSpine]

That definition of racism is far too broadly cut. It seem to suit the demands of the far Left to shut down any speech critical of something on the Progressive stack. Religion (any religion) can, must, and should be open to ridicule, satire, and parody ( or just plain old disapproval).

Judging people by what they choose to believe is entirely acceptable. One's beliefs form a fundamental part of one's character.

Ah, yes, the amorphous and mysterious "left" tricked everyone to changing the definition of the word in order to make you look bad. Quite a conspiracy.

Nobody is arguing that ridicule, satire, or parody are racist. Holding up a sign that says "NO MORE MUSLIMS" is racist. Acting as though all Muslims are fundamentalists is racist. Acting as though people of a particular religion or background are a secret cancer corrupting your society and trying to harm you is not only racist, but it was the basis for the worst act of racism in the history: The Holocaust.

The fact that you don't seem to be able to distinguish between criticism of Islam and discrimination/prejudice towards Muslims is exactly the problem, and exactly why you don't understand why it falls under racism. Your ignorance is demonstrating why it falls under the racism category.

- - - Updated - - -

This all looks like a lot of dissembling to me. There is no legitimate equivalence between the fashion of skirts and telling women to cover themselves.

Do you think the tradition of women wearing skirts comes from a history of women being allowed to dress however they want and choosing to? No. It comes from women being told what is appropriate for them to wear. Women aren't wearing skirts today because they were given the choice in the past. They are wearing skirts today because our culture is still dictated by the norms set at a time when women were forced to dress certain ways.

[Spectral]

Do you think the tradition of women wearing skirts comes from a history of women being allowed to dress however they want and choosing to? No. It comes from women being told what is appropriate for them to wear. Women aren't wearing skirts today because they were given the choice in the past. They are wearing skirts today because our culture is still dictated by the norms set at a time when women were forced to dress certain ways.

I realize I already said this, but this is what I'm talking about. When I say that progressives are normalizing Islamism, I'm referring to exactly what you're doing right now.

I realize you firmly disagree.

[Stormspellz]

An average of three women per day are killed by their husbands or boyfriends in the United States, but they don't count as "honor killings" for reasons best left unexamined.

because they aren't. I know its a hard concept to understand

[NineSpine]

I realize I already said this, but this is what I'm talking about. When I say that progressives are normalizing Islamism, I'm referring to exactly what you're doing right now.

I realize you firmly disagree.

Islamism is not the hijab. That's the point I'm making. Islamism is the belief that society should be organized in accordance with Islamic law. Islamism means political change to enforce Islam as a religion. When progressives start advocating mandatory hijab laws, you'll have a point. When progressives start advocating that men who beat their wives for not wearing the hijab should be exempt from assault laws, you'll have a point.

You are redefining Islamism to be any public expression of Islam.

- - - Updated - - -

because they aren't. I know its a hard concept to understand

I think he's referring to the number of women murdered by their husbands IN GENERAL, not Muslim women, and denying that that happens would be kind of bizarre.

[Deleted]

Most of those subhuman autists protesting for Mudslimes would get their throat slit under an Islamic regime.

[NineSpine]

Most of those subhuman autists protesting for Mudslimes would get their throat slit under an Islamic regime.

I spend about a third of my time in the Muslim world, and I don't know what the fuck you are talking about.

[Kiri]

That definition of racism is far too broadly cut. It seem to suit the demands of the far Left to shut down any speech critical of something on the Progressive stack. Religion (any religion) can, must, and should be open to ridicule, satire, and parody ( or just plain old disapproval).

Judging people by what they choose to believe is entirely acceptable. One's beliefs form a fundamental part of one's character.

Note to Mods: I'm doing my best to discuss this without mentioning any one belief or group of people in particular. If that's not being careful enough, my apologies, and please PM me if you like to discuss it.

I don't believe that judging people by their choice of general religion is entirely acceptable - especially when they are judged by the actions of the most radical believers.
This is primarily due to two factors.
1) Religion and its believers do not need to be equal. I, personally, am a catholic. I believe in some of the things that my religion tells me and in others. I know a lot of people who are not overly religious in any way but still like to identify with their religion and do believe in their god, largely due to seeking comfort in the belief in a higher power. Saying 'He is a Muslim, therefore he must be (insert prejudice here)' is simply not correct. If you have a Muslim that seeks to live by Shariah law and rejects the ones of the country they live in? Judge away for that. But don't believe everyone who write Muslim on a form or even goes to a mosque is the same.

2) Religion is not necessarily a simple choice. People usually grow up with the religion of their parents and do not directly experience other beliefs. It takes either external influence or concerted effort to just decide 'I will no longer believe in the religion that I believed in so far in my life'. Plus, changing one's belief often comes with alienating friends and family, and can sometimes mean the loss of community. Becoming more atheistic is generally more likely than outright swapping religions. Until the day comes that children are not raised religiously until they are old enough to choose for themselves, then neutrally presented with all the options, judging them for their choice feels wrong. More often then not, judging people by their religions is actually judging people by who they were born to and how they grew up.

[pfbe]

There can be no justification for discrimination on the basis of race.

Don't be silly, of course there can be. If I decided to tackle diabetes in the US, it would only be smart of me for my actions to discriminate for black Americans, since diabetes is like 60% more common among that specific group.

[Freighter]

The definition of racism includes ethnic discrimination. One of the primary markers of ethnicity is religion. You are welcome to think discrimination on the basis of religion is acceptable, but you don't get to pretend it isn't racism just because it's a negative thing to be called.

Religion has nothing to do with ethnicity. Ethnicity is biological, you see differences between the different ethnic groups in susceptibility to different medical conditions or other measurable things. This wouldn't be the case if it was entirely a social construct as you make it out to be when you include religion. You don't see people claiming they are ethnic christians or ethnic muslims. The only people I can even think of that does anything remotely similar are the malays, where being a muslim is part of being malay.

[Mihalik]

Ethnicity is biological.

Ethnicity is NOT biological. It is cultural. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ethnicity

Do you honestly think there are biological differences between ethnic Swedes and ethnic Norwegians?

Some ethnic groups do experience specific predispositions to genetic illnesses due to endogamy, but if you take a person out of that ethnic group and raise it in a different one (raise an Ashkenazi Jew as French Catholic) that person will belong to the ethnic group he was raised in, not in which his biological parents were born in.

It is much easier to make a logical argument for race being a biological thing that it is for ethnicity.

Jewish people are an example for an ethno-religious group where religion and culture are the primary determinant of your ethnicity and absolutely not your "biology".

[Freighter]

Ethnicity is NOT biological. It is cultural. http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ethnicity

Do you honestly think there are biological differences between ethnic Swedes and ethnic Norwegians?

Some ethnic groups do experience specific predispositions to genetic illnesses due to endogamy, but if you take a person out of that ethnic group and raise it in a different one (raise an Ashkenazi Jew as French Catholic) that person will belong to the ethnic group he was raised in, not in which his biological parents were born in.

It is much easier to make a logical argument for race being a biological thing that it is for ethnicity.

Jewish people are an example for an ethno-religious group where religion and culture are the primary determinant of your ethnicity and absolutely not your "biology".

Ethnicity is defined by shared/common ancestry, so yes, it is biological. You can also notice differences in susceptibility to different medical conditions based on what (biological as it's defined by shared/common ancestry) ethnic group someone belongs to. Like your example, Swedes and norwegians, they are less prone to be lactose intolerant than the ethnicities that exist in southern europe.

Jewish people are an example for an ethno-religious group where religion and culture are the primary determinant of your ethnicity and absolutely not your "biology".

"Halakha states that the acceptance of the principles and practices of Judaism does not make a person a Jew."

" Opinion polls have suggested that the majority of Jews see being Jewish as predominantly a matter of ancestry and culture, rather than religion."

Who would have guessed they place an emphasis on ancestry? Like everyone else do.

I wouldn't consider someone korean if they were just people who grew up in korean culture or in korea, just like other koreans wouldn't consider them to be korean. We're one people, you don't become part of us just by adhering to the same ideas that we do or by being raised there.

[Deleted]

That would make one "pro-sharia" wouldn't it?

Oh, and by the way. The paper is pretty much a liberal ran rag.
More headlines embedded within the story. We need to take that into consideration as well when reading it. It will be spun to fit a narrative.

It technically would. But it is one of those bit more complex things, these people didn't protest Sharia-law, because it is pretty much a none existent thing, as well as it already being illegal, so it is a targeted attack on the people that are associated with sharia law in the news and that is Muslims.

As for it being a liberal ran rag, I honestly don't care, because it is such a transparent thing.

[Jinpachi]

Also, Dearborn is very lovely. I don't know what you think it's like there, but it's very nice. Lots of good restaurants, friendly people. The crime rate has plummeted in the last 15 years. What exactly is the problem?

Don't deflect. The conversation isn't about whether Dearborn is nice or not, and you know it

[Allybeboba]

It technically would. But it is one of those bit more complex things, these people didn't protest Sharia-law, because it is pretty much a none existent thing, as well as it already being illegal, so it is a targeted attack on the people that are associated with sharia law in the news and that is Muslims.

As for it being a liberal ran rag, I honestly don't care, because it is such a transparent thing.

We always have to take into account which side of the political spectrum is writing the story we are reading. That way we can get some sort of perspective and realign it to a more neutral stance.

- - - Updated - - -

Don't be silly, of course there can be. If I decided to tackle diabetes in the US, it would only be smart of me for my actions to discriminate for black Americans, since diabetes is like 60% more common among that specific group.

Or sickle cell. There are all sorts of examples.

[Spiffums]

I think the logic is that guns protect all of the other rights. At least that's what I've heard people like that parrot.

- - - Updated - - -

Try defending your other rights with harsh language and the middle finger and see how much "terror" you strike into the hearts of the ones taking your rights away. They will just send their agents WITH GUNS to move you along.

[Deleted]

We always have to take into account which side of the political spectrum is writing the story we are reading. That way we can get some sort of perspective and realign it to a more neutral stance.

So what is the perspective and realignment that you are seeking for neutrality? Because I am hard at work to trying to figure out exactly what the point of protesting something that is basically none existent and already completely and utterly illegal; outside of the rather transparent reason of course, which would be they just don't like or want Muslims around, and that is easier to get across if you make up this strong oppressive force that is trying to overtake you.

[Allybeboba]

So what is the perspective and realignment that you are seeking for neutrality? Because I am hard at work to trying to figure out exactly what the point of protesting something that is basically none existent and already completely and utterly illegal; outside of the rather transparent reason of course, which would be they just don't like or want Muslims around, and that is easier to get across if you make up this strong oppressive force that is trying to overtake you.

In America, we don't have issues with people that practice the Muslim faith integrating into society as a whole. What we do have a problem with is sensationalistic news companies pushing their own agendas.

[Deleted]

The entire existence of a dichotomy between masculine and feminine clothes does the exact same thing. Your argument that the hijab is particularly offensive to western values in this regard just doesn't make sense in light of that. On top of that you are denying women the presence of mind and agency to decide for themselves what the hijab means to them, which is absolutely more mysoginistic than any headscarf.
.

We're not stupid. Where do you think women gets the sense of need to wear a hijab? Had a visit from god? Only reason they wear it, aware of it or not, is from a dominant man/group. Noone puts on a hijab when its 30c outside, or put on a burkini, it goes against your real senses. Women in arab countries and muslim neighborhoods in west NEEDS to wear it, they dont have an option. Western women can wear what they want.

Also you shouldnt fucking tell people what they find offensive to western values or not, they're completely free to think for themself.

- - - Updated - - -

In America, we don't have issues with people that practice the Muslim faith integrating into society as a whole. What we do have a problem with is sensationalistic news companies pushing their own agendas.

Ye muslims in america is so well integrated and show respect:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...oni/102212852/

or wait they dont give a shit about americans way of life.

[Allybeboba]

We're not stupid. Where do you think women gets the sense of need to wear a hijab? Had a visit from god? Only reason they wear it, aware of it or not, is from a dominant man/group. Noone puts on a hijab when its 30c outside, or put on a burkini, it goes against your real senses. Women in arab countries and muslim neighborhoods in west NEEDS to wear it, they dont have an option. Western women can wear what they want.

Also you shouldnt fucking tell people what they find offensive to western values or not, they're completely free to think for themself.

- - - Updated - - -



Ye muslims in america is so well integrated and show respect:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...oni/102212852/

or wait they dont give a shit about americans way of life.

What's the problem? They ordered something very specific and didn't receive what they wanted and it made them sick.

The same could be said for Kosher Delis.
Have a wonderful day.

[Noxx79]

We're not stupid. Where do you think women gets the sense of need to wear a hijab? Had a visit from god? Only reason they wear it, aware of it or not, is from a dominant man/group. Noone puts on a hijab when its 30c outside, or put on a burkini, it goes against your real senses. Women in arab countries and muslim neighborhoods in west NEEDS to wear it, they dont have an option. Western women can wear what they want.

Also you shouldnt fucking tell people what they find offensive to western values or not, they're completely free to think for themself.

- - - Updated - - -



Ye muslims in america is so well integrated and show respect:

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/new...oni/102212852/

or wait they dont give a shit about americans way of life.

So the American Way of Life is lying to your customers and giving them stuff they didn't order despite objections?

I mean yeah, but why would you defend that?