The woman who made the racist post is on leave, but as far as I know, the mayor who applauded the post is still on the job.
NSFW THE TRUMPOCALYPSE
- Thread starter MadamSarcastra
- Start date
-
- Tags
- trump
- Status
Calliegirl
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 5,816
- Lifestyle
- Vegan
Exactly. They can be angry, but they don't have the right to kill others who say something they deem offensive.
Insulting all Muslims by saying that they worship a paedophile and then trying to defend Muslims from religious intolerance. You don't see hypocrisy there?
I can dislike, and show my dislike, for what a God, Prophet, deity, etc does or stands for, and still not want others to be assaulted or killed simply because they are followers of that religion.
No, I don't think I'm a hypocrite for that.
Okay, you missed (or ignored) my point, but I'm glad to see that I didn't misunderstand your Islamophobic views. I would love you to tell the Muslims that you "help" that you think that they all worship a paedophile. I should just learn to trust my first instinct on people instead of giving them a second chance. When People Show You Who They Are, Believe Them.
Calliegirl
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 5,816
- Lifestyle
- Vegan
I guess I missed your point.
As far as I know, Mohammad was a pedophile. He married a six year old girl and had sex with her when she was nine. Just because people worship him, it doesn't change that fact, nor does it mean I can't express disgust about it. It also doesn't mean I think Muslims should be assaulted or killed for simply being Muslim.
Supposedly the Bible says gays should be killed, and I think that's horrible. There are Christians who would be offended that I said that and disagreed with the bible, but it's a terrible thing for it to say and I have a right to say so. I personally know someone who is unhappy that I think the Bible is wrong for saying that, and that I agree with same sex marriage (she's against it), but she knows we all have the right to our opinions. If someone was attacking her because she's Christian, of course I would help her, and I don't think I would be a hypocrite for doing so.
I don't think I should have to censor myself because my beliefs/ethics/morals offend someone else, just like I don't expect others to do so. And if my calling out a pedophile makes me Islamophobic in your eyes, I won't argue with you, it's your right to feel that way.
If this makes me a bad person, so be it.
Last edited:
Calliegirl
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 5,816
- Lifestyle
- Vegan
I used supposedly because some people are arguing over the translation, but most are going by the version that claims gays should be put to death.
And from everything I've read, on multiple sites, they all agree that Muhammad married a six year old, and consummated the marriage when she was nine.
If you have differing information, please share.
I guess I missed your point.
Yep. Maybe people should be more aware when they slag off Donald Trump or his supporters for being bigoted.
Not that I am supporting him at all, obviously.
FortyTwo
Custom Title
Ah, I totally missed that part about worshipping a pedophile. That's, um, a pretty big thing to miss. My bad.
Calliegirl, you're taking a lot of things very out of context. Followers of a religion don't necessary condone everything that has been said or done in the name of that religion or by its other followers. The Ancient Greeks were a bunch of pedophiles, but if someone buys into philosophy written by Aristotle or Homer's epics, we don't call them out as worshiping people who shook hands with pederasty supporters. Mostly this is due to t fact that the Greeks are usually given a pass because they're icons from Western culture and not the East.
And what about the founding fathers of the United States? These were people who wrote eloquently and in great detail about some really groundbreaking philosophical, social, and governmental practices, many of which endure to this day due to their insight. But they were also a bunch of cruel, snide, evil people who owned hundreds of other human beings and forced them into labor and sex (Jefferson was involved with Sally Hemings when she was fourteen at the oldest), believed women were inferior to men, and were so supremely elitist that they ignored the implications of their own writings and structured the entire system of the US to continuing some truly evil ****.
Basically, the past is full of a lot of garbage people with a lot of garbage beliefs and practices. I won't defend any of those practices and beliefs. But you have to look at the good with the bad and get the whole picture. You can't take one and ignore the other. The vast majority of people who believe Muhammad had some great ideas wouldn't approve of a relationship between an adult and a child. Accusing Muslims of being a group of people who "worship a pedophile" implies that they totally would.
I don't doubt that you mean well, but religion is a really complex topic that I've started to soften on embarrassingly recently, and I think it's important that whole religions aren't demonized for the actions of a few and especially the actions of a few in the distant past when standards of living were massively different.
Calliegirl, you're taking a lot of things very out of context. Followers of a religion don't necessary condone everything that has been said or done in the name of that religion or by its other followers. The Ancient Greeks were a bunch of pedophiles, but if someone buys into philosophy written by Aristotle or Homer's epics, we don't call them out as worshiping people who shook hands with pederasty supporters. Mostly this is due to t fact that the Greeks are usually given a pass because they're icons from Western culture and not the East.
And what about the founding fathers of the United States? These were people who wrote eloquently and in great detail about some really groundbreaking philosophical, social, and governmental practices, many of which endure to this day due to their insight. But they were also a bunch of cruel, snide, evil people who owned hundreds of other human beings and forced them into labor and sex (Jefferson was involved with Sally Hemings when she was fourteen at the oldest), believed women were inferior to men, and were so supremely elitist that they ignored the implications of their own writings and structured the entire system of the US to continuing some truly evil ****.
Basically, the past is full of a lot of garbage people with a lot of garbage beliefs and practices. I won't defend any of those practices and beliefs. But you have to look at the good with the bad and get the whole picture. You can't take one and ignore the other. The vast majority of people who believe Muhammad had some great ideas wouldn't approve of a relationship between an adult and a child. Accusing Muslims of being a group of people who "worship a pedophile" implies that they totally would.
I don't doubt that you mean well, but religion is a really complex topic that I've started to soften on embarrassingly recently, and I think it's important that whole religions aren't demonized for the actions of a few and especially the actions of a few in the distant past when standards of living were massively different.
Calliegirl
Forum Legend
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2012
- Reaction score
- 5,816
- Lifestyle
- Vegan
Where in this post did I blame an entire group of people for the actions of a pedophile? Where did I accuse them of being a group of people worshiping a pedophile?
I think you guys are reading way too much into this post that isn't there. It was a post defending the magazine's right to satirize Muhammad, even though people worship him, without being killed.
Last edited:
Well, I bet you can find lots of important Christian figures who did the same thing at that time.... not that that would make it much better.
Well, to be precise, she is likely sorry for getting caught and has apologized for "this getting out of hand"...
So, to get back to the Trumpocalypse, here's an interesting (albeit older) article on Steve Bannon, who Trump has appointed as his future right-hand man:
This Man Is the Most Dangerous Political Operative in America
Bannon’s unveiling as Trump’s chief strategist is a layer cake of horrors | Lindy West
Obviously, Republicans have no big issues with him, so far...
Republicans refuse to criticize Steve Bannon hire after growing backlash
This Man Is the Most Dangerous Political Operative in America
Bannon’s unveiling as Trump’s chief strategist is a layer cake of horrors | Lindy West
Obviously, Republicans have no big issues with him, so far...
Republicans refuse to criticize Steve Bannon hire after growing backlash
Last edited:
It's interesting that one of the big US political parties will allow someone who's accused of anti-semitism to get this high up in the system. Usually, that label has been a political mark of death.
Last edited:
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
"The Hunger Games" most certainly would not have been my pick for "must read books" under any circumstances...
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
Ok, so don't read it. These are suggestions, not requirements. The point of the article is to make people aware of the dangers of totalitarian governments by suggesting books on the subject.
Before the result I saw an interview with the man who wrote Listen, Liberal. It sounded like he made some interesting points. It sounds similar to what people say has happened to the UK Labour Party.
Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People by Thomas Frank — Reviews, Discussion, Bookclubs, Lists
With his trademark sardonic wit and lacerating logic, Frank's Listen, Liberal lays bare the essence of the Democratic Party's philosophy and how it has changed over the years. A form of corporate and cultural elitism has largely eclipsed the party's old working-class commitment, he finds. For certain favored groups, this has meant prosperity. But for the nation as a whole, it is a one-way ticket into the abyss of inequality.
Listen, Liberal: Or, What Ever Happened to the Party of the People by Thomas Frank — Reviews, Discussion, Bookclubs, Lists
With his trademark sardonic wit and lacerating logic, Frank's Listen, Liberal lays bare the essence of the Democratic Party's philosophy and how it has changed over the years. A form of corporate and cultural elitism has largely eclipsed the party's old working-class commitment, he finds. For certain favored groups, this has meant prosperity. But for the nation as a whole, it is a one-way ticket into the abyss of inequality.
I have read it. Which is why I am questioning its inclusion into the list
But yes, I get it, if people do not want to read "The Diary of Anne Frank" or "One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", or even "1984", this might be the next best thing, right?
beancounter
The Fire That Burns Within
I have read it. Which is why I am questioning its inclusion into the list
But yes, I get it, if people do not want to read "The Diary of Anne Frank" or "One day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich", or even "1984", this might be the next best thing, right?
I agree with your assessment of the book, but training wheels are sometimes necessary, as it can lead to bigger and better things. And if this book can open someone's eyes, that's a good thing.
- Status
