Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-05-2017, 03:40 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 01:46 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  I'm angry.

Really angry.

And before I start my rant I should point out that politically, I'm between left and moderate If you're idea seems more logical, I don't care if you're left or right, I follow logic, reason, humanism and the environment above any political party.

[rant]

My brother is an ex-Christian. Turns out he has also met the criteria for an intellectually dishonest liberal robot. He is more than happy to rake Christianity over the coals of reason with me, yet when I present Islam as a dangerous ideology that manifested the Manchester bombings, he was quick to defend the precepts of Islam, implied I was an Islamophobe, and said that it was only extremists who violate human rights and that it is only when the Quran is misconstrued that this happens. This all on the eve of an Islamic extremist blowing up 22 innocent people, including children, while injuring many others.

Before I continue I should clarify that my brother hasn't read a book, poll, peer-reviewed research article or a scientific journal on Goddamn nothing in years. He literally just spouts off far-left Liberal tripe instead of researching all areas of the political spectrum and coming up with a more scientific and less biased conclusion that might be closer to the truth.

Anyways, I proceeded to point out that while I respect freedom of religion and identity, the Muslim ideology, from a humanistic perspective, is an incredibly dangerous one for people to entertain as factual. I explained to him that human rights violations occur all over the middle east as basic conclusions of Islamic ideology throughout muslim populations, and that they are perpetrated not by extremists, but by mainstream Muslim thinkers who truly believe that adulterers, apostates, and gays should be stoned because Allah said so. I pointed out that Liberals, as humanists, generally, should criticize this idea in a safe environment wherever possible so that its absurdity is both noted and considered, instead of protecting it under the guise of freedom of religion. I proceed to state that freedom of speech should be above freedom of religion when freedom of religion allows for the violation of basic and inalienable human rights, such as the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. He said people are allowed to believe what they want. I said yes, but that doesn't make their beliefs right.

My brother than proceeded to spout off that I was making generalizations about the Muslim population (no I wasn't I was saying Islam is a dangerous ideology that can lead to bad outcomes,) that not all Muslims are bad (which I already know,) and that most Muslims don't believe what the data clearly shows most of them believe.

This is where I got furious and told him he was a fucking idiot. Thank you for denying the needless deaths of all of the people in the Middle East that didn't believe Islam was the truth. Thank you for denying that women don't get stoned to death in the Middle East all the time. Thank you for precipitating this extreme ignorance that all ideologies are equally valid.

I pointed out that Muslims recently wanted to overthrow the Queen of England and turn Buckingham Palace into a mosque. He said that if enough Muslims entered England, then democratically they would have the right to disintegrate the barrier between church and state, since they never made a constitutional separation between the two.

I told him if that happens I can't wait for him to see the results so I can tell him I fucking told you so.

I also told him I've never heard dumber fucking shit come out of his retarded mouth in my entire Goddamn life as I stormed out of the house (we're roommates. And all this time I didn't know he was a fucking moron.) I pointed out that he never reads or researches anything, to which he replied, I don't need to.

Now... here's my question. How the fuck did it become the norm for liberals to defend an ideology that is patently opposed to humanism, while denying Christianity any footing in the Western World at all?

Don't get me wrong I think they're both crazy ideologies that shouldn't be entertained. But how did this happen? Can someone please explain that to me? Is it because Liberals really like that whole 'but not all of them are like that' aspect of Islam, despite the fact that the ideology itself consistently leads to terrible outcomes?

Can someone please shed some light on this because right now I permanently think that my brother is actually the deepest form of intellectually dishonest and fucking moronic that can be conceived. I can't believe, for someone who believes so strongly in the right to a happy life for all, that he can engage in such cognitive dissonance.

Or perhaps maybe I'm in the wrong? I dunno.

[/endrant]

Sorry guys.

I think you are cherry picking a very small sample out of most liberals.

I am both a social and economic liberal, but hardly politically correct.

I've pissed off liberals being a liberal myself.

I am all for criticism of Islam and the Koran, but I am not for blanket solutions lumping billions of individuals and assume their guilt before they've done anything.

I do think it is heartless to want to ban a non violent person fleeing war, even with Mexico, it is heartless to want to deport non violent people who merely are trying to escape poverty and or crime.

I am not for an all out ban on Muslims that is just stupid and inhuman. I am for arresting violent people, but the same goes for people born in my country.

I blaspheme Islam too, but I also criticize Christianity and Jewish and Hindus and Buddhists.

Humans make up every religion, and there has never been in our species history a perfect religion with no competing sub sects. Every nation in history has had it's infighting and regional conflicts too.

I am for human rights. I am for protecting non violent individuals. But claims as ideas don't deserve blind value. So if you are running into someone who thinks censorship is always the way to keep the peace, no, I am not for that.

If all 7 billion humans had the ability to silence, arrest or murder others over things they don't like hearing, there is not one person in the world that cant think of things they'd rather not hear.

Civility isn't about never offending or never getting offended, civility is non violence in the way respond to getting offended.

You cannot force the world to like you or only say nice things about you. But at the same time even with protecting blasphemy, that is not licence to demagogue entire groups when the reality is a human is ultimately an individual and should be judged as such. You don't have to like what someone claims, and you can even offend their claims, but in the west, if they are not calling for violence or advocating violence then you don't assume they are guilty by proxy of label.

Islam's problem's in the middle east still don't justify our far right nuts in response. We have idiots who want to control the bodies of women here and want to use law to do it. We still have assholes making attempts to discriminate against LGBT and our far right treated Obama like he was a serial killer.

Point is, nobody should say it is wrong to criticize or blaspheme, but a non violent individual should deserve the same protections regardless of their origin.

If you only focus on one religion, and that tunnel vision gets to a big enough degree that society can potentially set itself up to become the very thing they claim to be fighting.

Famous quote, "Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it".

Poetry by Brian37(poems by an atheist) Also on Facebook as BrianJames Rational Poet and Twitter Brianrrs37
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Brian37's post
25-05-2017, 03:43 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 03:00 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  If I could clarify. I'm in no way angry at anyone here if I'm swearing a lot. I'm just angry at my brother. If I seem impassioned, he knows how to push my buttons at the right times. I swear I'll be calm soon.

But your use of terminology creates a problem. By singling out Islam as being somehow unique in producing violent extremists, you are inadvertently singling out all muslims and not merely the violent among them.

The violent among us are a product of their environment (I think we are all biologically predisposed to it given that we are animals like any other animal). So an entire region that is poor and uneducated that just so happens to be majority Muslim, produces a lot of violent extremists. Maybe the issue has much more to do with the complexities of socioeconomic issues and education than it does with a religious ideology. Meaning that by trying to simplify it down to "Islam is a bad ideology that leads to violence" you are grossly oversimplifying the problem.

A poor region of the world that is poorly educated, where the economies are highly dependent upon a non-renewable resource that is subject to boom and bust which can generate economic instability and uncertainty, produces a lot of violent conflict. And in addition to this, some (a minority) have taken this ignorance, fear, paranoia, and group-think mentality and molded it into terrorism by preying upon those people's religion.

Islam isn't the enemy any more than any other single religion is. Fear and ignorance and paranoia and poverty and those that use these to prey upon people, those are the problems. And if you choose to respond to fear with fear or violence with violence or paranoia with paranoia or ignorance with ignorance, you shouldn't be surprised to find yourself in a vicious and violent cycle where peace is never achieved.

So, why do liberals defend "Islam?" Because we've (humans) tried the violent methods for getting rid of the violent among us, and it doesn't work. So maybe it's a better idea to figure out a different approach. If things like ignorance and fear and paranoia and economic instability are contributing factors, how about we combat those things instead?

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
25-05-2017, 03:48 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
Probably there are other faiths that have people get calloused towards violence.

Really, you can't stop people following their faith, that always backfires.

All you can do is help integrate them with people who are not so calloused towards violence. After a couple of generations, the callousness will be disappearing.

There is no short term solution.

[Image: dobie.png]Science is the process we've designed to be responsible for generating our best guess as to what the fuck is going on. Girly Man
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Dom's post
25-05-2017, 03:58 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
Also worth pointing out is that you keep asserting that there are "statistics" that demonstrate that Islam is somehow more predisposed to creating or promoting violence than other ideologies, except that statistics can only (at best) show a correlation. Meaning that it might be true that in the modern world, most of the terrorist violence is produced by Islamic extremists (I don't know that this is true but I'll assume so for the moment), but that may be because the people and regions predisposed to being indoctrinated into the violent extremism just so happen to be in Muslim-rich countries. So the statistics don't show that Islam is necessarily more violent than any other ideology but that most (once again, I don't believe this is necessarily true but I'll assume it is for the moment) of the violent extremists happen to be Muslim. Could you (or anyone) honestly say that if you were to substitute Islam for any other religion or ideology in the Middle East that it would be any different? I can't say that because I don't believe it would be true. If the Middle East were dominated by Christianity (with all other circumstances remaining equal), I think you'd still have the same violent terroroists. Or Buddhism or Hinduism or whatever. Humans who feel backed into a corner will respond violently. So the key must be to get them to back slowly away from the corner, not pin them in and try to destroy them

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2017, 04:01 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 03:43 PM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  
(25-05-2017 03:00 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  If I could clarify. I'm in no way angry at anyone here if I'm swearing a lot. I'm just angry at my brother. If I seem impassioned, he knows how to push my buttons at the right times. I swear I'll be calm soon.

But your use of terminology creates a problem. By singling out Islam as being somehow unique in producing violent extremists, you are inadvertently singling out all muslims and not merely the violent among them.

The violent among us are a product of their environment (I think we are all biologically predisposed to it given that we are animals like any other animal). So an entire region that is poor and uneducated that just so happens to be majority Muslim, produces a lot of violent extremists. Maybe the issue has much more to do with the complexities of socioeconomic issues and education than it does with a religious ideology. Meaning that by trying to simplify it down to "Islam is a bad ideology that leads to violence" you are grossly oversimplifying the problem.

A poor region of the world that is poorly educated, where the economies are highly dependent upon a non-renewable resource that is subject to boom and bust which can generate economic instability and uncertainty, produces a lot of violent conflict. And in addition to this, some (a minority) have taken this ignorance, fear, paranoia, and group-think mentality and molded it into terrorism by preying upon those people's religion.

Islam isn't the enemy any more than any other single religion is. Fear and ignorance and paranoia and poverty and those that use these to prey upon people, those are the problems. And if you choose to respond to fear with fear or violence with violence or paranoia with paranoia or ignorance with ignorance, you shouldn't be surprised to find yourself in a vicious and violent cycle where peace is never achieved.

So, why do liberals defend "Islam?" Because we've (humans) tried the violent methods for getting rid of the violent among us, and it doesn't work. So maybe it's a better idea to figure out a different approach. If things like ignorance and fear and paranoia and economic instability are contributing factors, how about we combat those things instead?

Yes and no. It is wrong to lump billions of individuals into all being bad and assume they all think alike. But no, the Koran as well as the Hadiths DO contain justifications for political violence. But then again you look at Christian and Jewish history funny how they all stem from the tribal God of Abraham.

I think that is the real problem, none of the three want to face the fact that it really stems from a violent head character who wants blind loyalty and loves them losing their lives defending this cosmic narcissist.

The only difference between the west and the east to me, is that the west has had a longer history of keeping a leash on religion. There was a time when Christianity was as barbaric. Even in parts of Africa certain Christian sects get just as violent and some countries still arrest gays, even Russian Orthodox Christianity sill bans LGBT activism and locals sill often look the other way when gays are assaulted if they are not arrested.

The bible has been used to justify colonialism in India, America, it has been used to justify genocide of Native Americans and slavery, and lynchings denial of women voting.

But yea, it is still wrong while making a criticism of a religion to assume that every individual who follows it automatically believes the same thing the worst do. Our species behaviors are not in our labels but in our evolution. Not even the word "atheist" will magically make the person claiming that position non violent.

I agree though, selling fear of the other doesn't work. I think economic stability and education and good health care do decrease fear.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2017, 04:02 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 03:48 PM)Dom Wrote:  Probably there are other faiths that have people get calloused towards violence.

Really, you can't stop people following their faith, that always backfires.

All you can do is help integrate them with people who are not so calloused towards violence. After a couple of generations, the callousness will be disappearing.

There is no short term solution.

Not only is there no short term solution, there is no simple solution because it isn't a simple problem even though people want to make it into one (by saying things like Islam itself is the problem).

And I get it. If it were as simple as Islam being the problem, then at least the solution is simple and straightforward (not easy mind you). But to acknowledge that the problem isn't so simple, makes dealing with it much more complex. And people hate complex problems.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheBeardedDude's post
25-05-2017, 04:19 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
Quote:I think you are cherry picking a very small sample out of most liberals.

Lol. Come live in Canada and see if I'm cherry-picking.

Quote: am both a social and economic liberal, but hardly politically correct.

I've pissed off liberals being a liberal myself.

I am all for criticism of Islam and the Koran, but I am not for blanket solutions lumping billions of individuals and assume their guilt before they've done anything.

How is this the consistent leftist conflation? Dear Jesus. It's absolutely mind-boggling. This is always where they end up, even though you repeatedly state that you're not making blanket statements about people, just following stats.

I'm not talking about the people. I'm talking about the enlarged capacity this idea has to produce negative outcomes in comparison to other ideologies. Its propensity towards violence should be abundantly clear, regardless of the peaceful practitioners.

Quote:I do think it is heartless to want to ban a non violent person fleeing war, even with Mexico, it is heartless to want to deport non violent people who merely are trying to escape poverty and or crime.

Well of course, agreed. Just be ready as a refugee, for me to debate Islam's truthfulness if you should ever bring it up.

Quote:I am not for an all out ban on Muslims that is just stupid and inhuman. I am for arresting violent people, but the same goes for people born in my country.

I assume you are referring to Trump? I'm not for a muslim ban, just the right to let them know what they think is dumb.

I'm not politically correct enough not to if an ideology can lead to humans wanting to blow other people up. I'm disheartened that people are. Human life should be valued highly above mental comfort.

Quote:Humans make up every religion, and there has never been in our species history a perfect religion with no competing sub sects. Every nation in history has had it's infighting and regional conflicts too.

I am for human rights. I am for protecting non violent individuals. But claims as ideas don't deserve blind value. So if you are running into someone who thinks censorship is always the way to keep the peace, no, I am not for that.

Wow.

I believe having the right to tell someone what they think is false is the opposite of censorship in fact. If I can't scrutinize a belief system, that is censorship.

If they can prove to me what they believe is true, then by all means, I'm all ears.

Quote:But your use of terminology creates a problem. By singling out Islam as being somehow unique in producing violent extremists, you are inadvertently singling out all muslims and not merely the violent among them.

I am not singling it out. I am saying statistically its propensity to induce violent behaviour is much higher than other ideologies or systems of belief, regardless of the fact that there are peaceful adherents. The ideology itself is very dangerous in its ability to provoke violent behaviour in people.

Quote:The violent among us are a product of their environment (I think we are all biologically predisposed to it given that we are animals like any other animal). So an entire region that is poor and uneducated that just so happens to be majority Muslim, produces a lot of violent extremists

I think we may agree, but in different ways. I agree that violence is a product of the environment. I think a lack of scientific or historical education, no value placed on critical thinking skills, and a high value placed on religious precepts is a firestorm for violent behaviour under the banner of an omnipotent being.

Quote:Islam isn't the enemy any more than any other single religion is

I must, respectfully disagree, because the statistics say otherwise.

Quote:So, why do liberals defend "Islam?" Because we've (humans) tried the violent methods for getting rid of the violent among us, and it doesn't work. So maybe it's a better idea to figure out a different approach. If things like ignorance and fear and paranoia and economic instability are contributing factors, how about we combat those things instead?

Absolutely. All I'm talking about is scrutinizing a religion to the point of falsification. If you attempt to do this to a muslim population, the outcome is usually death, depending on how close you are to the middle east.

I feel like you are defending something which you haven't researched at all.

Quote:Also worth pointing out is that you keep asserting that there are "statistics" that demonstrate that Islam is somehow more predisposed to creating or promoting violence than other ideologies, except that statistics can only (at best) show a correlation. Meaning that it might be true that in the modern world, most of the terrorist violence is produced by Islamic extremists (I don't know that this is true but I'll assume so for the moment), but that may be because the people and regions predisposed to being indoctrinated into the violent extremism just so happen to be in Muslim-rich countries

Say that again... but slowly.

If you know what Sharia is, I just gave you polls that show how many Muslims in the Middle East believe it should be adhered to.

You do whatever you want with that data. If disregarding it is what you want to do, go for it.

Quote:So the statistics don't show that Islam is necessarily more violent than any other ideology but that most (once again, I don't believe this is necessarily true but I'll assume it is for the moment) of the violent extremists happen to be Muslim. Could you (or anyone) honestly say that if you were to substitute Islam for any other religion or ideology in the Middle East that it would be any different?

We don't have to because that is not the reality. I go by what I see. I see a religion that is vehemently opposed to human progress banging down an iron fist over the middle east. That is all. I'm relieved that some of the adherents are peaceful. I'm dismayed that some of them are not.

Quote:Probably there are other faiths that have people get calloused towards violence.

Really, you can't stop people following their faith, that always backfires.

All you can do is help integrate them with people who are not so calloused towards violence. After a couple of generations, the callousness will be disappearing.

There is no short term solution.

Sam Harris touched on that a bit, and I agreed with him in every way. The problem is that it seems incredibly difficult for humanism to gain a foothold in Muslim dominated countries. Just cuz humanists usually end up dead is all.

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
~ 6 ~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2017, 04:29 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 04:19 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  
Quote:I think you are cherry picking a very small sample out of most liberals.

Lol. Come live in Canada and see if I'm cherry-picking.

Quote: am both a social and economic liberal, but hardly politically correct.

I've pissed off liberals being a liberal myself.

I am all for criticism of Islam and the Koran, but I am not for blanket solutions lumping billions of individuals and assume their guilt before they've done anything.

How is this the consistent leftist conflation? Dear Jesus. It's absolutely mind-boggling. This is always where they end up, even though you repeatedly state that you're not making blanket statements about people, just following stats.

I'm not talking about the people. I'm talking about the enlarged capacity this idea has to produce negative outcomes in comparison to other ideologies. Its propensity towards violence should be abundantly clear, regardless of the peaceful practitioners.

Quote:I do think it is heartless to want to ban a non violent person fleeing war, even with Mexico, it is heartless to want to deport non violent people who merely are trying to escape poverty and or crime.

Well of course, agreed. Just be ready as a refugee, for me to debate Islam's truthfulness if you should ever bring it up.

Quote:I am not for an all out ban on Muslims that is just stupid and inhuman. I am for arresting violent people, but the same goes for people born in my country.

I assume you are referring to Trump? I'm not for a muslim ban, just the right to let them know what they think is dumb.

I'm not politically correct enough not to if an ideology can lead to humans wanting to blow other people up. I'm disheartened that people are. Human life should be valued highly above mental comfort.

Quote:Humans make up every religion, and there has never been in our species history a perfect religion with no competing sub sects. Every nation in history has had it's infighting and regional conflicts too.

I am for human rights. I am for protecting non violent individuals. But claims as ideas don't deserve blind value. So if you are running into someone who thinks censorship is always the way to keep the peace, no, I am not for that.

Wow.

I believe having the right to tell someone what they think is false is the opposite of censorship in fact. If I can't scrutinize a belief system, that is censorship.

If they can prove to me what they believe is true, then by all means, I'm all ears.

Quote:But your use of terminology creates a problem. By singling out Islam as being somehow unique in producing violent extremists, you are inadvertently singling out all muslims and not merely the violent among them.

I am not singling it out. I am saying statistically its propensity to induce violent behaviour is much higher than other ideologies or systems of belief, regardless of the fact that there are peaceful adherents. The ideology itself is very dangerous in its ability to provoke violent behaviour in people.

Quote:The violent among us are a product of their environment (I think we are all biologically predisposed to it given that we are animals like any other animal). So an entire region that is poor and uneducated that just so happens to be majority Muslim, produces a lot of violent extremists

I think we may agree, but in different ways. I agree that violence is a product of the environment. I think a lack of scientific or historical education, no value placed on critical thinking skills, and a high value placed on religious precepts is a firestorm for violent behaviour under the banner of an omnipotent being.

Quote:Islam isn't the enemy any more than any other single religion is

I must, respectfully disagree, because the statistics say otherwise.

Quote:So, why do liberals defend "Islam?" Because we've (humans) tried the violent methods for getting rid of the violent among us, and it doesn't work. So maybe it's a better idea to figure out a different approach. If things like ignorance and fear and paranoia and economic instability are contributing factors, how about we combat those things instead?

Absolutely. All I'm talking about is scrutinizing a religion to the point of falsification. If you attempt to do this to a muslim population, the outcome is usually death, depending on how close you are to the middle east.

I feel like you are defending something which you haven't researched at all.

Quote:Also worth pointing out is that you keep asserting that there are "statistics" that demonstrate that Islam is somehow more predisposed to creating or promoting violence than other ideologies, except that statistics can only (at best) show a correlation. Meaning that it might be true that in the modern world, most of the terrorist violence is produced by Islamic extremists (I don't know that this is true but I'll assume so for the moment), but that may be because the people and regions predisposed to being indoctrinated into the violent extremism just so happen to be in Muslim-rich countries

Say that again... but slowly.

If you know what Sharia is, I just gave you polls that show how many Muslims in the Middle East believe it should be adhered to.

You do whatever you want with that data. If disregarding it is what you want to do, go for it.

Quote:So the statistics don't show that Islam is necessarily more violent than any other ideology but that most (once again, I don't believe this is necessarily true but I'll assume it is for the moment) of the violent extremists happen to be Muslim. Could you (or anyone) honestly say that if you were to substitute Islam for any other religion or ideology in the Middle East that it would be any different?

We don't have to because that is not the reality. I go by what I see. I see a religion that is vehemently opposed to human progress banging down an iron fist over the middle east. That is all. I'm relieved that some of the adherents are peaceful. I'm dismayed that some of them are not.

Quote:Probably there are other faiths that have people get calloused towards violence.

Really, you can't stop people following their faith, that always backfires.

All you can do is help integrate them with people who are not so calloused towards violence. After a couple of generations, the callousness will be disappearing.

There is no short term solution.

Sam Harris touched on that a bit, and I agreed with him in every way. The problem is that it seems incredibly difficult for humanism to gain a foothold in Muslim dominated countries. Just cuz humanists usually end up dead is all.

I'm not going to give a detailed reply because I'll be repeating myself. But I will reiterate that you're confused about what statistics are and what they mean. You're erroneously drawing a causal relationship from a correlation while ignoring literally any other factors or explanations that provide a better causal explanation. For example, Islam isn't the only ideology to produce violent extremists, therefore violent extremism isn't unique to Islam. Meaning that when looking for any common factors between different violent extremist groups, you need to look beyond the superficial explanations. You're oversimplifying and misusing statistics.

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like TheBeardedDude's post
25-05-2017, 04:36 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
Quote:I'm not going to give a detailed reply because I'll be repeating myself. But I will reiterate that you've conflated what statistics are and what they mean. You're erroneously drawing a causal relationship from a correlation while ignoring literally any other factors or explanations that provide a better causal explanation.

Am I? I'm intrigued.

Quote:For example, Islam isn't the only ideology to produce violent extremists, therefore violent extremism isn't unique to Islam.

Okay I see where you're going with this.

Quote: Meaning that when looking for any common factors between different violent extremist groups, you need to look beyond the superficial explanations. You're oversimplifying and misusing statistics.

I actually don't because I'm looking at propensity to induce violence, which is significantly higher within the religion of Islam than other major religions.

You are ignoring the fact that Islam breeds more hate than other ideologies do, on a regular basis. I don't understand why you're doing this. You are attributing it to environmental factors, when environmental factors do not often cause people to kill each other over religious beliefs (i.e: 3rd world parts of Africa where Orthodoxy is practiced instead of Islam, yet where poverty is widespread, do not often have stoning of women, or rapes, or religious murders, or any of Islam's evil ilk,) since environmental factors are not religious.

My polls are specifically referring to Sharia. Why are you misconstruing them?

~ The Universe is under no obligation to make sense to you ~
-Neil Degrasse Tyson
[Image: stairway_to_heaven_by_tomtr.png]
~ 6 ~
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-05-2017, 04:40 PM
RE: Why Does the Far-Left Defend Islam?
(25-05-2017 04:36 PM)Cosmo Wrote:  
Quote:I'm not going to give a detailed reply because I'll be repeating myself. But I will reiterate that you've conflated what statistics are and what they mean. You're erroneously drawing a causal relationship from a correlation while ignoring literally any other factors or explanations that provide a better causal explanation.

Am I? I'm intrigued.

Quote:For example, Islam isn't the only ideology to produce violent extremists, therefore violent extremism isn't unique to Islam.

Okay I see where you're going with this.

Quote: Meaning that when looking for any common factors between different violent extremist groups, you need to look beyond the superficial explanations. You're oversimplifying and misusing statistics.

I actually don't because I'm looking at propensity to induce violence, which is significantly higher within the religion of Islam than other major religions.

You are ignoring the fact that Islam breeds more hate than other ideologies do, on a regular basis. I don't understand why you're doing this. You are attributing it to environmental factors, when environmental factors do not often cause people to kill each other over religious beliefs (i.e: 3rd world parts of Africa where Orthodoxy is practiced instead of Islam, yet where poverty is widespread, do not often have stoning of women, or rapes, or religious murders, or any of Islam's evil ilk,) since environmental factors are not religious.

My polls are specifically referring to Sharia. Why are you misconstruing them?

Show me the evidence that proves Islam "breeds more hate than other ideologies do." Because the statistics won't do that and can't do that because that's not how statistics work. Statistics are mathematical descriptions of data. They can show correlations but can't prove causation.

You're misusing statistics and as a consequence, you're drawing erroneous conclusions. So no, you don't understand what I'm saying or where I'm going

Being nice is something stupid people do to hedge their bets
-Rick
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: