Muslims a Are Creating Nations Within Nations

[Luiz 4,253]

3 hours ago, Redstreak said:

It's like asking why are there simply simply eye rolls and head shakes towards Kevin Ham. Some people are just beyond reproach, expending the energy to "debate" them is just pointless

 i would love to see someone debate him as well in fact i think its needed. billl nye did it didnt he?  if you let them keep spouting bullshit then their believers will never get to hear their opinions challenged. no matter how ridiculous the opinion i think its always good to present them with the opposing view or else we just have given up on people. 

 

you see i'm far too unintelligent to dismantle his points and I as a stupid person rely on those smarter than me to show why someone may be wrong so i'm not just left in confusion without having the capabilities to challenge the opinion myself. 

 

so until someone breaks down why opinions like ben shapiro's are incorrect, i will be left to assume he might be right.  

[ryanripley 86,575]

3 hours ago, Luiz said:

when ben shapiro is posted all i ever see in response are head shakes or eye rolls but never any actual arguments against his points  interesting

same sis 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

22 minutes ago, Luiz said:

so until someone breaks down why opinions like ben shapiro's are incorrect, i will be left to assume he might be right.  

Did someone call my name? This is why I post so much on the forums.  

Gimme a few and I'll dismantle it for you.

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

45 minutes ago, Luiz said:

 so until someone breaks down why opinions like ben shapiro's are incorrect, i will be left to assume he might be right.  

There's a lot of polling and statistics in this video. Who conducted them? What were the questions? What was the context?

Now even if we were to assume that they were all correct, the topics per country he chose were quite arbitrary. It's also interesting how he quoted the entire populations as radical based on a single issue. If you want to call the entire population "radical muslims" based on a single topic, then you at least need to have a consistent topic regarding radicalism. 

I noted that he used Sharia law a lot. First of all, Sharia law in itself is not extremist. It simply means religious. or rather Islamic, law. What's interesting is that the implementations of Sharia law is more or less determined on a per country basis. There is no consistency among them. So the interpretation of what constitutes Sharia law per country is different enough to warrant further scrutiny. Some people think it only applies to moral issues. Other attribute it to economic. Most extremists view it as military justification, nothing more nothing less. 

Now it's true that wanting to impose that law on non-Muslims is justifiably extremist, but the law itself being imposed on Muslims themselves is more of a cultural issue than a religious one. Practically speaking, it's already happening. In practice it still happens in advanced countries such as the USA...Religious freedom bills ring a bell?

Consider the fact that most (if not all) of the nations quoted are from the developing world. Note that their ideas of secularism do not correspond to those of the West. You can't judge the two by the same yardstick. It's unfair.

---

If anyone in GGD wants the Muslim community to be more active in combating their extremist brethren it's me, but painting them all as extremists due to arbitrary stances is a little excessive.

Ben Shapiro is known to have a bias against Muslims. I would not put much credit into his words when it comes to this particular topic. He's picking and choosing to make a point, while relying on overwhelming the viewer with a lot of questionable statistics.

[lego 44,165]

24 minutes ago, Luiz said:

 i would love to see someone debate him as well in fact i think its needed. billl nye did it didnt he?  if you let them keep spouting bullshit then their believers will never get to hear their opinions challenged. no matter how ridiculous the opinion i think its always good to present them with the opposing view or else we just have given up on people. 

 

you see i'm far too unintelligent to dismantle his points and I as a stupid person rely on those smarter than me to show why someone may be wrong so i'm not just left in confusion without having the cpabilities to challenge the opinion myself. 

 

so until someone breaks down why opinions like ben shapiro's are incorrect, i will be left to assume he might be right.  

 

That says a lot about you, doesn't it.

Do you need someone to debate with every fascist on youtube, so you wouldn't assume they're right about something?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/02/goldberg-breitbarts-ben-shapiro-fascist-157448

Did you also need someone to debate and break down these videos and his talking points before being left to assume that he's right?

 

 

 

 

Damn, is Gaga actually a liar because no one ever debated these issues with Ben Shapiro on college rape.

 

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

12 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

*snip*

 

The person is misinformed. No need to be mean-spirited about it. 

[lego 44,165]

42 minutes ago, ryanripley said:

same sis 

 

here's the refutation of that video

 

"Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro jumped in to say the nature of Islam is irrelevant. More important, according to Shapiro, is what its followers believe, "because that’s what they act upon." Through this lens, Shapiro painted a disturbing picture of the religious wellspring for people who fly planes into towers and behead their prisoners. Shapiro is an editor-at-large with the conservative website Breitbart.com and cofounded a conservative media analysis group,TruthRevolt.

...

Shapiro spoke with great self-assurance, but as we looked at his claim that most Muslims are radicals, we were left scratching our heads. In the first place, Shapiro consistently used the highest percentages available in the surveys to maximize the number of Muslims he could tag with the "radical" label. Secondly, he used a broad definition of radical. To choose one main example, there are many varieties of how people interpret Sharia law and support for it says little about a person’s specific beliefs.

Other numbers tell a different story

Shapiro cited the work of the Pew Research Center in some of his analysis and much of our work relies on the same source. We tried to reach Shapiro and were unsuccessful.

In about half of the countries he assessed, Shapiro focused on support for Sharia law. According to theCouncil on Foreign Relations, "Sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings." It is a moral code that covers marriage, crime and business. Different branches of Islam use different versions of the law. Some elements are widely accepted, such as the immorality of fraud. But for countries and sects that follow the harshest versions in which thieves have their hands cut off and unfaithful women are stoned to death, the opposition from the West, and parts of the Muslim world as well, is strong and visceral.

For Shapiro, support for any form of Sharia law means one thing -- the believer is a radical. 

...

Sharia ≠ radical    

Given that Shapiro used support for Sharia law in 7 of the 15 countries as a marker for radicalism, we should note that the experts we reached urged a more cautious approach. Pew found that when you ask Muslims about specific elements in Sharia law, support shifts.

According to James Bell, director of International Survey Research at Pew, many Muslims will say they want religious judges deciding family or property disputes. But ask them about corporal punishments for criminals or the death penalty for apostates, and support drops off considerably.

"The key takeaway is that Muslims differ in what they mean by Sharia and how they want it applied," Bell said.

...

Shapiro said that a majority of Muslims are radicals. To make his numbers work, he had to cherry-pick certain results from public opinion surveys. Given the choice between two possible percentages, he chose the higher one. Shapiro also relied heavily on the idea that anyone who supported sharia law is a radical.

Some of the best polling work shows that Muslim beliefs are much more nuanced. Some countries where high percentages of Muslims support Sharia law show low support for suicide attacks on civilians. Large fractions of Muslims that endorse sharia law do not want it imposed on others. The meaning of Sharia law varies from sect to sect and nation to nation.

Shapiro’s definition of radical is so thin as to be practically meaningless and so too are the numbers he brings to bear.

We rate the claim False." 

 

read in FULL

 

 

[Luiz 4,253]

6 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

There's a lot of polling and statistics in this video. Who conducted them? What were the questions? What was the context?

Now even if we were to assume that they were all correct, the topics he chose were arbitrary per country. It's also interesting how he quoted the entire populations as radical based on a single issue. If you want to call the entire population "radical muslims" based on a single topic, then you at least need to have a consistent topic regarding radicalism. I would think a good question would be.

I noted that he used Sharia law a lot. First of all, Sharia law in itself is not extremist. It simply means religious. or rather Islamic, law. What's interesting is that the implementations of Sharia law is more or less determined on a per country basis. There is no consistency among them. So the interpretation of what constitutes Sharia law per country is different enough to warrant further scrutiny. Some people think it only applies to moral issues. Other attribute it to economic. etc...

Now it's true that wanting to impose that law on non-Muslims can be seen as extremist, but the law itself being imposed on Muslims themselves is more of a cultural issue than a religious one. Practically speaking, it's already happening. In practice it still happens in advanced countries such as the USA...Religious freedom bills ring a bell?

Consider the fact that most (if not all) of the nations quoted are from the developing world. Note that their ideas of secularism do not correspond to those of the West. You can't judge the two by the same yardstick. It's unfair.

---

If anyone in GGD wants the Muslim community to be more active in combating their extremist brethren it's me, but painting them all as extremists due to arbitrary stances is a little excessive.

well i see those statistics everywhere including wiki (  not saying wiki is infallible) but i've never seen statistics that counter it from an unbiased source. 

 

i'd say "radical" is the incorrect term. fundamentalist is better. no matter what country's version of shariah is i'd still dislike it i'm pretty sure

 

the religious freedom bill imo pales in comparison to a place like saudi arabia and even though that bill passed there is overwhelming opposition to it in the US.

 

and yes they are different than the west but his video wasnt about only western muslims, it was about muslims as a whole in the world and the majority are in developing countries. except indonesia, is indonesia considered developing? i dont even know rn  . 

the way i see it, the thing that is most wrong in the vid is labeling them radicals because that induces fear in whoever watches it. but the thing is that what you determine to be radical or fundamentalist is up to the speaker. some people today would declare anyone who is a fundamentalist of any religion to be someone who is "radical" about their religion. westboro christians could be considered radical for their beliefs to some (especially here on a majority gay forum) but i'd just call them fundamentalists. 

it is when they act on their beliefs like actually murdering gays is when i call them radical but everyone has their own thing.

rad·i·cal

ˈradək(ə)l/

adjective

1.

(especially of change or action) relating to or affecting the fundamental nature of something; far-reaching or thorough.

"a radical overhaul of the existing regulatory framework"

synonyms:thoroughgoing, thorough, complete, total, comprehensive, exhaustive, sweeping, far-reaching, wide-ranging, extensive, across the board, profound, major, stringent,rigorous

"radical reform"

2.

advocating or based on thorough or complete political or social reform; representing or supporting an extreme section of a political party.

"a radical American activist"

synonyms:revolutionary, progressive, reformist, revisionist, progressivist; More

 

dictionary definition might be used to justify someone wanting to reform the government to adhere to shariah law as radical but i'd just have to disagree with it and call it fundamentalist   since like you said not every form of shariah is the same. 

btw could you direct me toward the country with the least offensive verison of shariah law? like, a country that goes by shariah that i could use as an example of how shariah isnt all that horrible or that could sort of coexist with the west without westerners thinking its some diabolical muslim agenda?

 

 

 

[Economy 52,851]

23 hours ago, PaperIz said:

Sounds like every religion tbh. They just actually follow through with their strict guidelines. At my baptist church we were always taught to live separate lives from "the world"  

This. They actually follow thru

 

the catholic church totally compromises these days for what the masses want.

[teo 609]

More than half want to ban homosexuality?!

[LebaneseDude 6,146]

8 minutes ago, Luiz said:

*snip*

There's nothing inherently extremist about being a fundamentalist, especially when the majority of the population already follows the same identity that the fundamentalism entails.

These people want to have Sharia law on their own countries because they are Muslim.

They do not seek to impose it on another nations, as extremist terrorists do.

See the difference?

----

If you want some more information about sharia law and its implementation, wikipedia has a good table in place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country

----

Note that I do not personally support Sharia law, but this is an academic conversation regarding the correlation between wanting to have Sharia law and being an extremist. The two aren't equivalent.

 

[Economy 52,851]

23 hours ago, MJHolland said:

Scary. I've seen many documentaries capturing the self-segregated world of Muslims in the UK. No assimilation whatsoever. 

Here in Canada we dont seem to have that issue, at least in the GTA

 

Our cultures are so diverse (Toronto ranks most multicultural city in the world) that theres really no such thing as minority. Even the most common ethenicities are pretty low

 

everyone just respects eachothers opinions even if they dont agree. We dont have as much debate as the US for example over LGBT rights even within our immigration population that doesnt agree with it.

 

I do notice little clusters tho. Like some areas of some cities have far more of some ethenicities than others. That we still deal with

[ryanripley 86,575]

10 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

 

here's the refutation of that video

 

"Conservative pundit Ben Shapiro jumped in to say the nature of Islam is irrelevant. More important, according to Shapiro, is what its followers believe, "because that’s what they act upon." Through this lens, Shapiro painted a disturbing picture of the religious wellspring for people who fly planes into towers and behead their prisoners. Shapiro is an editor-at-large with the conservative website Breitbart.com and cofounded a conservative media analysis group,TruthRevolt.

...

Shapiro spoke with great self-assurance, but as we looked at his claim that most Muslims are radicals, we were left scratching our heads. In the first place, Shapiro consistently used the highest percentages available in the surveys to maximize the number of Muslims he could tag with the "radical" label. Secondly, he used a broad definition of radical. To choose one main example, there are many varieties of how people interpret Sharia law and support for it says little about a person’s specific beliefs.

Other numbers tell a different story

Shapiro cited the work of the Pew Research Center in some of his analysis and much of our work relies on the same source. We tried to reach Shapiro and were unsuccessful.

In about half of the countries he assessed, Shapiro focused on support for Sharia law. According to theCouncil on Foreign Relations, "Sharia guides all aspects of Muslim life, including daily routines, familial and religious obligations, and financial dealings." It is a moral code that covers marriage, crime and business. Different branches of Islam use different versions of the law. Some elements are widely accepted, such as the immorality of fraud. But for countries and sects that follow the harshest versions in which thieves have their hands cut off and unfaithful women are stoned to death, the opposition from the West, and parts of the Muslim world as well, is strong and visceral.

For Shapiro, support for any form of Sharia law means one thing -- the believer is a radical. 

...

Sharia ≠ radical    

Given that Shapiro used support for Sharia law in 7 of the 15 countries as a marker for radicalism, we should note that the experts we reached urged a more cautious approach. Pew found that when you ask Muslims about specific elements in Sharia law, support shifts.

According to James Bell, director of International Survey Research at Pew, many Muslims will say they want religious judges deciding family or property disputes. But ask them about corporal punishments for criminals or the death penalty for apostates, and support drops off considerably.

"The key takeaway is that Muslims differ in what they mean by Sharia and how they want it applied," Bell said.

...

Shapiro said that a majority of Muslims are radicals. To make his numbers work, he had to cherry-pick certain results from public opinion surveys. Given the choice between two possible percentages, he chose the higher one. Shapiro also relied heavily on the idea that anyone who supported sharia law is a radical.

Some of the best polling work shows that Muslim beliefs are much more nuanced. Some countries where high percentages of Muslims support Sharia law show low support for suicide attacks on civilians. Large fractions of Muslims that endorse sharia law do not want it imposed on others. The meaning of Sharia law varies from sect to sect and nation to nation.

Shapiro’s definition of radical is so thin as to be practically meaningless and so too are the numbers he brings to bear.

We rate the claim False." 

 

read in FULL

 

 

i'm not really on GGD to debate sis so i'll accept your opinion as truth for now however i'll still remain intolerant of religion, especially islam 

[Luiz 4,253]

25 minutes ago, YourSweet666 said:

 

That says a lot about you, doesn't it.

Do you need someone to debate with every fascist on youtube, so you wouldn't assume they're right about something?

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2013/02/goldberg-breitbarts-ben-shapiro-fascist-157448

Did you also need someone to debate and break down these videos and his talking points before being left to assume that he's right?

 

 

 

 

Damn, is Gaga actually a liar because no one ever debated these issues with Ben Shapiro on college rape.

 

it says what?  that i admit to my flaws?

and i said "Might be right" doesnt mean i just believe everything people say in youtube videos  jeez 

i've seen the gay marriage vid before and i of course disagree with him  mainly on the point of it affecting the education system which was his big beef with gay marriage. i think its right to teach kids about gay marriage just to make it so kids dont grow up with an uninformed view of homosexuality that leads to an aversion to it.

 

never seen this trans video before but i dont even think i've ever seen enough scientific research on transgender people and what it is or why it happens in order for me to actually have a valid opinion. i cant really say i agree or disagree with anyone on that issue

oh and black lives matter  i dont have any statistics in front of me rn to disprove it but i feel like he's wrong. i did a while back though post about how BLM needs to use their power to have an impact on gang violence which kills more black people than cops do  and in that video he talks about the racism of the past that has created the bad situation today which is what i always say.  that vid is like half i agree with and half i dont agree 

the college rape statistics have always seemed fishy since people always talk about how the questions that produced that statistic were vague as to what actually is rape. 

 

anyways. my main point was that just because you dont like someone's opinion doesnt mean you should ignore it and expect those who might believe everything they say to just somehow have an epiphany and come over to your way of thinking. people will remain stuck in their ways unless you push them a little and move them in the right direction. unless there are people willing to push for progress we will remain stagnate 

[Luiz 4,253]

11 minutes ago, LebaneseDude said:

There's nothing inherently extremist about being a fundamentalist, especially when the majority of the population already follows the same identity that the fundamentalism entails.

These people want to have Sharia law on their own countries because they are Muslim.

They do not seek to impose it on another nations, as extremist terrorists do.

See the difference?

----

If you want some more information about sharia law and its implementation, wikipedia has a good table in place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_of_sharia_law_by_country

----

Note that I do not personally support Sharia law, but this is an academic conversation regarding the correlation between wanting to have Sharia law and being an extremist. The two aren't equivalent.

 

yes but he also mentioned that a double digit percentage of muslims in european countries like france would like to see the country turn to shariah. by definition i could see how you can label them as radical and the fact that the number percentage of those who agree with shariah is so high, it can be scary to people who live in that country. 

all i am saying really is that i understand the fear people might have of fundamentalist islam as i also have that fear of fundamentalist christians. like the ****ers who want to take abortions away or the republican candidates who use religion to gain support for wars and other bullshit like bush did with this "gods on our side" nonsense to win hearts and minds to attack another country. but of course there is the separation of church and state here that saves us from the psychos in the south who would make it worse than it is here.