Rising fascism in the US

I see a lot of comparison from all the respondents to this subject. We’ve talked pretty extensively about failures if the US in particular, other governments as well—and for good reason.

We should be able to analyze Islam without whataboutism.

If the boys wear what they want in your class (you must have a pretty diverse population in your area of Georgia) and dress immodestly then they are not really practicing their faith according to the Quran. They are supposed to dress modestly and lower their gaze.



talk to Islam

You can't single out one religion without comparing it to the beliefs and customs of other religions. In today's political climate it would simply feed into Islamophobia while serving little other purpose.

Many pages here are filled with criticism of the Christian religion with no comparison.

You are wrong again.

Most of my Muslim students were in California.
Muslim boys dressed like other boys; girls covered themselves. Period.

There is an oppressive double standard between girls and boys. It’s undeniable.

You know what they say about anecdotal evidence, it would seem to really apply in an anonymous forum such as A2k.

Tell me about the Muslim boys you’ve seen covered like the girls.

You predictably argue from your bias. You waste my time. I’ll be ignoring you.

So the only definition of sexism we're to use is yours? Don't you think the lack of a female head of state says something about sexist attitudes. If that was the sole criteria to apply, and you must admit it seems a pretty good criteria, America would lag behind quite a few Muslim countries in non sexist rankings.

You seem to making a lot of assumptions about Islam based on very limited experiences. Your chief assumption is that all Muslim women who wear the burka are doing so because a man told them too, because they're oppressed. That's just not true.

Your anecdote about watching Muslim students in California also makes assumptions. The boys dressed like Westerners, but all the girls were in burkas. Now all the girls you saw in burkas probably were Muslim, but how do you know that all the girls in western dress weren't? I live in a very multicultural part of Southampton. There are a lot of Muslims, I walked past the a mosque on my way back from the pub last night. I won't lie and say I've not seen women in burkas, but I've not seen a lot of them, about two a month if that. If all Muslim women worse burkas I'd be seeing them about six or seven times at least.

Most Muslim women, like Muslim men, dress like everyone else, in Southampton at least.

It was a very small, socio-economically challenged community where we all knew one another.

But, your larger point is at issue. If women are free to choose, lovely. What argument do I have against that? Although I believe all religion is bollocks, let people choose their lifestyle.

I just know that no healthy person chooses oppression; no woman should spend a life in a prison of hot fabric because her beauty is deemed by a religion to be inherently evil, and she is held to account to the point of death to protect men from it.

Islam should proclaim this to protect women from torture, murder, and a life of oppression.

I've seen men in malls or department stores beside women who were wearing a head covering and Arabic dress and men besides them who were wearing pants and shirts like described in Quran. But no I haven't claimed nor I have been around too many Muslims. Nor did I claim to have seen any. I provided the verse which desribed how men were dress in Quran. Any biasness has been on your part. You need to take a second look at yourself after your supposed metamorphosis into a progressive.



Ignore me all you like.

What about Sikhs? The women dress like everyone else but the men have to wear turbans and grow a beard. Are they being forced to hide their hair? Are they oppressed?



How do you envisage this happening? Is the Koran going to spout legs and start talking? How ridiculous would it be if someone said the same thing about Christianity? At with Christianity at least you've got the Pope one mouthpiece. Islam doesn't have that. The prophet saw how the church had coopted and controlled faith and he wanted none of it. God has no clergy, each Muslim is his own priest directly connected to God. What that means is there's a huge mass of differing Imams with different interpretations and so on.

And before you ask, shouldn't prominent Muslims condemn such things, well yes, and they have, but it just doesn't get reported.



What about pornography? Isn't that demeaning? And that is the response many Muslims, both men and women give when the burkha is criticised.

Criticising Islam instead of types of Islam plays right into the hands of Trump/Bush and the Saudi Princes. Wahhabism, the extreme form of Sunni Islam practiced in Saudi Arabia is what inspired IS, Al Qaida, the lot, so why don't we condemn that. We don't because it would single out Saudi Arabia, and Trump wouldn't want to do that. It suits the Saudis too, criticism of Islam can be put down to infidel bigotry and dismissed, unlike something more specific.

Meanwhile Saudi money sends Wahhabist literature to Western mosques all with the blessing of Western governments.

Actually, many people called upon Christian leaders to denounce the violence against abortion clinics and medical staff working in those clinics. Christianity has definitely taken its lumps, rightfully so.

I don’t like the double standard of heaping criticism on one religion and digging in as an apologist for others.

Why not judge all religions with the same measuring stick?

And please know that I denounce my country’s corrupt relationship with Saudi Arabia. I agree completely with your related sentiment.

Because when white people criticise Christians they're criticising their own. When they start criticising other religions with really broad brushstrokes they're inflating their own. Casting themselves as superior, you only have to read some of Gungasnake's posts to see that playing out.

It's imperialist thought, we know what's best for benighted Johnny Foreigner, so lets just issue blanket condemnation.

I'm sure lots of Germans thought criticism of the Jews in the 1930s was legit, especially after the Protocols of Zion did the rounds which isn't a lot different from the anti Muslim propaganda doing the rounds now.

I'm sure many do it today.
The deputy leader of Germany's far-right AfD party played down Nazi era as a 'bird ****' in German history today. I've always said that populist nationalism and anti-whatever often is badly hidden anti-Semitism.

Here's the thing. Women are universally oppressed in this world, and I hallow no sacred cows in defending my sisters globally, no matter what color their skin or god they misguidedly give their autonomy to.

So, I hear your argument, based on a concern that criticism of a brown religion may spark additional, unfair criticism. To that, I say stand up to that when it happens, but I'll never support censorship of truth because misguided people may use that as a springboard to bigotry.

Argue against bigotry when it happens.

You're an agnostic, if I recall accurately. Why fall on your sword for yet another wrong-headed religion that lends to oppression of women when you know the whole thing is bullshit? It's incongruous.

I see it as you see it, lash.

I really value people I respect dispassionately fleshing out their arguments about issues they care about.

I’m trying to be more thoughtful in my opinions and their delivery, and your participation is very helpful.

Thank you.

No you don't. All I've ever said is I'm not religious at all, and that's all I'll say. I value truth, Which is why I'll condemn something toxic like Wahhabism, but Islam is way too broad for such blanket condemnation.

If you are against women being told what to do by men then I'm with you. It's the singling out of one particular religion and making that the cause that's the problem, it's playing into the hands of the far right. We want tolerance and understanding not division and hate. If we want to help women in oppressive households we need to create an atmosphere where they feel comfortable in coming forward and seeking help.

Knowing how easily scared your cops are, you're probably right. But the question: why select cowards for police work?

Fire the knee-jerkers and hire rational, level-headed people. THEN change the protocols. Cowards can't remember rules under pressure anyway.

I've always kinda wondered why our military has different engagement rules than our police officers (and more strict ones).

From what I understand, the military cannot fire unless fired upon. Even if 10 guys are pointing guns right at them, they are not supposed to fire. They are supposed to deescalate the situation.

If that's wrong, then someone will correct me I'm sure, but if that's right, then wow our priorities are messed up.