IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Good counterpoint. But...
I don't think that we can tell 1 B+ people that they're doing it wrong when it comes to their faith. There are hundreds of millions of Muslims who have no problem living with us in the modern world. Do we let cancer define biology? Do we condemn every 16-25 year old male because some tiny fraction of them are monsters?

Our brains handle all sorts of contradictions in our heads simultaneously without each of us turning into murderous monsters.

More generally speaking, religion is a boat anchor around the neck of humanity. It turns normal people into judgemental hypocritical shits because it's based, for the most part, on books written by judgemental hypocritical assholes more than a thousand years ago. I notice that most Christians conveniently handwave away the fact that Jebus said "give away all your shit to the poor and do good works because money makes you an asshole" (paraphrasing Matt 19:21 and 6:19).


Agreed. In the greater scheme of things, I believe that is the case. As we know, in far too many cases, religious beliefs of representatives gets in the way of governments (the active body of all the people) helping to make society better. But religion also helps many people as well - far, far more than it turns into murderous monsters.

Now that we agree that religion is too often a problem, what are we going to do about it? Much of anything beyond gentle persuasion of adults seems to me to be highly problematic. There are politicians over here talking about monitoring of mosques, putting visible stickers on people, knee-jerk refusing refugees from war zones, and so forth. It's treating the wrong symptoms (natives of Belgium and France aren't Syrian refugees). We don't want some sort of "thought police" to go along with that. We (as a government) shouldn't be in the business of indoctrinating kids about religion, either, even if it is for the best of intentions. Why? Because you know that someone will decide to take that framework and twist it for their own political advantage. It's been a continuing battle here in the US since at least the early 1960s.

Keeping religious indoctrination (pro or anti) out of schools and government is the best policy.

It's all too tempting to point at an old book and say, "See, it says right there that rape is OK!!1". I've been guilty of picking-and-choosing horrible things like that in the past, myself. I try to stop myself from doing it these days. Context matters, religious tradition matters, and letting cultures have their own interpretation of what their culture means matters. It really doesn't matter what we, as outsiders, think their religious texts say and mean. It's not about us.

My $0.02.

Cheers,
Scott.
New It is about us . . .
. . when the book says we should all be killed - and a significant number believe that, and act on it to get their 71 virgins.
New EXACTLY
The whole point of ISIS is that Islam doesn't work like other religions when it comes to The Book: i.e. there's no interpretation or context or anything, the Koran is the exact literal holy word of god and it says what it says and that's that. You can go rooting through the hadith if you like, like a pig after truffles, but if the hadith and the Koran differ on a thing - well, the Koran wins every single time.

If you want to live in the UK and associate with women and drink and smoke and do all those things as a Muslim, of course you can, but you'll be a bad Muslim.

There's literally nothing to be gained by talking about the Christian bible as a counterpoint, because all the established churches (large and small) accept that it was written after the fact (in some cases, way after) and whilst it may have been as a result of divine inspiration, these are the words of human beans.
New Re: EXACTLY
The whole point of ISIS is that Islam doesn't work like other religions when it comes to The Book: i.e. there's no interpretation or context or anything, the Koran is the exact literal holy word of god and it says what it says and that's that.


No human language works that way. Every language has shades of meaning and different interpretations. Arabic, the language of the Quran, is no exception.

Reza Aslan:

The Quran itself states that its verses have multiple meanings, some of which are unfathomable to human beings and known only to God.

[...]

The inherent sacredness of the Quran has historically created an unusual problem for many Muslims. Since the end of the seventh century CE, when its verses were collected into a single, authoritative canon, the Quran has remained fixed in Arabic, the language in which it was originally revealed. It was believed that translating the Quran into any other language would violate the divine nature of the text. Translations were done, of course. But to this day, non-Arabic versions of the Quran are considered interpretations of the Quran. Unless the original Arabic verses are embedded on the page, it cannot technically be called a Quran.

The consequences of this belief are obvious. For much of the last 14 centuries, some 90 percent of the world's Muslims for whom Arabic is not a primary language had to depend on Islam's clergy—all of them men, as women are not allowed to enter the clergy—to define the meaning and message of the Quran for them, much as pre-Reformation Christians had to rely on priests to read them the Bible, which at the time was available only in Latin. That is now changing. Over the last century, the Quran has been translated into more languages than in the previous 14 centuries combined. A great many of these translations have been done not by Muslim clergy but by scholars and academics, by Muslim laity and non-Muslims, and, perhaps most significantly, by women. (The first English translation of the Quran by an American woman, Laleh Bakhtiar, was published in 2007.)

Arabic is a language whose words can have multiple, sometimes contradictory, meanings, so how one chooses to render a particular word from Arabic to English has a lot to do with one's biases or prejudice. Take the following example from Sura 4:34, which has long been interpreted as allowing husbands to beat their wives: "As for those women who might rebel against you, admonish them, abandon them in their beds, and strike them (adribuhunna)." The problem, as a number of female Quranic scholars have noted, is that adribuhunna can also mean "turn away from them." It can even mean "have sexual intercourse with them." Obviously, which definition the translator chooses will be colored by whatever his or her preconceived notions are about a husband's authority. The new crop of Quran translators are brushing aside centuries of traditionalist, male-dominated, and often misogynistic clerical interpretations in favor of a more contemporary, more individualized, and often more gender-friendly approach to the Quran. In the process, they are not only reshaping the way Islam's holy book is read; they are reinterpreting the way Islam itself is being understood in the modern world.


Even if a book hasn't changed in hundreds of years, its meaning can and most likely will.

FWIW.

Cheers,
Scott.
New What are we going to do about it?
Well, the answer is easy:

Educate people, make them prosperous, and give them a nice life.

As people's wealth and education level rises, their propensity for religion falls. It's almost as if people don't need an imaginary friend when their life is good.

(America is behind the curve on this compared to Europe, but it's happening)

Making this happen in the Middle East is an exercise left to the reader.
New Kinda sorta like...
The old saw:

Good / Cheap / Fast - Pick 2.

Yeah, people who are busy and have happy, fulfilling lives don't have the time or inclination to brood about becoming monsters and act upon those impulses. Getting from here to there isn't easy.

Of course, lots of monsters don't need religion to do the monstrous things they do. E.g. Adam Lanza, James Holmes, Seung-Hui Cho, Elliot Rodger, and on and on.

There was an interesting segment on the BBC this morning. The AK-47s that come out in events like these can be traced back to the Balkans wars and the drug trade. I can't find a BBC link, but this al Jazeera link cites the same sources, I believe. The takeaway is that this terrorism stuff is directly tied to organized crime like the drug trade. Changing the laws about drugs to make them less financially rewarding will do a lot to reduce the ability of international terrorists to carry out their plots. And maybe if we don't spend so much on the drug war, maybe we'd be able to get more humane treatment to people who need it so there's less domestic violence as well.

Cheers,
Scott.
New And, one very important point.
Get polygamy banned - everywhere. This is a major cause of the large numbers of dissatisfied young men easy to recruit for terorist activity, because they have no chance whatever of a satisfying family life.

The rich and powerful take so many of the women, there aren't enough left for regular guys. Even if they weren't forced, women have a strong attraction to the rich and powerful, and will often take the oportunity, unless polygamy is forbidden.

In the United States, those polygamous Mormon sects just throw most of the boys out of the community, but the U.S. is big enough to absorb them. This can't happen in Islamic countries.

Of course, it's written right into Islam, so it can't be banned in Islamic countries - that would be heresy against Islam (death penalty applies, as usual).

How can you get those 71 virgins if polygamy is banned.

-----------

Old Arab saying: "You can tell a fool by his two wives".

In Islamic countries, many a man has married a second wife to get the first one under control at home, but instead, they gang up on him - so he gets a third to try again.
New Too many football fans are jerks. Film at 11.
New Hey! I gave up the Battle Flag, they can give up Islam.
New You think wrong.
I don't think that we can tell 1 B+ people that they're doing it wrong when it comes to their faith.
Yes we can (heh...), since they are doing it wrong.

There are hundreds of millions of Muslims who have no problem living with us in the modern world.
But they don't seem to have any problem living with murderous jihadists laying claim to their faith either.

Yes, yes, you may quibble that some imams here and there are issuing statements condemning each new atrocity as it happens.

But if they really want to differentiate themselves from the murderous jihadists then it's on them themselves to get rid of the murderous jihadists. Namby-pamby condemnations are of no use.
--
Christian R. Conrad
Same old username (as above), but now on iki.fi

(Yeah, yeah, it redirects to the same old GMail... But just in case I ever want to change.)
     Not a word here on Paris . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (40)
         It's not the religion. - (static) - (31)
             What religion has ever been anything but a political movement? -NT - (mmoffitt)
             Oh no, it's not Islam, not at all! - (Andrew Grygus) - (29)
                 kurds are not followers of islam? News to me -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                     "Compared to the Unbeliever, the Kurd is a Muslim" - (Andrew Grygus)
                 It may not be. - (mmoffitt)
                 It's not religion. - (Another Scott) - (18)
                     You guys are talking like Daesh . . . - (Andrew Grygus) - (15)
                         Daesh is in the news. - (Another Scott) - (14)
                             That's whataboutery. - (pwhysall) - (13)
                                 Good counterpoint. But... - (Another Scott) - (10)
                                     It is about us . . . - (Andrew Grygus)
                                     EXACTLY - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                         Re: EXACTLY - (Another Scott)
                                     What are we going to do about it? - (pwhysall) - (2)
                                         Kinda sorta like... - (Another Scott)
                                         And, one very important point. - (Andrew Grygus)
                                     The turks don't seem to agree with you - (crazy) - (1)
                                         Too many football fans are jerks. Film at 11. -NT - (Another Scott)
                                     Hey! I gave up the Battle Flag, they can give up Islam. -NT - (mmoffitt)
                                     You think wrong. - (CRConrad)
                                 whataboutery, so you believe the earth is only 6 thousand years old? -NT - (boxley) - (1)
                                     Eh? - (pwhysall)
                     My amateur analysis - (drook) - (1)
                         That is an opinion I've also stated on this site. - (Andrew Grygus)
                 the meat of the matter - (rcareaga) - (1)
                     Talk about a broad brush! - (Andrew Grygus)
                 Yes and no. - (static) - (4)
                     Excellent! Thanks very much for the pointer. -NT - (Another Scott)
                     Very good! -NT - (a6l6e6x)
                     Gracias, Wade - (Ashton) - (1)
                         Waleed Aly is a very smart guy. - (static)
         Personally, ... - (Another Scott)
         So, I suppose all those Muslims drowning in the Med trying to get to Europe... - (a6l6e6x) - (4)
             There is actually a significant homegrown component - (scoenye) - (3)
                 Yep, Europeans are clanish and integration of immigrants is a problem. - (a6l6e6x) - (2)
                     Problem is, discrimination is protected - (scoenye) - (1)
                         :-( Thanks for the post. -NT - (Another Scott)
         not really muslims have been bombing paris since 1956 and france used to run syria - (boxley) - (1)
             France and Islam and recent history - (rcareaga)

That's pretty much epic-scale incomprehension.
419 ms