Aron Eisenberg (Nog) suspended from Facebook over Holocaust photos

[Gov Kodos]

I'm for the Jewish people, I'm for free speech and I'm for all people Asia, Europe, S.America, Africa and the rights of Muslims but I am not for their muslim religious culture or the extremists from their religion.

So, you're only for free speech that agrees with you.

I'm for their humanity and support them as people but in a secular way.

Religious and secular isn't really an either or choice in regards to respect.

As a person I simply disrespect the islamic religion, I am strongly secular and I do not like their religious language and I do not agree with their religious culture...

Good thing, they don't need or require your respect, little as it would be worth.

I like to bastardize their words and other peoples deliberately even when educated do the same they use incorrect arabic, why? To make illegitimate or to severely degrade the quality of it.

There's delusions of grandeur. What you do has nothing to do with the legitimacy of Islam. Your actions and words do cast light on you, though.

I personally want to disrespect their religious terms by bastardizing their own words, if I'm in France I will try my best to use French terms, if I'm in Thailand I will do by best to fit in with Thai culture, if I'm in America or some English speaking place I will use their English language and why use an incorrect translated pleonasm, why would I be describing such things as "Sharia Laws" .

Pleonasm, irony indeed. There are descriptive words for folks who set out to deliberately disrespect people simply for their beliefs.

You see then that is my even stronger way of saying I don't want their extreme religious views and don't want their extreme religious culture I refuse to even use their descriptions.

That's an extremist viewpoint.

The cultures of Asia of Europe of Africa do it all the time, in order to preserve their own langauge they often refuse to adapt foreign terms in their own way and they also use bastardized versions of words.

That's not the way language or culture works.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

I don't think a religion per se is to blame, but how some people use it as an instrument to manipulate the masses. That's not just a problem in Islamic countries, but everywhere people are blinded by religion and lack of education (which most of the time goes hand in hand with that).

The bigger problem are the institutionalised misogyny, homophobia, and anti-Semitism that run rampant in horribly patriarchical countries such as Saudi Arabia etc. If the people there had better access to education and social mobility and were less indoctrinated by their leaders, then Islam itself would be just another religion nobody cares about instead of something that is used to keep millions of people poor and uneducated by less than 1% of the population. This is all about social injustice, not so much about religious faith. Look at how Christianity was only a few hundred years ago: an excuse to spread horror and genocide all over the bloody planet. It wasn't the theoretical religion's fault, but how it was wielded.

The "us vs them" mentality should be directed at questions of social injustice and the 1% vs the 99%, not different religious groups. We need to question our structures and not someone's faith.

 

[HIjol]

But not that "Shariah Law" is a pleonasm? "Shariah" means "Islamic Law" so "Shariah Law" translates to "Islamic Law Law." Few get it right, including most "journalists." If you must include the word 'law,' perhaps write "Islamic Law" to avoid the awkward use.

I'm a little surprised Gov Kodos didn't have a Pedantic Pet Peeve moment on this one.

Thanks...F-ing Apple spell correct and me not catching it.

Like Sahara Desert...means Desert Desert

 

[CorporalCaptain]

If the people there had better access to education and social mobility and were less indoctrinated by their leaders, then Islam itself would be just another religion nobody cares about

That doesn't make any sense. Your position seems to be extreme, all or nothing.

In aggregate, religiosity doesn't vanish with an increase in either education or wealth.

Said another way: no, most people would still be Muslim and care about Islam.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

What? I am one of the most moderate people on the planet. Please don't judge someone just because they offered an analysis you don't agree with. All or nothing? I said social injustice is the real scourge of humanity. That's kind of a fact. I also said that blaming an entire religion is ill-advised. How is that extreme? The more access to basic human rights and education people have, the greater their capacity to question their own position is. It's why we tell children to read books, isn't it? So they can empathise and put themselves in other people's shoes, so that they can learn to switch perspectives. Education is everything. It's the foundation of democracy. If people are kept from means of educating themselves, they lack the capacity to question and become victims of oppression via superstition. That's logic, not extremism.

People in Islamic countries are told to hate Jews, for example, but if I - a Jewish person - know that Muslims are not my enemy, but bigotry is, so I am not part of that vicious cycle anymore. I refuse to hate, and I think most people would, regardless of their religion or culture, if they were free to live and educate themselves and enjoyed basic human rights (such as freedom of speech and freedom of education). With more education and better chances at social mobility, people in Islamic countries would raise their middle fingers at all the so-called religious leaders and know that oppression is their enemy, not Christians and Jews.

 

[Abaddon]

I despise being reported on Facebook so much so that I deleted my account a month or so ago. I had a page with over 10k likes too. Screw Fb and their wack ass tos.
On subject though, 80 odd years later the attempted genocide is still whipping up heat no matter what your stand point.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Well, systematically murdering 6 million people tends to do that.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

What? I am one of the most moderate people on the planet. Please don't judge someone just because they offered an analysis you don't agree with. All or nothing? I said social injustice is the real scourge of humanity. That's kind of a fact. I also said that blaming an entire religion is ill-advised. How is that extreme? The more access to basic human rights and education people have, the greater their capacity to question their own position is. It's why we tell children to read books, isn't it? So they can empathise and put themselves in other people's shoes, so that they can learn to switch perspectives. Education is everything. It's the foundation of democracy. If people are kept from means of educating themselves, they lack the capacity to question and become victims of oppression via superstition. That's logic, not extremism.

People in Islamic countries are told to hate Jews, for example, but if I - a Jewish person - know that Muslims are not my enemy, but bigotry is, so I am not part of that vicious cycle anymore. I refuse to hate, and I think most people would, regardless of their religion or culture, if they were free to live and educate themselves and enjoyed basic human rights (such as freedom of speech and freedom of education). With more education and better chances at social mobility, people in Islamic countries would raise their middle fingers at all the so-called religious leaders and know that oppression is their enemy, not Christians and Jews.

I didn't characterize your post as advocating extremism.

What I said was that your contention that "Islam itself would be just another religion nobody cares about" is an extreme, all-or-nothing position that isn't supported by the evidence. It would not literally be nobody, or even a minority of people. People would still care about Islam. You make it sound like Islam would cease to be part of the fabric of peoples' lives, were they educated and empowered with social mobility. That's absurd. It's entirely possible, though, perhaps even likely, that people would become less conservative, but that does not translate into people ceasing to care about their religion.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

No, what I said was that all religions are - in and of themselves - not harmful if they're not wielded as a tool of oppression. "Nobody would care" means that people wouldn't give a damn who believes what, because whatever your faith is, it's not a problem if not instrumentalised. There's also a direct correlation between religious bigotry and lack of education, which is the bigger problem. That's what I said.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Well, if that's what you meant, then I would have put it another way. As you've clarified, your contention isn't that they wouldn't care about Islam, but that they wouldn't care whether others were Muslim. That's a big difference.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

I also didn't say that Muslims wouldn't care about Islam. Seriously, critical reading means not getting hung up on pedantic things that a person didn't even write, or two words out of a huge sentence. Those were my exact words: "If the people there had better access to education and social mobility and were less indoctrinated by their leaders, then Islam itself would be just another religion nobody cares about instead of something that is used to keep millions of people poor and uneducated by less than 1% of the population."

I clearly meant to say the following: education eliminates most of the basis for religious oppression.

That is the semantic content of my statement.

One more time: religion by itself is not a problem. Using religion to keep people small and ignorant is a problem. Solution: more social justice and access to education. Result: everybody can believe whatever they want and nobody will care, because it'll be your own personal faith instead of an instrument of oppression. Islam, Judaism, Christianity, whatever: they are not problematic as long as they are not used to subjugate and terrorise. You can use any ideology to do that, regardless of its name or cultural context or whether its a religious belief or not.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

I also didn't say that Muslims wouldn't care about Islam.

I get it that it's not what you meant, but you literally did say it. Doubling down won't change that.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

"Literally"? Do I have to quote the Princess Bride?

This has stopped going anywhere. I said my piece. I'm out.

 

[{ Emilia }]

I get it that it's not what you meant, but you literally did say it. Doubling down won't change that.

Eh, to be fair I read it the way he intended it to be read.

 

[atlantalliance]

Like Sahara Desert...means Desert Desert

Yes but once again it is my position to disrespect the Arabic religious language, I prefer to use Sahara Desert and use a bastardized version of their words and disrespect the muslim religious culture, I am not against these people, I am for them, I am for their human rights but I am against their religous belief system just as you can speak against Communism, speak against Fascism, speak against the Cult of Jim Jones that is what I speak against the idea not the person. I am secular and I will continue speaking against Islamic culture. In the area there were many peoples Phoenician, Greek, Romans, Berber, Numidia, Christians and Egyptians all lived in the region before the violent arrival of Islam, not using Islamic and Arabic religious terms is sometimes my and other peoples way of resisting it. I like to bastardize their words and other peoples deliberately even when educated do the same they use incorrect arabic, why? To make illegitimate or to severely degrade the quality of it. Cultures of Asia of Europe of Africa do it all the time, in order to preserve their own langauge they often refuse to adapt foreign terms in their own way and they also use bastardized versions of words.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Sir (or ma'am) you cannot claim to support an individual's human rights while simultaneously refusing to respect the language they speak, the beliefs they hold dear, and their right to live in peace in the country of their choice.

 

[atlantalliance]

People in Islamic countries are told to hate Jews, for example, but if I - a Jewish person - know that Muslims are not my enemy, but bigotry is, so I am not part of that vicious cycle anymore.

I don't know if they are told so much by say Saudi propaganda, Hezbollah instruction or propaganda from say a news channel like Presstv Iran, unfortunately I think most of the anger can be traced to its root, the religion.

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, “Kill any Jew who falls under your power.” Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad’s men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Koran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost."


I am for all people, I support the human rights of all nations on this planet but I am against the religions that divide us

Sir (or ma'am) you cannot claim to support an individual's human rights while simultaneously refusing to respect the language they speak, the beliefs they hold dear, and their right to live in peace in the country of their choice.

I think many people at first, simply do not get my position or see it as 'racist' or something, I don't know why many it takes a long while before people get me mayb its because you see the secular movement has yet to take root in America...if you spoke to a secular Buddhist, a secular Jew or secular Christian or spoke with apostates, ex-muslims, atheists and agnostics you might get my position.
I support seperation of Church and State, meaning these people have a right to believe whatever Gods or God they want to believe in privately, they have freedom of religion, freedom of choice, freedom of thought, freedom of speech I do not however support the spread of these religions

 

[JWPlatt]

I clearly meant to say the following: education eliminates most of the basis for religious oppression.

Good summary, but you are not getting to the basics; education is not at the root of it. The empowerment of women and reproductive control invariable raises the standard of living for all. Education, among other things, follows in the chain of consequences.

 

[{ Emilia }]

@atlantalliance
You do realize it's easy enough to also quote hateful and violent parts of the Bible, right?

Considering the vast majority of Muslims is not out to fight a Jihad it's fairly safe to say that your post is a bit intellectually lazy.

I think many people at first, simply do not get my position or see it as 'racist' or something, I don't know why many it takes a long while before people get me mayb its because you see the secular movement has yet to take root in America.

I'm an atheist European who is very familiar with our secular tradition and laïcité and I can easily see the racism in your posts, too. So it must be something else at work there.

 

[Gov Kodos]

I don't know if they are told so much by say Saudi propaganda, Hezbollah instruction or propaganda from say a news channel like Presstv Iran, unfortunately I think most of the anger can be traced to its root, the religion.

Tabari 7:97 The morning after the murder of Ashraf, the Prophet declared, “Kill any Jew who falls under your power.” Ashraf was a poet, killed by Muhammad’s men because he insulted Islam. Here, Muhammad widens the scope of his orders to kill. An innocent Jewish businessman was then slain by his Muslim partner, merely for being non-Muslim.

Bukhari (52:177) - Allah's Apostle said, "The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him."

Quran (17:16) - "And when We wish to destroy a town, We send Our commandment to the people of it who lead easy lives, but they transgress therein; thus the word proves true against it, so We destroy it with utter destruction."

Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 484: - “Allah said, ‘A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.’”

Koran (47:3-4) - "Those who disbelieve follow falsehood, while those who believe follow the truth from their Lord... So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives)... If it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost."

There's plenty to cherry pick in the Bible, the Eddas, Harry Potter, basically, any text.

I am for all people, I support the human rights of all nations on this planet but I am against the religions that divide us

This is self-contradictory. You're denying Muslims their own freedom of thought and conscience.

I think many people at first, simply do not get my position or see it as 'racist' or something,

Stop saying bigoted things, then.

I don't know why many it takes a long while before people get me mayb its because you see the secular movement has yet to take root in America...if you spoke to a secular Buddhist, a secular Jew or secular Christian or spoke with apostates, ex-muslims, atheists and agnostics you might get my position.

Would these folks be espousing balderdash like you've been doing?

I support seperation of Church and State, meaning these people have a right to believe whatever Gods or God they want to believe in privately, they have freedom of religion, freedom of choice, freedom of thought, freedom of speech I do not however support the spread of these religions

Ah, there it is. You don't really support freedom of thought except your own version of it.