Opposing Islamic immigration is not intolerance. It is OPPOSING intolerance because Islam is currently the most intolerant form of government and religion on earth.

3  2017-07-08 by azzazaz

26 comments

Surely one should oppose islamism? Majid Nawaz makes good distinction between islam and Islamism. Basically islam is a private religion, islamism is anyone who wants to impose it over others

It is their religious duty to convert non Muslims. First peacefully if they are in the minority then by force if they are in the majority.

Firstly that assumes muslims are monolithic, there are those who are fine for others to have their own faith or lack thereof

Also can be a liberal like majid

Well, they are either ignorant of their own religion, lying, or really just non-practicing Muslims.

Literally all religions pick and choose what they listen to

Also majid is bloody well educated in Islam, far more than either of us

Literally all religions pick and choose what they listen to

Muslims choose to pick the beheading of infidels. That leads to problems. No other religion short of the Talmud teaches such violent actions towards people not of their religion.

Not all. Ignored my point.

Ah yeah, I remember all those times god didn't literally commit genocide in the old testament.

In practice religions happily support violence

The majority in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa do choose to implement beheadings and other violent teaches of their religion.

The Old Testament is Jewish. I have my opinions on Christianity and religion in general but for the most part Christians are peaceful and do not teach violence nor do they perpetrate violence.

I understand that, I'm saying it's not monolithic as a religion

Still the exact same God. Tell that to the crusaders, the bible belt who spawn the 'American Taliban' gleefully murdering abortion doctors.

Usually takes religion to make a good person into a monster

For the most part, Islam is a monolithic religion. All of the Abrahamic/Monotheistic religions believe in the same God. As for the crusaders they were sent down because of the Muslim invaders. It was defensive not offensive.

Abortion is murder. Not saying those people are justified but yeah. Also, how many cases of that have actually happened in modern time compared to the violence of Jews and Muslims?

Is Christianity a monolithic religion? No. Numerous different sects etc. Same with Islam.

Crusaders wanted to have a reconquest. If you're an apologist you could say it was defensive. Surely this Jewish violence is also defensive? They were there first. Nice hole you dug yourself. Also heard of the peasants crusade? Went through germany murdering jews and catholic priests who defended them

Thats your opinion to hold, but it's very much subjective so should be decided by the individual

All religions have the capacity to encourage a lot of violence, historically Christianity has been less tolerant than islam

Is Christianity a monolithic religion? No. Numerous different sects etc. Same with Islam.

Islam has two sects.

The rest of what you said is nonsense, so I will not even bother.

Firstly Islam has more than 2 sects. Also within those sects there are major differences.

Secondly explain why it's nonsense, if you cant I'll have to assume that you aren't able to adequately rebutt my points. Tell me what's wrong with each point I bring up

Firstly Islam has more than 2 sects

What are they? I'm all ears.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches

There you go, nice and easy to find.

Go on, explain why everything else was just wrong

Non-Mobile link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_schools_and_branches


HelperBot v1.1 /r/HelperBot_ I am a bot. Please message /u/swim1929 with any feedback and/or hate. Counter: 89289

What are they? I'm all ears.

The two main sects are Sunni and Shia but go ahead and say that I'm wrong about that and take another drink.

Did you forget about this? Or can you just not admit you are completely wrong?

Yup, nice summary. This is the truth and exactly what the Koran tells them to do.

Isn't it the duty of Christians to convert non-Christians? Should we be worried about them too?

Christians teach of conversion yes but through the peaceful act. If people do not want to convert the Christian has done their duty by at least trying to. It will be on the person they were trying to convert when judged by God.

Very relevant for r/conspiracy where some posters are often very careful/sneaky around Judaism and Zionism.

But really this is just bait from r/The_Donald. Where funnily enough they couldn't even talk about the above if they wanted to.

You're playing a game you can't win. As long as you try to justify your views as congruent with progressive values, you're not only constantly on defense but you're also legitimizing progressive ideology. Total tolerance for all ideas and peoples is not a positive thing and you know it, but you still struggle to admit to intolerance.

This is why Republicans and mainstream Western conservatives are so easy to make fun of and won't succeed in the culture war. They pay half-assed lip service to liberal values like equality and tolerance and then immediately push the government to treat different people differently. They won't just come out and say, "I am intolerant. I distinguish between groups and assign them individual values accordingly." They're timid and they're hypocrites.

You're playing a game you can't win. As long as you try to justify your views as congruent with progressive values, you're not only constantly on defense but you're also legitimizing progressive ideology. Total tolerance for all ideas and peoples is not a positive thing and you know it, but you still struggle to admit to intolerance.

This is why Republicans and mainstream Western conservatives are so easy to make fun of and won't succeed in the culture war. They pay half-assed lip service to liberal values like equality and tolerance and then immediately push the government to treat different people differently. They won't just come out and say, "I am intolerant. I distinguish between groups and assign them individual values accordingly." They're timid and they're hypocrites.

"I am intolerant. I distinguish between groups and assign them individual values accordingly."

I think i said that pretty clearly and explained why it wasnt intolerance to oppose those who are intolerant.

Dont get so stuck in labels. People dont follow or get inspired by labels . They following justice and what is right.

Firstly it's 'Mohamedism' not 'Islam' - translate/define properly.

Secondly only shit interpretations are so intolerant- better understanding provides kinder forms.

Thirdly, define opposition and intolerance- you're walking a fine line.

Lastly. There are idiots everywhere. Neither they or us are really clear of sight.

Firstly it's 'Mohamedism' not 'Islam' - translate/define properly.

Yeah...no.

Its islam.

Until there are roving gangs of moderate islam in the streets to protect people from extermists (like christians have done often in history) then I am going to call all muslims Islamosts and attribute the worst of islam to all of them until they prove me wrong.

Christians teach of conversion yes but through the peaceful act. If people do not want to convert the Christian has done their duty by at least trying to. It will be on the person they were trying to convert when judged by God.

Is Christianity a monolithic religion? No. Numerous different sects etc. Same with Islam.

Crusaders wanted to have a reconquest. If you're an apologist you could say it was defensive. Surely this Jewish violence is also defensive? They were there first. Nice hole you dug yourself. Also heard of the peasants crusade? Went through germany murdering jews and catholic priests who defended them

Thats your opinion to hold, but it's very much subjective so should be decided by the individual

All religions have the capacity to encourage a lot of violence, historically Christianity has been less tolerant than islam