Blanket generalizations are often the refuge of the intellectually lazy, the uninformed, and the bigoted.
2 Likes
All Religion BADâŚ
One more thing⌠my Jesus forgives you and your Jesus for all your sinsâŚ
1 Like
Yes, Uganda and Russia arenât suffering under the influence of Islam and yet they can find all sorts of hateful things in Christianity to justify doing what they want to do.
militant atheist� hmmm.?
I am stunned with what Ben and his group and a lot of commentator here seem to be willfully missing or ignoring about what Bill Maher is arguing. They were not equating ISIL and Islam, they are saying that a large portion of Islam outside of extremists still hold views that liberals should be against. They repeatedly excluded ISIL and Islamists, while the other side kept misstating that they are equating extremists and Muslim at large.
Truth is for whatever reason majority of Christians around the world do not believe you should be killed if you renounce Christianity, nor do they believe women are punished for rape and adultry by being jailed, nor do they think homosexuals should be killed. If the polls and statistics support the fact that most non âextremistâ muslims still believe in these practices why is it wrong to say Liberals should not be defending Islam?â
BTW I agree with this argument as an atheist. I do not agree with Christianity either, but it is false to equate the destructiveness of these two religions just because some people are bigoted against Islam. I think Liberals and rationalists can call out both groups for their failures.
Islamic extremist are a lot like Christian Republican extremistâŚ
extremeâŚ
1 Like
I donât like Affleck to begin with - he certainly has a problem with LISTENING!
For me this was a wonderfully robust, articulate and informative segment. Bill Maher deserves for debating this important and complex issue and all of it facets. It spans two distinct and very important human and democratic imperatives - tolerance and reason. I am sure that this debate will prove very important.
The right wing conservatives have an analog of this problem that they get very very wrong on both sides. For the conservative it is the debate between the power of organized religious fundamentalist and racially prejudiced conservatives and âAyn Randianâ conservative libertarianism.
Speaking of messengers. I thought that Ben Affleck was impassioned but his arguments were based on the mores of political correctness and to promote his new movie to the widest audience possible. Sam Harris was incredibly articulate and well reasoned. I was ambivalent when I began to listen but he convinced me.
Seems to me that the NON-Muslims are the only people having discussions like this. FOR years now. And I donât see what good it does if theyâre not willing to speak-out more. If they are, weâre not hearing them. BUT then actions DO speak louder than words.
I think there was no effort to suggest that jihadis were at the center of Islam or whether or not they should be the bullseye of Islam. Even the discussion of whether jihad is a core Islamic value is erroneous. Sam Harris was simply using the fact that in a system of concentric circles, the central circle is small. He was suggesting a nested series of mathematical subsets each a little different from and bigger than the other but part of a whole, which in this case is Islam. It is a good intuitive model for reasoning.
This is where I claim foul. When have you been exposed to moderate Muslims? When has a show featured them? One of the guests pointed out all the condemnation that had been laid at ISILâs feet from Islamic leaders. Just because you havenât been exposed to them doesnât mean they donât exist.
p.s. on the side, I didnât expect my neighbor, a conservative Christian, to apologize for Fred Phelps or any abortion clinic bombings, even though I know they are prolife.
3 Likes
Thanks for posting the Reza Aslan clip. Voices of reason are needed, not hysteria. Bill Maher believes he is a liberal thinker, but he is closer to a reactionary.
5 Likes
Affleck is a bully and is so because he is afraid and disconnected. He tries, but there are better debates in 2nd grade classes. In the end, he does himself in because his approach is to use aggression to overwhelm others who also have valid points. Bottom line, he wrecks the conversation with his erroneous perceptions of others. His behavior was totally uncalled for. Making a film about Iran does not make someone an expert on Islam.
Youâre right about Muslims inventing algebra, but the Romans invented our alphabet. The Muslims invented something better than the alphabet. They invented our zero-based numbering system, which is a heck of a lot better than the clunky Roman numerals used in the Roman Empire before the Muslim influence spread there. Math and science couldnât have advanced to the extent they have if scientists had to use Roman numerals.
2 Likes
âMaking a film about Iran does not make someone an expert on Islam.â
No, but it probably makes him a lot more knowledgeable than Maher is on the subject. Afleck shouldnât have lost his temper, but dealing with bigotry and ignorance isnât easy.
3 Likes
Muslim rulers did not kill nonbelievers in the areas they conquered, although Jews and Christians had to pay an âinfidel tax.â When large numbers of Jews and Christians started converting to Islam in Spain to avoid the tax, one ruler even banned conversion because he needed the tax revenue more than he needed the converts.
Jewish views on adultery and homosexuality werenât any better than the Muslims in biblical times. The penalty for both was death according to Jewish law. Christians werenât any more tolerant, either. But Christians and Jews just learned to become more tolerant over the centuries (most of them, at least) and tended to ignore the more barbaric religious practices set down in the scriptures. Most Muslims have done the same, at least in the US.
2 Likes
@feathered_head: With all due respect, we did not seek voices of reason when we took on the Nazis and the Communists after that. We did not make the case about the majority of nazis and communists being peaceful or god-fearin or law abiding and not murdering innocents in concentration camps etc. We did not become particularly hysteric either. We focused on controlling and preventing the complete meltdown of human values, the ethical issues, the criminal behaviors, the genocidal tendencies, the tragic human costs.
Remember, there is a serious structural and sociocultural and religious problem in Sunni Islamic societies. Nearly all of the terrorism is Wahabbi Sunni and our foreign policy, which thus far has been guided by oil and by Israelâs security interests has been exclusively pro-Sunni for more than 75 years.
However, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and much of the Middle East consists of primitive tribal societies ruled by authoritarian tyrants who have co-opted the misguided mullahdom. The mullahdom in these countries know little beyond the virulently hateful jihadi interpretation of the koran that is taught in madrassas.
Even today, the Saudi kings still behead in public as part of their culture and their legal system. The Saudi flag has a beheading sword on it. It is no surprise that the Arabs and radicalized Western Sunni kool-aid converts in DASH are beheading and committing genocide. The Wahabbi countries became inordinately rich because of oil and many of their citizens had little reason to work or get an education. Sunni islamic societies, which emerged nearly 500 years behind other major religions have fallen further behind and become more medieval and intolerant.
I am afraid that if we do not take on Wahabbi geopolitical and economic interests with the same determination we fought the communists and the nazis, Wahabbi groups like al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, DASH, al Shabab, lashkar el taiba, Taliban etc. will be sprouting like medusa-headed monsters. The world will be playing whack-a-mole round-the-clock. Sunni terrorism is a symptom not a cause. We have to tackle the root causes. Sam Harris is making a very reasoned case for this.
1 Like
Politics and religion donât mix, understand that first. They are hard topics all alone and impossible subjects to get through in a group. Itâs one of the rules right, like calling shotgun, exxies or dibs, that canât be disputed, you donât talk politics and religion.
ISIL and radical Islamists are both so itâs bound to offend lots of people on all sides. Fundamentalist Christians mix the two also but they arenât the subject right now.
I also personally get out of this that Maher and his side are vaguely saying donât be an Islamist be a Christian, Jew or Mormon, because they are more acceptable. Which is absolute horseshit. #1 Maher is almost an annoying atheist and American fundamentalist Christians are as horrible in their effects, today and for centuries, as anything. Beheading is more gory but systematically undermining a nation with sights on the world takes a bigger toll.
Plus, Maher has been such an ass lately that that is what I see when I look at him. He did that to himself and doesnât just get a free pass nor free respect. Itâs the John McCain syndrome. You catch yourself wanting to side with him when he says something smart or decent then they turn around and burn you and feel good about it. You have to learn your lessons.
Bill burns bridges and that means no going back.
3 Likes
I found Maherâs commentary revolting and frightening. That he has any legitimacy is strange, indeed. How many Islamic people have lost their lives in the last twenty years because America has chosen to engage in dubious wars? And yet somehow the entire body of the Islamic world is to be blamed for hate. Has anyone talked to the average Fox-news watching American recently? The level of hate here is becoming horrifying.
More to the point, Stalin, Pol Pot, and (if one considers the manâs irreligious leanings) Hitler â all of whom can be considered atheists of one sort or another â have been responsible for the worst genocides in history. Does this mean that atheism is hateful? Does this mean that I can hold atheists accountable for their actions because they donât âobjectâ? Can I then say Iâm just against âanti-atheist thought,â that Iâm not not anti-atheist, because, well, there are those good atheists out there, and I have some atheist friends, but letâs face it, they are all genocidal maniacs at heart if we are frank about it?
Full disclosure: Iâm not a big Maher fan, anyway. I find him to be smarmy and arrogant; he doesnât seem capable of questioning himself, or, no-God forbid, laughing at himself-- which is why he is not, nor will never be of the same ilk, as Colbert or Stewart.
Though it does mean he is of the same ilk as Bill OâReilly, albeit in a more annoying, smug, self-satisfied way. I could see getting through a dinner with Bill OâReilly, and I might even enjoy it, particularly if we got drunk. Having dinner with Bill Mayer would be torture â one oh so wise and witty statement after another, calibrated to show off Maherâs general superiority.
Anyway, I respect Ben Affleck today. Thank you Mr. Affleck for being a human being with human intelligence.
7 Likes