I'm sorry but just shut the fuck up about "religion". They're bloodlusty assholes that wanted to kill and divide. Nothing more.
It's not a religious thing (Paris isn't à holy city) or a cultural thing. It's hate. Simple and plain hate. They'd like us to say it's about religion and culture. Because that jump starts the next sentence, it's us versus them where us has a better culture. And then to start discriminating in our own country. Because us vs them is the basis of any racist speech. So please stop making it about culture and religion. Or if you want to make it about culture, make it about the real culture they attacked : tolerance, understanding, love. That would the best answer we could make. Thanks PS: sorry for this email I don't usually send those but hey after that week-end I couldn't restrain myself Le 16 nov. 2015 7:24 AM, "Isaac David" <isacdaa...@isacdaavid.info> a écrit : > Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 23:06, Gerard Meijssen <gerard.meijs...@gmail.com> > a écrit : > >> Hoi, >> Your sarcasm is nothing but discrimination. You throw everybody who >> beliefs >> on one pile. >> > > I don't know how anyone could be more explicit on his treatment of the > problems of making an overt generalisation, yet you attack me personally on > the alleged grounds that I have accused all religious people of being > violent. > > Just as if a religion, any religion is needed for people to >> get off the rails. There are plenty of examples of that. >> > > I never said so. I don't think so. Jainism serves as a good example of how > faith-based beliefs may be completely harmless depending on what the claims > are. However, I do think religion is one of the ways some people get off > the rails, and that this is a problem that goes largely underestimated and > unacknowledged, firstly because most people subscribe to a religion and > second because it is so easy to confuse the criticism of intolerance and > bigotry with actual intolerance and bigotry. But this is irrelevant as far > as my original reply to Gnangarra and Vandenberg are concerned because I > didn't even touch that point. All I said is that I find it extremely > dishonest to claim that these attacks had nothing to do with Islam, > whatever the extremism and interpretations of ISIS might be and however > disconnected and offensive their deeds might look like for the rest of > Muslims. > > > As to who is an actual Muslim and who understands the sunna and its >> interpretation particularly in the light of Daesh, they are two distinct >> questions. >> Any typical Muslim will leave the finer points to the scholars, >> > > "Leaving" sounds like a bad idea. What is so great about experts is that > they shortcut the access to wisdom, but they shouldn't be used as an excuse > to waive intellectual responsibility. Scholars disagree, scholars make > mistakes , and it will be up to the average person to evaluate the problem > at hand. Scholars seldom enroll into armed conflict, average people do. > > any typical Muslim will disagree with Daesh on many major points. >> > > I'm so glad they do and I would like to thank them for it, but this > doesn't change a bit the relationship of Islam as a many-stranded religion > and the attacks at Paris. On the other hand I'm not so comfortable that > said major points don't include things like intolerance for other faiths, > specially non-Abrahamic ones, death penalty for adultery, the imposition of > Sharia in Western judicial systems and other topics which are agreed upon > by big fractions of Muslims.[1] > > By the way, I have no special focus on your religion; it's part of the > subject of this thread. > Regards > > [1]: > http://www.pewforum.org/files/2013/04/worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-full-report.pdf > >> >> Thanks, >> GerardM >> >> On 15 November 2015 at 23:09, Isaac David <isacdaa...@isacdaavid.info> >> wrote: >> >> <sarcasm> >>> Yes, because there are many nice self-avowed Jewish, Muslims, >>> Christians, >>> etc. around the world. Therefore when some bad people do something >>> horrible >>> in the name of their cultural and ideological identity it actually has >>> nothing to do with the ideas themselves, it's always got to be some >>> other >>> historical, social or psychological factor, otherwise we would be >>> linking >>> bad guys with good guys. >>> </sarcasm> >>> >>> But who are you to decide who is an actual Muslim and who isn't? >>> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman >>> >>> >>> Le dim. 15 nov. 2015 à 15:47, John Mark Vandenberg <jay...@gmail.com> a >>> écrit : >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 15, 2015 at 11:17 PM, Gnangarra <gnanga...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Not sure we should be making such a link as the events in Paris are >>>>> not >>>>> about Islam just as the actions of the women in Kentucky was not a >>>>> reflection of Christianity. Paris is not the only place its >>>>> unfortunately >>>>> its not even the latest place to fall victim to ISIS. >>>>> >>>>> Wikimedia is a world wide community and the focus on Paris ignores >>>>> all >>>>> our >>>>> other communities who have over the last week, months. year or longer >>>>> have >>>>> been affected by acts of terrorism, I think we should exercise care >>>>> when we >>>>> adopt activities that elevate events or imply some guilt of >>>>> association >>>>> immortalizing that as fact in a place like wikipedia >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Very much agree broadly with Gnangarra, especially about links with >>>> Islam. >>>> The most positive and wiki way to respond is to ensure we're being >>>> neutral, and that the reality of all attacks around the world are >>>> being adequately and accurately recorded in a balanced manner from a >>>> worldwide perspective. >>>> >>>> However the attack on Paris is widely viewed as an escalation, not >>>> because a citizen of one country is more valued than another, because >>>> some places are more treasured by larger number of people of the >>>> world, and also we're more shocked as we expect they are better >>>> protected, and that creates an elevation of its own. >>>> >>>> I appreciate the Signpost for very tastefully responding, in a measured >>>> way. >>>> >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2015-11-11/Gallery >>>> >>>> -- >>>> John Vandenberg >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >>>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >>>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >>>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >>> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >>> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >>> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >>> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: >> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines >> Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, >> <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> >> > _______________________________________________ > Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: > https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines > Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org > Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, > <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe> _______________________________________________ Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at: https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, <mailto:wikimedia-l-requ...@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe>
