>>54925833 I think when people point out that most terrorists are muslims, they forget these people come from war-impoverished areas. Do you think those people have the capability to learn what is good and what is bad when their home neighbourhood is bombed on the regular? When everyday, they think about whether today might be the day they end up with a bullet in their head? I would be mad too.
>>54925898 if there are 200 hostages and 4 hijackers why dont the hostages overpower due to the sheer number? See how stupid you sound? When American funded extremists rise up its the moderates that are the first to die.
>>54928927 if you read the data closely, you realize that outside of a few problematic areas, islamic fanaticism really isnt that big of an issue.
Also, saying that you want shariah isnt a clear sign of extremist tendencies. Most places where that question had been asked suffered from massive amounts of corruption and governmental abuse of powers. In those areas when people say they want shariah, they're not necessarily talking about religious rule for the sake of a theocracy, but moreso to fix instability within their countries that the status quo seems to ignore. Wanting shariah is a reaction, not an instigation. The following questions (stoning, homosexuality, etc) are asked only of those who favor shariah in the first place. If calculated properly, the numbers aren't as alarming as the chart on the bottom left makes it out to be. chart is flat out false and extremely exaggerated btw
Islamic fanaticism is a problem, no doubt, if you want to objectively understand and analyze the situation, its best not to just post /pol/ infographs that you haven't bothered to read yourself.
>>54936500 >When compared against other religions almost all of them are theres really only one religion that it can be compared to, and thats of course christianity. Theres no question that Muslims are more fanatical about their faith than Euro/NA Christians are about theirs. The problem with this comparison is that most EU and NA christians really don't believe in Christianity anymore. Even religious ones, have quite a bit of doubt in their faith. If you were however, to go into South America and SEAsia, you'd get the same amount of religious fanaticism that you'd see in muslim countries. Go to Mexico and try pissing on a statue of Mary, and see what happens. The lack of fanaticism has more to do with the western world not needing religion as much in their lives as other religions do, and this primarily happened after the tremendous amount of blood that was shed in the 20th century. The western world lost its faith in God, for good reason too.
>>54936304 >saying that you want shariah isnt a clear sign of extremist tendencies Good point. Why would saying "I would like our legal code narrowly theocratic" be extremist?
>but moreso to fix instability within their countries that the status quo seems to ignore I'm glad you've offered your own mind-reading expertise to the discussion. Consider going into work with Pew. Your capacity to determine "I want to stone gays" as really a coded "I'm not politically enfranchised and/or poor" would be invaluable. You could offer classes on tea-leaves and palm-reading as well.
>chart is flat out false and extremely exaggerated You've done the numbers? Fascinating. At least everybody is in agreement that a mere 1.1B are in favor of fundamentally illiberal theocracy. Unless "Sharia" has some meaning we aren't familiar with.
>>54937129 A muslim saying that he/she wants Shariah is literally the exact same thing as an American saying they want to follow the constitution. Neither of them know exactly what the document they want to rule the land contains. What they both associate with their respective documents is justice, fairness, equality, etc. Both of them only refer to traditional documents, only when they feel as if the governmental status quo has failed them and their country. >I'm glad you've offered your own mind-reading expertise to the discussion you do know their are plenty of books written on this subject, right?
>>54937274 >want to abolish free speech for example I don't think they necessarily want to abolish free speech, they just want hate speech to encompass their religious sensitivities not saying that it should be allowed, just that theres a difference between not wanting freedom of speech and believing that something classifies as hate speech.
You'd have to limit yourself to talking about retarded white women who pretend-converted to Islam so they could special snowflake status, not people who grow up in countries where those laws are enforced.
>>54937555 >That's a weak as fuck argument. its actually not do you think that its just a coincidence that islamic fanaticism rises in those places where governmental establishments are overtly corrupt and poverty is a challenge facing a large portion of the population? corruption and poverty are the only two ingredients you need for the growth of an anti establishment ideology
>>54937555 It's actually a strong argument. Sharia law or any ideal law people think of is incredibly subjective. Sharia law practiced in Morrocco is very different from Sharia practiced in Saudi Arabia.
Anyway, few Muslims believe Sharia law is applicable to non-Muslims. Historically, Christians and Jews were obeying their own laws and had their own courts in Muslim lands. Only in a few exceptions, were they had to be some merging rulings when there was intercommunal problems.
>>54937620 denial of a holocaust is tricky because it affects a race of people. I can understand its inclusion as hate speech. I don't however agree with muslims who claim to be victims of hate speech when someone criticizes Islam or the prophet. Islam is a world religion, and Muhammad is a historical figure, there is absolutely no reason why both of these things should not be criticized to the fullest extent. I'm a muslim btw
No, they want abolishment. There was even a broadcasted debate on the matter, the lead speaker for Muslims is well known in UK representation and politics. He effectively advocates fascism in the name of Islam and qualifies anything so much as a white boy saying the name of his prophet as an act of aggression.
Just look it up on YouTube I'm sure it'll be in the too listings.
>>54937402 >What they both associate with their respective documents is justice, fairness, equality, etc It's a good thing then that we recognize Shariah as traditionally implemented being inherently inhumane, and "extremist" (to use your term) by any usable definition in the West. They don't know every concept? What about the parts where adulterers get stoned? Not serious to say people aren't aware of even basic concepts within Shariah, given the overwhelmingly positive response questions like that received in the survey.
>Both of them only refer to traditional documents, only when they feel as if the governmental status quo has failed them and their country. Or, you know, when someone calls them up and asks them. It wouldn't take a political catastrophe for an American to say "Lets follow the Constitution". Nor is every country surveyed undergoing such situations.
>you do know their are plenty of books written on this subject, right? Your appeal to "plenty of books" isn't impressive. If the appeal is to the Academy, the Academy isn't free from bias.
>>54925833 >anon do you really hate all Muslims due to the actions of a few terrorists? I don't have feelings one way or the other for the poor dumb savages. I simply recognize the idiocy of importing the worthless idiots when our populations are in a demographic crisis and we have lost our power to assimilate the hostile hoards breeding in our midst as it is.
>>54938198 >What about the parts where adulterers get stoned? there is more to Shariah than just corporal punishments, just as there is more to the constitution that just the protection of slavery. You're acting like a child honestly, and can't seem to grasp the idea that the muslim world is a complex place, and not just a one dimensional shithole ruined by MUH BARBARIC IDEOLOGY. Also like a previous poster mentioned Shariah isnt one thing, its been many different things throughout history, just as a small example the Ottoman Caliphate decriminalized homosexuality in 1858. This was long before the Western world.
>It wouldn't take a political catastrophe for an American to say "Lets follow the Constitution" are you fucking serious? you must be delusional as fuck, because the idea of going back to the constitution is what the republican party has been running on for the last 15 years now.
>Your appeal to "plenty of books" isn't impressive. If the appeal is to the Academy, the Academy isn't free from bias. >I don't want to listen to any contrary views on an issue I have absolutely no knowledge about other than a /pol/ infograph. Please let me continue living in my delusional ignorance ok fammilia
>>54938577 >e have lost our power to assimilate the hostile hoards breeding in our midst as it is. we as americans don't have this problem, muslims in america and canada are very well integrated. The muslim integration issue is really only a European problem.
>>54938682 >there is more to Shariah than just corporal punishments Lets take this slowly.
1)But there are corporal punishments. 2)Including (for example) the stoning of adulterers. 3)Which is, we agree, "extremist". 4)The Sharia-supporting people surveyed either support this or a significant minority does when asked. Which means:
A) The claim you made >>54937402, that Muslims aren't aware of every inhumane nook and cranny of what Sharia means is at least partially untrue, since they certainly know of a bunch and support it anyway.
B) Your claim >>54936304, that supporting Sharia isn't a clear sign of "extremist" tendencies is also pretty untrue, given that we agree that such beliefs outlined in the survey are indeed "extremist", the beliefs are singled out as known (there's no, "Oh, I didn't realize my supporting Shariah included that"), and that they have a broad outline of support, at least by a significant minority of the populace.
>>54938953 >we as americans don't have this problem Bullshit. We are looking at the possibility of a second revolutionary war between whiny entitled shits and the emerging police state, a second war of secession from an increasingly anxious Texas along with the other southern states who are drowning, and race wars waiting in the wings from the La Raza vultures and the Marxist wanna be idiots. Also black people are dependent, growing and unhappy as usual.
Thread replies: 76 Thread images: 10
Thread DB ID: 518232
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.