Are you a pig-headed, coexist-fetishistic demagogue?
March 12, 2015 at 10:32 pm
(This post was last modified: March 12, 2015 at 10:32 pm by DeistPaladin.)
[I decided this response to "Are you an Islamaphobe?" needed its own thread.]
You might be [a pig-headed, coexist-fetishistic demagogue] if you agree with one of the following:
1. You think "Islam" is a race.
2. You are fine with criticizing other religions but the minute Islam is criticized, you automatically shout down the critic as a "bigot".
3. You think religion is never, ever to blame for anything done in its name. We're not talking about a nuanced view where multiple factors are considered for a given sectarian atrocity. We're talking about complete absolution of religion. There are no examples in history where sectarian violence should ever be attributed to religion. It's always due to some other cause or simply due to the vague cause of "bad people". Anyone who says otherwise is a "bigot".
4. When people are either killed or have to hide due to death threats because of the crime of "blasphemy", you suggest that it's the fault of the "blasphemer" for not being more sensitive to religious feelings and for "abusing" the right of free speech.
5. You want to censor speech and jail critics of religion in the name of sensitivity to religion.
6. You think making fun of or criticizing Islam is the same thing as calling for the persecution of Muslims everywhere and draw an allusion to white supremacist anti-Semitic persecution of Jews.
7. You straw man any critic of religion as one who believes that religion is "always" to blame for everything and you continue using that straw man even after being corrected.
8. You think that cultures which kill gay people and treat women as chattel are equal to cultures that seek to protect the rights of both groups.
You might be [a pig-headed, coexist-fetishistic demagogue] if you agree with one of the following:
1. You think "Islam" is a race.
2. You are fine with criticizing other religions but the minute Islam is criticized, you automatically shout down the critic as a "bigot".
3. You think religion is never, ever to blame for anything done in its name. We're not talking about a nuanced view where multiple factors are considered for a given sectarian atrocity. We're talking about complete absolution of religion. There are no examples in history where sectarian violence should ever be attributed to religion. It's always due to some other cause or simply due to the vague cause of "bad people". Anyone who says otherwise is a "bigot".
4. When people are either killed or have to hide due to death threats because of the crime of "blasphemy", you suggest that it's the fault of the "blasphemer" for not being more sensitive to religious feelings and for "abusing" the right of free speech.
5. You want to censor speech and jail critics of religion in the name of sensitivity to religion.
6. You think making fun of or criticizing Islam is the same thing as calling for the persecution of Muslims everywhere and draw an allusion to white supremacist anti-Semitic persecution of Jews.
7. You straw man any critic of religion as one who believes that religion is "always" to blame for everything and you continue using that straw man even after being corrected.
8. You think that cultures which kill gay people and treat women as chattel are equal to cultures that seek to protect the rights of both groups.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
