Ahriman
BANNED
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2014
- Messages
- 402
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
Almost all religions are the same in this regard. It seems that you cannot understand this issue. When a thief comes to your home, you would kick his a$$ by any means. you may scream Allah-o Akbar if you are a muslim as well and punch the thief in the face. But, it is not yours or your religions fault. It is the thief's fault. Got it
I do understand the issue very well, but you seem not to understand it, it could be due to the reason that you probably haven't been to places that I have been, haven't talked to the people that I did, etc... I'm sorry but your analogy is wrong, it can't be applied to an instance where an ideology is being spread in massive scale, my whole argument is based on the fact that Islam propagates hate, I'm not saying that all Muslims are hateful, but a very big chunk of them are. (Now back to your analogy) Even if your analogy holds true, then it was the "Thief's" fault that followed a certain ideology that justifies breaking into people's homes, as is the case with many Muslims, who take "Finders Keepers" approach!
Arabs issues has roots in their desert culture as well. Islam, in the same way as the other semitic religions, and old religions, allow them to exhibit their nature. BTW, you or no one else has the right to tell others to follow or not to follow which religions. That's the meaning of liberalism and secularism. Other wise, you would be considered as a fascist, and not different from wahabis and mullahs.
That's the problem, we know that Islam like the rest of religions is man-made (its not divine!) and rooted in the "desert culture" as you put it, so you just answered yourself, if an ideology is not native to a region and that ideology could be exploited by certain countries then that ideology is harmful, everything has its limit, same goes to Liberalism and Secularism, moreover in this case Russia has never claimed to be a Liberal country, and even if it was, if Liberalism could be exploited to spread hate and terrorism then those loopholes must be closed. I'm sorry but the very religion that you're defending is based on fascism, countering Fascism doesn't necessarily makes a me Fascist.
From a Secular perspective, if extremists be allowed to spread their ideology then they will eventually demand more and more privileges which can be extremely harmful to Secularism itself, just look at what is happening in Britain!
As John Stuart Mill said, oppressing one person, and not letting him to talk is the same wrongful and disgusting action as oppressing whole people. As I said before, this is called fascism. it does not matter whether you want to oppress one person, a bunch of people or whole people.
Good, so you are familiar with John Stuart Mill, then I'm sure you're also familiar with Utilitarianism, it doesn't matter what its called (Nonetheless, I don't agree with it being Fascism) the principle stays the same, as long as a repeated action generates greatest amount of happiness it can be justified, that is based on an ethical theory that Mill himself contributed to, so if a religious minority has to be oppressed in order for the rest of the country to live in peace then the action (to oppress them) is justifiable.
Last edited: