The Dirt on Sadiq Khan

[cronus]

Muslims comprise just 2% of the total British population, yet they commit 25% of all anti-homosexual crimes. A religious that tolerates lying to the outsider(kufar) is going to be unreliable regarding attitude statistics. What actually happens on the ground is a better litmus test.

[Brian Peacock]

OK. Where are you getting that information from? But all sorts of nominal groups can be and are bigots against other nominal groups - you don't have to be a Muslim to be anti-gay, you can be a Catholic, or a Protestant, or Jewish, or none-of-the-above. Hate crimes against disabled people have risen by 41% in the the 12 months from 2014-15 for example, but does this not suggest that social attitudes are malleable or flexible according to the context of the times? Most people don't commit hate-crimes against disabled people but are we to condemn an entire society when some people do? Is that a reasonable assumption to make about the state of British culture? I don't think it is, nor is it any more reasonable to assume that all Muslims are women-oppressing gay-bashing terrorists in waiting.

[cronus]

OK. Where are you getting that information from? But all sorts of nominal groups can be and are bigots against other nominal groups - you don't have to be a Muslim to be anti-gay, you can be a Catholic, or a Protestant, or Jewish, or none-of-the-above. Hate crimes against disabled people have risen by 41% in the the 12 months from 2014-15 for example, but does this not suggest that social attitudes are malleable or flexible according to the context of the times? Most people don't commit hate-crimes against disabled people but are we to condemn an entire society when some people do? Is that a reasonable assumption to make about the state of British culture? I don't think it is, nor is it any more reasonable to assume that all Muslims are women-oppressing gay-bashing terrorists in waiting.

No, I reserve the right to mock and insult Islam, Mohammed and Allah though. And invite doubting Muslims to leave their tyrannical faith. I reserve the right to eat bacon outside any Mosque and wipe my arse on pages from the koran. Only imaginary beings would be harmed.

[Brian Peacock]

OK. Where are you getting that information from? But all sorts of nominal groups can be and are bigots against other nominal groups - you don't have to be a Muslim to be anti-gay, you can be a Catholic, or a Protestant, or Jewish, or none-of-the-above. Hate crimes against disabled people have risen by 41% in the the 12 months from 2014-15 for example, but does this not suggest that social attitudes are malleable or flexible according to the context of the times? Most people don't commit hate-crimes against disabled people but are we to condemn an entire society when some people do? Is that a reasonable assumption to make about the state of British culture? I don't think it is, nor is it any more reasonable to assume that all Muslims are women-oppressing gay-bashing terrorists in waiting.

No, I reserve the right to mock and insult Islam, Mohammed and Allah though. And invite doubting Muslims to leave their tyrannical faith. I reserve the right to eat bacon outside any Mosque and wipe my arse on pages from the koran. Only imaginary beings would be harmed.

I said nothing to contradict that did I. You know I hold religion in very low regard, very low indeed, so don't confuse my not condemning all Muslims for the despicable acts of a few for some inherent respect of their faith.

[Tyrannical]

And invite doubting Muslims to leave their tyrannical faith.

Wait a second, maybe I have misjudged them

[cronus]

And invite doubting Muslims to leave their tyrannical faith.

Wait a second, maybe I have misjudged them

Loud bombs might send some of them Stockholm Syndrome crazy but it don't work on you and me.

[JimC]

Bullshit. Again.

If they were a tiny cult based in Texas with similar general views on women/gay rights you'd be knocking them for six around here.

You mistaking not agreeing with your generalisations for an incapacity to be critical.

“It is well for a man not to touch a woman. But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.” 1 Corinthians 7:1-2

“But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of every woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God…. any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head …For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair …For a man ought not to cover his head; since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)” 1 Corinthians 11:2-10

“Wives, be submissive to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.” Ephesians 5:21-24

“…the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.” 1 Timothy 2:11-15

“Wives, be subject to your husband, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged. Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing the Lord.” Colossians 3:18-22

“….and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be sensible, chaste, domestic, kind, and submissive to their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited…. Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect…” Titus 2:4-9

“No one could learn that song except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been redeemed from the earth. It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are chaste…” Revelation 14:3-4

http://freethoughtnation.com/what-does- ... out-women/

Now I'm sure you'll have no trouble accepting that many if not most Christians don't subjugate women in strict accordance with the demands of the New Testament, even when this is exactly what their sacred religious texts command them. So why do you presume that Koran is any worse on women, or that it has more power or force, or that merely being a Muslim automatically renders one a women-oppressing wife-beater type?

However, the fact remains that in the present world, there are significant areas in the muslim world, such as Sadi Arabia, where it is 100% clear that women are oppressed, and that this is not nearly the same in the western world, if only because those christian memes have lost the battle with enlightenment values over time.
This is a world away from some sort of assertion that "all muslims oppress women" but you would have to have your head in the sand not to notice that a significant sub-set of them do...

[Svartalf]

And invite doubting Muslims to leave their tyrannical faith.

Wait a second, maybe I have misjudged them

they don't believe in you

[Brian Peacock]

Bullshit. Again.

If they were a tiny cult based in Texas with similar general views on women/gay rights you'd be knocking them for six around here.

You mistaking not agreeing with your generalisations for an incapacity to be critical.

“It is well for a man not to touch a woman. But because of the temptation to immorality, each man should have his own wife and each woman her own husband.” 1 Corinthians 7:1-2

“But I want you to understand that the head of every man is Christ, the head of every woman is her husband, and the head of Christ is God…. any woman who prays or prophesies with her head unveiled dishonors her head …For if a woman will not veil herself, then she should cut off her hair …For a man ought not to cover his head; since he is the image and glory of God; but woman is the glory of man. (For man was not made from woman, but woman from man. Neither was man created for woman, but woman for man.)” 1 Corinthians 11:2-10

“Wives, be submissive to your husbands, as to the Lord. For the husband is head of the wife as Christ is the head of the church, his body, and is himself its Savior. As the church is subject to Christ, so let wives also be subject in everything to their husbands.” Ephesians 5:21-24

“…the women should keep silence in the churches. For they are not permitted to speak, but should be subordinate, as even the law says. If there is anything they desire to know, let them ask their husbands at home. For it is shameful for a woman to speak in church.” 1 Corinthians 14:34-35

“Let a woman learn in silence with all submissiveness. I permit no woman to teach or have authority over men; she is to keep silent. For Adam was formed first, then Eve; and Adam was not deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a transgressor. Yet woman will be saved through bearing children, if she continues in faith and love and holiness, with modesty.” 1 Timothy 2:11-15

“Wives, be subject to your husband, as is fitting in the Lord. Husbands, love your wives, and do not be harsh with them. Children, obey your parents in everything, for this pleases the Lord. Fathers, do not provoke your children, lest they become discouraged. Slaves, obey in everything those who are your earthly masters, not with eyeservice, as men-pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing the Lord.” Colossians 3:18-22

“….and so train the young women to love their husbands and children, to be sensible, chaste, domestic, kind, and submissive to their husbands, that the word of God may not be discredited…. Bid slaves to be submissive to their masters and to give satisfaction in every respect…” Titus 2:4-9

“No one could learn that song except the hundred and forty-four thousand who had been redeemed from the earth. It is these who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are chaste…” Revelation 14:3-4

http://freethoughtnation.com/what-does- ... out-women/

Now I'm sure you'll have no trouble accepting that many if not most Christians don't subjugate women in strict accordance with the demands of the New Testament, even when this is exactly what their sacred religious texts command them. So why do you presume that Koran is any worse on women, or that it has more power or force, or that merely being a Muslim automatically renders one a women-oppressing wife-beater type?

However, the fact remains that in the present world, there are significant areas in the muslim world, such as Sadi Arabia, where it is 100% clear that women are oppressed, and that this is not nearly the same in the western world, if only because those christian memes have lost the battle with enlightenment values over time.

Indeed, and this is where people who object to Sadiq Khan on the basis of him being a Muslim think they get a free pass - because some Muslims are bad then its ok to say all Muslims are bad.

Some Muslims are bad, some Christians are bad, some Conservatives are bad, some Socialists are bad, some atheists are bad, some Country music fans are bad, some humans are bad, therefore blah blah blah...

This is a world away from some sort of assertion that "all muslims oppress women" but you would have to have your head in the sand not to notice that a significant sub-set of them do...

It seems to me that we're constantly having to add this kind of context and qualification in discussions like this precisely because someone is pushing the fallacy of generalising from the particular. Here it's that

Sadiq Khan is a Muslim,
All Muslims obey the Koran and the Koran is bad,
Therefore Sadiq Khan is bad.

This is a smoke screen for those who, objecting to his politics, think that blatant and classic ad homs and (as with our Prime Minister and Defence Secretary using Parliamentary privilege to say he's a friend of terrorists) lying are justified because, surprise surprise, Muslims are bad therefore Sadiq Khan is also bad.

[DaveDodo007]

If there's any real social progress under Kahn I'd be surprised. Everything in your standard Muslim's way of thinking is by definition socially regressive. Especially on critical social platforms like women's rights and so forth.

If there was any real social progress under Boris I'd be surprised. Everything in your standard Tories way of thinking is by definition socially regressive. Especially on critical social platforms like worker's rights and so forth.

Generalisations generally rely on broad-brush assumptions.

Look I don't give a fuck who Londoners vote to be their mayor as we live in a democracy but lets put an end to this lie that the tories are regressive. The tories voted in same sex marriage (not labour who had been in power for what seems like ages.) There was no segregation of the sexes by the tories in the last general election, there was however many by the labour party. It wasn't the tory party that said it would ban the laughable term Islamophobia (basically a new blasphemy law) that was Ed Miliband the then labour leader. The tory party just brought in a new minimum wage and a higher level of income before you pay tax. It is not the tory party trying to ban free speech and free expression, that honour goes to members of the labour party. In case you hadn't notice it but the term regressive left is gaining currency for a good reason.

Edit: Ban Islamophobic comments.

[Brian Peacock]

Youve mistaken me for someone who gives a shit.

[DaveDodo007]

Youve mistaken me for someone who gives a shit.

Then why make such a comment in the first place?

[DaveDodo007]

Shit, it seems you're more of a misogynist than Dave the Dodo!

Disagreeing with feminists = hating 3.5 billion people on the planet.

[Brian Peacock]

Youve mistaken me for someone who gives a shit.

Then why make such a comment in the first place?

I was pointing out that generalisations are lazy and weak by spoofing the comment I quoted. Context laddie, context.

[pErvinalia]

You might not hate women, Dodo, but you certainly don't have any respect for them.