Australian 'no-go' zones

[Cunt]

pErvinalia, I honestly think you (and others) are so fully submitted to Islam, that you cannot speak out against it. I gave examples, asking you to say why you wouldn't hand out those pamphlets (as an example), but instead of answering that simple question, I get a warning for it.

Funny, I would have expected it more on a religious forum.

I think your question was posed incorrectly. I wouldn't pass out those kinds of leaflets either, but it has nothing to do with the danger of Islamic retaliation. I just wouldn't hand out such literature.

But, I get what you're trying to say - you're trying to say that people will be chilled from passing out anti-Islamic literature because of the threat from retaliatory Muslims, and from the chilling effect of protectionist laws. I agree that is an issue.

I was surprised at the warning you got. I don't see as your posts were among the worst offender of attributing views to people that they don't hold. I found the warning very puzzling.

I think the unwillingness everyone has to criticize the muslims is because of a great trick they played, with Westerners and their sympathy.

See, they have acted like a cringing, oppressed minority.

They aren't.

They are a vast, powerful political group, almost as big as the HUGE religious group, and blended together so it's tough to tease the two apart.

But if they hold positions of authority and governance, that isn't evidence that they are NOT oppressed, somehow it is evidence that they are MORE oppressed and that they need more protections.

It will be interesting to see how this new effort by Trump to reduce discrimination against homosexuality plays out.

[Forty Two]

Yes, it's the Left. They have assigned the Moslems as an oppressed group of "brown people," and therefore they get protection.

Criticizing Islam is now akin to racism, and gets one labeled a "right winger."

The Left drove out Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins and other big names from "the community." Notice how nobody talks much about them or their stuff anymore, and they are not longer heroes of the Left. They are right wingers now.

It all started around the time of Elevatorgate, and it became a concerted effort of certain factions of the atheist and skeptic community -- that Richard Carrier group and Atheism Plus -- the Skepchick group -- then on to the Anita Sarkeesian group -- the PZ Meyers pack of assholes -- and it was mission after mission to destroy big name after big name of the "old guard" atheists (the formerly known as "new atheists") - the Left wanted to replace them with Progressive Leftist SJW folks, and take control - -and they won. Stephen Pinker and Jerry Coyne and pretty much every big name either defected to the "Progressive" wing or has been forced out. The once great AronRa started puking SJW nonsense like "ifyou're not a feminist, you're a sexist," and Thunderf00t was drummed off freethought.com for well, thinking freely.

Since Christopher Hitchens died the atheism, skeptic and freethinker movement has imploded. We're left with the purple haired freaks with stupid oversized glasses narcissistically peering at their belly buttons all day wondering how they feel and if they'll feel different soon, and suddenly Sandy Ocasio-Cortez is the great thinker of tomorrow.

They. Won.

[NineBerry]

Allahu Akbar!

[Cunt]

I wonder if the group here would support the journalists who were attacked in Paris (was it 'Charie Hebdo'?) or if they would say that those agitators should have known that their offensive words would spur violence...

[pErvinalia]

I wonder if the group here would support the journalists who were attacked in Paris (was it 'Charie Hebdo'?) or if they would say that those agitators should have known that their offensive words would spur violence...

You really are clueless if you don't know the answer to that.

[Cunt]

I don't know.

I think Lauren Southern had a point. No-one here wants to admit it.

How many australian media outlets have published drawings of Mohommad, in support of that kind of freedom?

[NineBerry]

Charlie Hebdo are not journalists. They are satirists. Obviously. no one should be killed for expressing an opinion. To compare Charlie Hebdo writers to populists like Laua Southern insults them. Their criticism and mocking of Islam is one based on humanist ideals and not based on fear of foreign things.

[Cunt]

OK, so when is Islamic violence in response to words justified, in your opinion?

[NineBerry]

When is raping your wife justified in your opinion?

[pErvinalia]

[Cunt]

I'm not married, so you couldn't rape my wife.

Weird question for you to ask, but can you take this one seriously at all?

I mean, I'm asking if it's ok to require people to curb their speech around Islam. It's a clumsy subject, not at all easy to describe. I tried to make it about Lauren Southern and her VERY clear example, but you all would rather joke about it.

Let me ask this way...would you ask your police forces to defend a satirist or critic, against violence pouring out of a mosque?

Would you ask your police forces to defend a mosque against satire or criticism?

Or would you rather just make jokes and avoid the uncomfortable subject?

[Rum]

pErvinalia, I honestly think you (and others) are so fully submitted to Islam, that you cannot speak out against it. I gave examples, asking you to say why you wouldn't hand out those pamphlets (as an example), but instead of answering that simple question, I get a warning for it.

Funny, I would have expected it more on a religious forum.

What utter drivel. Really. Listen to yourself,

[NineBerry]

I see poisoned questions. They are everywhere.

[Hermit]

The Left drove out Sam Harris and Richard Dawkins and other big names from "the community." Notice how nobody talks much about them or their stuff anymore, and they are not longer heroes of the Left. They are right wingers now.

It all started around the time of Elevatorgate...

I never regarded either as a member, let alone a hero of the left. I poopooed Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris long before elevatorgate. Dawkins, when he begged for a knighthood and Harris the moment I first read something he wrote, which was his proposal that a preemptive nuclear strike that "would kill tens of millions of innocent civilians in a single day" is an option.

Harris wrote his first nuclear strike advocacy in 2004 (though I did not get to read about it until about 2008) and Dawkins posted his wish for a knighthood in his now defunct forum in 2007. The Rebecca Watson kerfuffle took place in 2011.

For the record, I never regarded Christopher Hitchens as a left wing hero or even just a left winger either. He certainly wasn't by the time I read some of his stuff. All three of them were just formidable atheists to me.

As for PZ Meyers, at the defunct RDFS I labelled him as the loudmouth from Minnesota and the forum equivalent of the tabloid gutter press upon my first acquaintance with his utterances.

[Cunt]

I see poisoned questions. They are everywhere.

So how should they be asked?

Or is this just your way of joking so you don't have to directly engage with the subject?