• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is radical Islam compatible with a free society?

Is radical Islam compatible with a free society?


  • Total voters
    55
But you could always say, or someone could, that it's not in good taste. That's the exact same thing the Mullah's say. So no, that's not a legitimate reason not to do it because nobody could ever publish anything if they had to worry about everyone's "taste".
7YodyG8.jpg
How many people go thru day to day life expressing their rights to the fullest?
One could be in a social setting, be introduced to a Muslim and state, Mohammed was nothing more than a pedophile.
Could they? Of course they can, but would it be in good taste? I will leave that to you to decide.
 
How many people go thru day to day life expressing their rights to the fullest?
One could be in a social setting, be introduced to a Muslim and state, Mohammed was nothing more than a pedophile.
Could they? Of course they can, but would it be in good taste? I will leave that to you to decide.

I think the publishing, posting of politically incorrect cartoons is fine. We are adults after all.. well, most of us.
 
Last edited:
I think the publishing, posting of politically incorrect cartoons is fine. We are adults after all.. well, most of us.
I agree, freedom of expression and association is a basic right.
 
Trying to reason with you is like trying to reason with a drunk man. Know that not everyone welcomes your hatred.
He's laughing at you, not 'hating' you. But if you don't understand that Islam is not a race I suppose you won't understand that either.
 
no you did not you start off with radical Islam then you 1st post after that switches to Islam then you fed me some line about word police this is not a hard series of questions please just clarify what you mean if you would be so kind

Radical Islam. Radical.
 
Riight. Have you even met a Muslim? :roll:

Many, I live in southern California, and have middle eastern (though Christian) family members who are often at family gatherings. My parents both worked in the middle east for years, I went to PA school with several muslims, and I personally live in southern California.

I probably know more than you, and on a closer basis.
 
Similarly the Lord's Resistance Army is true Christianity, and the moderated versions are new innovations. :roll:

The biggest difference in Christianity and Islam is that Christianity has been moderated much more over the last couple of hundred years.

Im not debating that other radicals dont exist (they clearly do). However-I dont see millions of such people in say the country of france (where there are over 1 million radical muslim-and no-Im not saying they are ALL terrorists-but they need not be).

When you combine such a radical ideology with great numbers, its something the west should consider if it wishes to have an honest discussion.
 
The question was RADICAL Islam, not Islam generally.

What exactly do you mean by radical Islam?

People who support violence for political means, those who advocate for strict islamic state including law, govt, etc.
And to restate the obvious-they need not all be terrorists-though the most extreme certainly are.
 
Starting about 500 years ago Christianity slowly stopped being a theocracy.
Radical Islam is not so much a religion, as it is a political ideology with a religious component.
It can evolve into an actual religion, but not until it drops the political aspects.

I generally agree with this, and while its true that islam is a younger religion (albeit with a very violent history), and while I generally dont hold other cultures accountable to western standards, I do indeed have concern when such an ideology comes into and then clashes with the west.
 
It could be argued that the Westboro BC, Jerry Falwell, the KKK, the gay-hanging Christians of Uganda and Timothy McVeigh represent the true Christianity too. It would be a crap argument and brain-dead logic, but no more so than your argument.

Not really-historically or otherwise-but it would be a way for some to maintain PC liberal dogma in spite of the clear evidence in front you. You have to understand how silly some appear clinging to a clearly disproved theory that is right in front of them.

To be clear, Im not defending Christian radicals, but rather pointing out the overwhelming issue-radical islam. Equivocation just doesent work here.
 
cyprus is an issue of greeks and turks ,not islamic

I know Turkey is trying to be as secular as possible, but radical islam is a factor there as well, especially recently. Its still tense on the island as I understand it. And my family is greek, so I know the story.
 
Radical fundamentalism of any kind is not compatible with any free society. Religious tyranny is a sickness of the soul. Trying to curtail it as you say can only be done by marginalizing religious fundamentalism and treating it as a watch word, the same way we watch the KKK etc.

Explain how to marginalize it? Its expanding rapidly right now-ISIS and Boko for example despite marginalization efforts.
 
You site all these sources of how islam is holding back world peace today but systematically neglect to acknowledge how Catholicism and subsequent denominations were the reason for global instability for and have caused wars for ages. Since the 1000s Catholicism has caused violence and suffering. Now, for a fraction of that time, a different religion is causing similar problems and they are the most demonous people to have ever walked the earth. I certainly denounce the actions of these extreme Islamists, but to disregard the relevant past is unfortunate. Nobody ever questioned whether Catholicism was compatible with the world. If the world survived it since the 1000s, I think it can survive this as well.

This is useless equivocation and frankly where I see libertarianism as being the most out of touch. I get it-you dont like religion-but religion is the state of most of the world and always has been. You are going to have to deal with that, and the tendencies of those groups.

Saying sorry and withdrawing will not address this issue.
 
Explain how to marginalize it? Its expanding rapidly right now-ISIS and Boko for example despite marginalization efforts.

By giving them no attention whatsoever. ISIS, will be disappearing soon.
 
More semantic Nonsense in the name of Islamist Apologism.

Just like the Hebdo string where you were SO Happy you could object to someone saying/generalizing Muslims burned 40,000 cars when In fact/OF COURSE, it was probably just Many/Most, Not juvenile Strawman debate "all".


In any case, it's ALL in the service of, Indeed Classic, and HOURLY, semantic nit-picking aPCologism.


EDIT to the below Empty NON-answer.
Minimalize/nit-pick/demand endless 'proof', in service of Leftism/Islamism.

Its what they do.
 
That is racist, pure and simple. And it is far from the truth. Person for person, radical Westerners are far more dangerous to radical Muslims than the other way around.

Islam is a religion not a race. Its always remarkable watching lefties who despise religion in general get all PC when it comes to islam. I guess this suggests the PC gene is predominant over the anti-religion gene. :lol:
 
Stop spamming these race-baiting cartoons. What America experienced on one day, over thirteen years ago, at the hands of a tiny number of Muslims, pales in comparison to what we have done to Iraqi and Afghan civilians.

We have met the enemy, and the enemy is us.

More equivocation (who saw that coming?).

Here is a direct question I have for you -who's the bigger threat to free society-the US or radical islam? Answer directly please.
 
Arabs sure aren't white, I can tell you that. It is not difficult to see how Islamophobia and racism are almost inextricably linked, unless you are in denial.

Only 1/5 of Muslims are arab. Perhaps its not about the color of their skin and more about the violence and terror?
 
You do fail to recognize one thing. Most of the Middle East countries are not free societies--in other words, a republic like ours. Every time a radical ideology starts up it gets curtailed here in the USA.

Take the Westboro Baptist Church for instance. I would call that quite radical, but even those folks know when to stop because of laws and regulations created by our (USA) free society.

Thats a separate point, but there are plenty (over a million a year, legally) who come here each year, often from such societies-and they dont import this behavior. Face it-this is a problem with Islam-and its fairly unique.
 
No, but neither are the Kardashians. We just learn to accept the idea that there are people who have different beliefs, ideas and pleasures. The "pursuit of happiness' is the most insightful phrase in any constitution anywhere and from that we learn to tolerate others in their pursuit. It's a pain in the ass sometimes, but worth it.

Agreed.
 
Back
Top Bottom