• 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!

Shocking Anti-Islam Ad Campaign Coming To New York City Buses And Subways

Grant said:
They've been defending it at least since 9/11 while attacking Christianity, as we can see on these threads. Christopher Hitchens is one of many who noticed these bizarre reactions.
Click to expand...

They had to put it in over-drive after 9/11.
 
Grant said:
This is their rationale. FDI
Click to expand...

Its rationale is sweeping exaggeration. No one disputes the existence of radical and extreme ideological strains and movements within the Islamic world, but the group goes far beyond focusing on those ideological movements. Instead it proclaims that it is telling the "truth" about Islam, effectively treating all Muslims as extremists or potential extremists.

Moreover, some of its policy remedies are incoherent and inaccurate, to say the least. For example, its piece describing the ads explains, "The fourth ad points out that 'Christians are becoming extinct everywhere in the Middle East except Israel' and calls for an end to U.S. aid to Islamic countries in light of the ongoing and increasing Muslim persecution of Christians."

Such a characterization ignores Egypt where the radical Islamist government was driven from power and the country has been fighting radical Islamists in the Sinai Peninsula, supporting Israel against the Hamas terrorist organization, and cooperating with the U.S. in fighting ISIS. Egypt is a predominantly Muslim country that deserves support.
 
apdst said:
Islam is a politically correct religion. Liberals are obligated to defend it. I believe the anti-American/anti-democracy ellements make Islam acceptable to Liberals.
Click to expand...

:roll:
 
CanadaJohn said:
Here in Toronto, on our buses and subways, religious ads are always controversial. However, if they simply espouse the "benefits" of one religion without disparaging any other religion they have been accepted in limited ways. The ones I've seen have simply been informational such as "get more information here", etc.

Personally, regardless of your views on the topics expressed in the three ads posted in the OP, I believe these ads are dangerous in that they could incite violence against anyone who is outwardly Islamic and clearly many Muslims wear their religion quite clearly in their everyday lives. On that basis, I would oppose them just as strenuously as I would oppose some Palestinian support group who wanted to post ads condemning Israel for Palestinian "apartheid".
Click to expand...



Much the same practice here, although there is always some from of controversy Translink has to deal with, graphic pro-life ads, well, this is the Left Coast.

I agree, these are an attack on an identifiable group and would seem to denigrate the whole of Islam.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Technically no. But it adds up to the same thing. These ads isolate a religion/sect and draw a straight line from Islam to terrorism. There is also the "Arab" factor. The largest concentration of Muslims isn't even in the middle east, but Indonesia, and yet this isolates Arab based Muslims.

So in the end, if not racism, then xenophobia....
Click to expand...
Not all Muslims are terrorists, advocate terrorism, or support terrorism in any way. Not all Muslims hate Jews or Americans. This ad would not be directed at them. I didn't notice "Arab" mentioned but it does mention that 2/3 of all US aid goes to Muslim countries.

There is a distinct line between Islam and terrorism, though how straight is might be is questionable. Xenophobia would not apply here.
 
Serenity said:
Who said that? Certainly not me. I'm commenting on what you DID say.....

Does hating muslims equate to being a racist?



© apdst.
Click to expand...


You're resorting to a personal engagement, because you lack the ability to debate the thread topic. You're incapable of expressing why I'm wrong, or why the ads are wrong; you're only able to attack me, personally and you somehow believe that makes you morally superior and, based on that alone, makes you right.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Technically no. But it adds up to the same thing. These ads isolate a religion/sect and draw a straight line from Islam to terrorism. There is also the "Arab" factor. The largest concentration of Muslims isn't even in the middle east, but Indonesia, and yet this isolates Arab based Muslims.

So in the end, if not racism, then xenophobia....
Click to expand...

Hi F and L No it isn't xenophobia. The reason for the "straight line" to Islam is because the "people of that faith have allowed it to be high jacked by radicals. Throughout history those of the Christian faith and Jewish faith have had a remnant stand up and fight against radicalism. Not so much in Islam. The so called "moderates" turn a blind eye and for the most part do not fight it but rather tolerate it passively. That is unacceptable. Period. Those who point that out isn't xenophobia but calling a spade a spade. These moderate Muslims need to sh*t or get off the pot. If they were so just and righteous, the sorry persons in all these predominant Muslim countries waging Jihad wouldn't be allowed to get away with what they do. End of Story.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Its rationale is sweeping exaggeration. No one disputes the existence of radical and extreme ideological strains and movements within the Islamic world, but the group goes far beyond focusing on those ideological movements. Instead it proclaims that it is telling the "truth" about Islam, effectively treating all Muslims as extremists or potential extremists.
Click to expand...
You might interpret that as 'effectively treating all Muslims as extremists or potential extremists' but they are not saying that. This is akin to the 'not all Muslims are terrorists' line that has to be mentioned so frequently whenever this issue is discussed. If yu can find a 'lie' in whateer was said then please point it out.
Moreover, some of its policy remedies are incoherent and inaccurate, to say the least. For example, its piece describing the ads explains, "The fourth ad points out that 'Christians are becoming extinct everywhere in the Middle East except Israel' and calls for an end to U.S. aid to Islamic countries in light of the ongoing and increasing Muslim persecution of Christians." Such a characterization ignores Egypt where the radical Islamist government was driven from power and the country has been fighting radical Islamists in the Sinai Peninsula, supporting Israel against the Hamas terrorist organization, and cooperating with the U.S. in fighting ISIS. Egypt is a predominantly Muslim country that deserves support.
Click to expand...
Egypt is only a part of the Middle East and kudos to them for getting rid of the Muslims Brotherhood. But one country does not the Middle East make.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Much the same practice here, although there is always some from of controversy Translink has to deal with, graphic pro-life ads, well, this is the Left Coast.

I agree, these are an attack on an identifiable group and would seem to denigrate the whole of Islam.
Click to expand...

Just as a point of interest, what would be wrong with denigrating the whole of Islam?
 
vesper said:
Hi F and L No it isn't xenophobia. The reason for the "straight line" to Islam is because the "people of that faith have allowed it to be high jacked by radicals. Throughout history those of the Christian faith and Jewish faith have had a remnant stand up and fight against radicalism. Not so much in Islam. The so called "moderates" turn a blind eye and for the most part do not fight it but rather tolerate it passively. That is unacceptable. Period. Those who point that out isn't xenophobia but calling a spade a spade. These moderate Muslims need to sh*t or get off the pot. If they were so just and righteous, the sorry persons in all these predominant Muslim countries waging Jihad wouldn't be allowed to get away with what they do. End of Story.
Click to expand...



Hi Vesper...

How did the people of Islam allow their faith to be hijacked? If it is so, then what of us Christians and the Westboro Church? The Salem witch hunts?

Has the United States abandoned all pretense at justice, and all of Islam is to be blamed, not just accused, but blamed for all of terrorism?

These ads are not constructive, they do not add anything, but hold the world's largest religion responsible for the actions of fanatics.
 
Grant said:
He can't do better than that.
Click to expand...

apdst's argument was garbage. It continues the lie that "the left" will defend Islam at all costs. It's worthy only of derision; ergo, that's what it gets.
 
Grant said:
Not all Muslims are terrorists, advocate terrorism, or support terrorism in any way. Not all Muslims hate Jews or Americans. This ad would not be directed at them. I didn't notice "Arab" mentioned but it does mention that 2/3 of all US aid goes to Muslim countries.

There is a distinct line between Islam and terrorism, though how straight is might be is questionable. Xenophobia would not apply here.
Click to expand...

However, there are people who oppose crticism of Islam for fear of violence by Muslims, which means the very same people who defend Muslims also believe that all Muslims are capable of religious extremist violence.
 
CanadaJohn said:
When do the first amendment rights of one party override the first amendment rights of another? Aren't you disrespecting the first amendment rights of Muslims when you say they "will come to understand, by that example, that they have to moderate their religious feelings"? Isn't the NYC subway/transit system an arm of the government? Can't it be argued that the government is clearly abusing the first amendment rights of Muslims through allowing such ads?
Click to expand...

The ad was in response to this one. 'Islamic Jew-hatred' bus ads featuring Hitler roll out on D.C. streets
 
Kobie said:
apdst's argument was garbage. It continues the lie that "the left" will defend Islam at all costs. It's worthy only of derision; ergo, that's what it gets.
Click to expand...

Another personal attack. This is how it always starts. You get a couple of Libbos slinging insults vice debating the topic and things go to ****.
 
apdst said:
However, there are people who oppose crticism of Islam for fear of violence by Muslims, which means the very same people who defend Muslims also believe that all Muslims are capable of religious extremist violence.
Click to expand...

That violence appears to be coming no matter whether we offend Islamists or not. I doubt any of those recently beheaded by IS were asked how they felt about Muslims, or ads on buses. Nor the intended victims in Australia or Belgium.
 
apdst said:
You're resorting to a personal engagement, because you lack the ability to debate the thread topic. You're incapable of expressing why I'm wrong, or why the ads are wrong; you're only able to attack me, personally and you somehow believe that makes you morally superior and, based on that alone, makes you right.
Click to expand...

Save your crocodile tears. No one is attacking you personally. My comment to you was relating to a statement you specifically made in relating to Muslims. They are your own words - own them. If you don't want your disgusting, bigoted comments discussed then perhaps you should not share them.
 
apdst said:
Another personal attack. This is how it always starts. You get a couple of Libbos slinging insults vice debating the topic and things go to ****.
Click to expand...

Pointing out that your argument is a bad one is not a "personal attack."
 
Kobie said:
apdst's argument was garbage. It continues the lie that "the left" will defend Islam at all costs. It's worthy only of derision; ergo, that's what it gets.
Click to expand...

"apdst" "the left" "defend islam"

meanwhile...

Luftwaffe said:
I'm fine with nuking the ME.
Click to expand...
 
Kobie said:
apdst's argument was garbage. It continues the lie that "the left" will defend Islam at all costs. It's worthy only of derision; ergo, that's what it gets.
Click to expand...

Another personal engagement sans fact, or substance. This is how it always gets started.
 
Fearandloathing said:
Hi Vesper...

How did the people of Islam allow their faith to be hijacked? If it is so, then what of us Christians and the Westboro Church? The Salem witch hunts?

Has the United States abandoned all pretense at justice, and all of Islam is to be blamed, not just accused, but blamed for all of terrorism?

These ads are not constructive, they do not add anything, but hold the world's largest religion responsible for the actions of fanatics.
Click to expand...

Members of the Westboro Church have been isolated and condemned by all Christians. You're reaching again with the Salem Witch hunts.

The United States is not blaming Islam for all terrorism, and in fact the past two President have both said that most Muslims are peaceful people.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom