Show newer

@farooqkz

Its only obvious to you it is hardly obvious that it is thr one and only jnterpritation to the resr of the world.

@Pat @BobKerns @tonic

@farooqkz

Yes and what you jnterprit as the law of islam is different than what other people choose to interprit. Again you dont get a free pass for choosing a vile interpritation over a kind one.

@Pat @BobKerns @tonic

@matrix to point 1, ill doubke check but almost certain that is ot thr case here

2, just because it has multiple levels doesnt make it i correct given the canon

4. Saying "distinct faiths" , particularly when based off the same source material, is just a fancy way if saying you have multiple interpritations.

@freemo
Prosidering would be form a thought by looking side-eye at a bunch of data points without "considering" what they mean when brought together.
And to quibble about latin: it should be exversing and suffix technically XD

@farooqkz

And sorry but the whole "someone else does my thinking for me", which is what "its religious not personal" sounds like isnt gonna cut it. You are and will be held accountable **personally** for your religious beleifs, exactly because religious beleives are always personal beleifs.

@Pat @BobKerns @tonic

@farooqkz

No it is a personal beleif.. you choose to pick the interpritation you just described, other Muslims dont, period. So yes its a personal belief that you choose to tell yourself it isnt, nothing more nothing less. all religious beleifs are personal beliefs.

@Pat @BobKerns @tonic

@matrix The problem is that it is VERY hard, next to impossible to assert what hte book is actually telling you to do, which is a very different abstraction layer than simply what the book is describing.

Take the Leviticus 19:19 as a prime example since it seems straightforward but when we poke it a bit more its not...

"“You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material."

This seems perfectly straightforward, it is telling you what you cant do, it seems like we cant even debate the fact that is saying dont mix fabrics or seeds...

But its not that straightforward.. there are several competitings interpritations all of which have validity...

1) This is simply a long list of laws for a region at the time, a result of the long-windedness of the bible, not a proclemation from god. This is backed up by the suspicious lack of "god said" or any assertion these are rules set down by god .
2) the hebrew gamatria of the text reveals a hidden story (which historians are aware of by the way). The surface text isnt particularly important, the gematrial interitation, the underlying message,is.

3) It is literally telling you whatis and is not allowed (a generally jewish interpritation since this is old testamant).

4) a later set of books considered by only some people to be legit talk about jesus and in those stories they negate much of the rules set down in the old-testimant, so these rules are not enforced by god anymore but they used to be. (this is what most christians think)

The list goes on... There is no "right".. there are just endless interpritations, all valid within the frameowkrs of that particiular "canon" (both oral and written canon)

My favorite futuretime: outversing the postfix of words I say and prosidering what their new meaning might be.

@Pat

The overwhjelming majority of Muslimns I know from around the world would never want to force their beliefs on others. They themselves would never engage in homosexuality as they do view it as against their personal morality but would never dream of imposing that on others.

So yea, the excuse of "this is my religion" doesnt cut it, because he choose that particular hateful interpritation, the religion didnt "force" it upon him.

@farooqkz @BobKerns @tonic

@freemo The ones that are nice are nice. They cite their religion as an affirmation of what they do right.
The ones that are not nice cite their religion as an affirmation to be not nice.

It changes nothing. People are what they are. Religion is like the foreskin of the worker's class. The party. If it gets hot, it retreats.

@farooqkz @Pat @BobKerns @freemo @tonic I would differentiate how you say it. You can say about yourself whatever you wish, and i would not bat an eye.
Example: "I believe people eating strawberry icecream is wrong."
Fine.

If you however say people should be stopped from eating strawberry icecream, you are starting a fight (with people that did not do anything bad to you, so no defense there) and i believe you deserve all the backlash such a thing provokes.

@admitsWrongIfProven

I woukd be a tad bit kore delicate about the wording:

"I think eating strawberry jce cream is wrong so i dont eat it, but other people shoukd be allowed to choose for themselves what they do as lobg as they dobt make me eat strawberry ice cream"

Thats fine.

"I think other people shoukd only be allowed to eat the kibd of ice cream i approve of because me and my faith based opinion says so and everyone shoukd be beholden to my faith based opinions, not just me"

Well thats wrong.

@farooqkz @Pat @BobKerns @tonic

@raucao Not entierly related but i do agree. If you degrade religious people and assune religious people are universally bad without getting to know an individual or their opinions then you arent a very good person either.

@freemo thanks again for providing this server for me to lurk from. You and the other admins have been doing a good job for my experience on the Fediversr

Outsult
Noun
1. An insult applied by someone that actually reflects badly on them, outing them in some way.

My favourite recent outsult was being called a "thesaurus trying to impress people by looking intelligent" because I know what words like "hyperbole" and "sardonic" mean.

No, little dude, this is actually just how I talk because I'm well read and literate. Good to know where YOUR bar is, though.

Just a reminder, being a horrible person shoukdnt be tolerated simply because they claim their religion says so.... **YOU** choose one of any number of interpritations of your religion that caused you to be a horrible person. Thats not your religions fault, thats just you finding an excuse to be a shit human. No one needs to tolerate you being a shit human just because your a religious shit human.

That is all...

@farooqkz

The quran at no point says that you have tonforce other people to follow the quran... so if you follow the quran according to the book it is only forbidden for you.

Dont try to blame your disgusting oppression of others on the quran which says nothing of the sort.

@pwinn

@farooqkz

And just to put it out there, of my many dozens of muslim friends every single one of them supports the right for other people to enter i to gay marriage. Many feel that it woukd be wrong for thry themselves to be gay ir marry the same sex, none of them woukd ever be such a monster as to deny that for others, especially when nothing in their religion requires them to impose their personal choices on others.

@pwinn

@farooqkz

Assuming you mean video games and not gay marriage then no big deal. Most people have at least a few backwards ideas. If the worst you have going for you is you think kids shouldnt play violent video games then you are well ahead of the curve.

Now if you think gay people should be legally denied the right to marry who they wish, now thats a pretty cruel opinion that would be far worse, but again, most people have a few nasty opinions, doesnt make it right, but all i can do is hope people who think that one day learn not to be cruel, and until then ill do my best to change their mind.

@pwinn

Show older
CleverLibre Social

CleverLibre Social is an inclusive social instance for open discussion, learning, and community.
All cultures welcome.
Hate speech and harassment strictly forbidden.