See this is where we disagree, infact could you please give an example of a country that is in your view, uncivilized?

I understand that there are friendly and peaceloving muslims worldwide, this is not a critique of individual people. I (and i imagine most others) consider stuff like the below quotes to be very uncivilized and infact tyrannical and dystopian and we can't really give you much credibility if you are to consider SA to be a "pillar of the civilized world". It is quite dishonest on your part (and a disservice to the victims) to defend these injustices that i have quoted below by pointing out that there are many problems that exist in western society (and you will find me in agreement on issues like the prison industrial complex, racism and many other major topics).

Here are some quotes that show that SA doesn't seem to be as just, equitable and civilized as you perceive it to be. You may view this as a lifestyle (and take the moral relativism route saying that it is unfair to critique) but i will reject that position as i believe that it is possible to universally condemn certain policies as being morally reprehensible at best:

Source

I am interested in your opinion of rights activists in SA? In your view, are they brave civil rights activists to be admired, respect and supported, or are they troublesome people who need to be silenced?

I note that rather than take the route of saying that such behavior by a state is immoral and not in the spirit of Islam, you have rather doubled down and accepted and therefore justified these violations as being part of a way of life, going as far as to refer to it as a pillar of civilization. I find this to be damaging to your credibility as far as taking your views seriously enough to warrant reply.

You seem to perceive any critique/dissent as being an unreasonable attack on muslim people. I urge you to reconsider this position as its possible to be anti-bigotry, pro-religious tolerance, and still be against the implementation of serious rights violations in the theocratic system that we are using as a case study.

How can you seriously defend these types of actions by the SA government?

Will you join me in declaring that the above quotes are morally outrageous, and that there needs to be urgent reform so as to ensure the rights of people are respected?

Were you to make a thread about the corruption of the prison system in the U.S, the racist policies like Stop & Frisk (and ofcourse the Drug War), i would surely join you in condemning them and expressing desire for reform.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5ab8BOu4LE

in sort of a way I am happy to tell you I support the recent movement of women protesting the driving ban in S.A, check out this video,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0IEDi47rbC8

In the video you will actually see men giving praise to the women driving. Note how in the video we see a female doctor, yes that's right a female doctor in S.A. Not to mention the fact S.A is one of the most educated countries in the World. Women account for 60% of the college grads and hold prestigious positions.

Of course the situation in some ways in S.A, as in any other fortunate country, is an ongoing improvement

Hey bluffs for so much of this thread I have taken high levels of criticism. I never gave my opinion on S.A and its not as big of a deal as you think it is. I think there is a better way to go about working together with Saudis then to get upset with polices of S.A( b/c at this point we should not get upset with the people of S.A, which IMO are some of the nicest in the world)

bluffs, have you ever been to a mosque? The one I have been to has a base of Muslims from around the world , they paint a picture that me or you usually do not hear from the media. It is one of peace

What do you mean by "in sort of a way"? Can you please expand on your reservations? I anticipate your reply to my previous post.

I would greatly appreciate it if you were to debate in detail, rather than moving to anecdotes, for example i just made a post about some very serious human rights violations and you respond with uncited statistics that are ultimately irrelevant to the wider point that we are discussing.

To respond anyway, it is irrelevant how educated a gender group is when they make up 5% of the workforce (one of the lowest rates in the world). Is this low level of participation simply out of a lack of desire? FWIW there was a drive to increase the level of participation but it was met with resistance from both the government and the male citizenry (this is in one of my quotes above).

Just to clarify for anyone reading, you don't view the long list of quotes above to be "as big of a deal as i think it is" correct?

For the millionth time, i am not critiquing a random muslim person as being immoral. I am presenting to you a case of an islamic government and displaying to you the results in effort to show you that a society ruled by the doctrine has led to some pretty bad outcomes. You seem to to be unable to appreciate the distinction between being a bigot who thinks "all muslims are bad and evil" and being me who says "hey look at this place here, it doesn't seem to be interpreting the religion as being one of peace based on these human rights violations". I was expecting you to respond that it is an unfair representation of the religion but you basically doubled down and justified everything as being not so big a deal, implicitly supporting the state of affairs as they exist.

I am also nitty when people say something like "people from X are some of the nicest in the world", it is an incredibly meaningless thing to say not only is it not empirical evidence, it is irrelevant to the topic we are discussing and also one mans "nice" is another mans "not nice". People who i consider to be nice people exist under both totalitarian and civilized regimes.

Athiests can be nice people too, i am still waiting for you to back up your highly offensive claim that we are more predisposed to violence than people of faith.

The thing is I dont make the laws in S.A, neither do you. I am entitled to my opinion on S.A, I have too much respect for its citizens to engage in w/e it is you want me to.

Here I am on the side of willing to reach out to folks whom media outlets like foxnews misrepresent, going as far as being Islamophobic. I will admit Bluffs, that itt I have unnecessarily called people Islamophobic, I am used to hearing negative remarks when it comes to anything related to Islam. I said earlier that i was provoked into making some of the responses that I did, that wont happen any more as I see no need to label anyone anything.

I know you have some sort of concerns on S.A, but I will challenge you to for instance watch this anthony bourdain special on S.A, it presents a much different picture of S.A then what you may imagine. Folks in S.A watch the same tv dramas as you and I. Fast food restaurants are all over the place and of course the latest in clothing at the fashion malls.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qoiQ6EI8Uss just take a glance at this even for a minute or two.

In my view, it is disrespectful of its citizens to assume a position that it is immoral to criticize the state of affairs as they exist and to push for reformation and restoration of basic human rights to people who are currently under an oppressive system is to support them. You are accusing me of being disrespectful to SA citizens by expressing my opposition to policies that are universally regarded as being oppressive and discriminatory. I do not understand how having a position that supports giving more rights and power to the people is disrespectful. Based on this information, I am interested in what you think of historic civil rights icons like MLK or Gandhi.

I also urge you to reconsider what seems to be your position that laws are only the concern of the lawmakers. It is incredibly important to have robust debate about policies to ensure that the desires of the populace are heard and respected. Law makers are essentially the vehicle through which society enforces its beliefs. In effort to avoid tyranny, it is incredibly important to ensure that important policy decisions are not made exclusively by an elite few.

I agree that in the US, there exist unnecessary levels of paranoia surrounding muslim people and it is justifiable to express dissatisfaction with the bigotry. What is not justifiable however is to be so firm in your position that you assume a hardline approach where you consider any critique of islam (or the way it is practiced within institutions) as being the result of some brainwashed O Reilly viewer rather than a person who is genuinely concerned about human rights and equality. You should afford the dissent some level of respect and refrain from supporting human rights violations in the form of not viewing them as being a big enough deal to warrant speaking out against.

I do not view SA as being some economically primitive land where there is no TV or electricity (as you seem to assume i do). I am sure that there are people who are living happy lifestyles there. What i take issue with is government sanctioned human rights violations which i have listed in an effort to present a dissent to your view that islam is an inherently peaceful religion. Either condemn SA for not practicing islam correctly, or accept that the religion is open to interpretations which lead to human rights violations as documented above.

well we have a long way to go, it took Iran and the US 35 years to come to the table but it happened. I also do not think you are disrespectful, in fact I respect you

I can tell you I find some of select few posts by others itt highly offensive (but I don't really mind them its the internet). People have been saying this and that about Islam and its followers w/o mentioning any benefits. If you note Bluff, in the first response in the Islamophobia thread my op was referred to as pathetic (which doesn't bother me it is the internet) Some of my family members are traditional Muslims, I ask you to keep this in mind going forward.

also save your time bluffs, I already responded to my thoughts on the topic of S.A in the Islamophobia thread, the posts are there if you want to check them out.

I have listed instances of Muslims saving jews in WW2, so of course a guy like Ghandi is someone I respect, I am stunned at some of these questions of yours but still its the internet

Keep in mind 8 voters and growing agree Islam is a religion of peace.

In honesty, for lack of a better word, i too view your writing off of serious human rights violations, like criminal punishment of the LBGT community, oppression of women and violent suppression of political dissent and barbaric methods of punishment (e.g amputation) as being something that is "not a big deal" as qualifying as being "pathetic" though i refrained from labeling it as such in the interest of not offending you (seeing as you brought this up anyway, i figured i will mention this).

It is apologist attitudes that enable the cycle to continue. It is far more courageous and respectful to your fellow human to refer to a spade as a spade when you see instances of serious rights violations.

To be clear, i do not support the bigotry of people who are knee-jerk paranoid of muslim people and i do understand that there are significant problems with this which are perpetuated by the media machine / political hacks. It is annoying that you conflate the two groups (those providing legitimate dissent and those just being bigots).

I do not like this type of passive aggression you use. Here is an example where rather than directly addressing a question of mine and demonstrating why it is either based on a falsehood, or not worthy of consideration for some other reason, you simply say you are "stunned" and "its just the internet". Basically a zero information response.

The reason i mentioned civil rights leaders is because they are often viewed as how i assume you would view them to be, troublesome and not respective of the culture (this is how you would view a rights activist in SA right? given that you tacitly support the current system as being "just a way of life"). What they really are not respective of is not the culture or the people but the power that leads to the rights violations which they protest against.

Also, given that you continually ignore my request for you to back up your assertion that athiests are more prone to violence than believers of faith, i assume you concede that you were simply being untruthful. When this happens, it is generally expected that the offending party apologize (which i note you refuse to do), it is ironic that for someone so sensitive about proper etiquette/respect, you yourself are displaying poor behavior by refusing to admit that you either misspoke or were trying to get away with a blatantly untruthful statement.

I do not know what relevance this has to our discussion and would appreciate it if you would elaborate as to why i need to keep this in mind when posting itt.

Infact ignore everything i have posted itt, can you provide some critiques of islam given you seem to value objectivity so much? you seem to be super partisan, almost shill like, basically the islam gamblor.

A lot of my thoughts on the Quran, some from ignorance, many from my general disdain for religion, were changed by gaining a Muslim family member. A parent's cousin met a man in Turkey who moved here to marry her (causing a certain amount of cynicism from parts of the family). As far as I can tell, he is as decent a man as you will ever meet. He will gladly discuss his understanding of Islam and how for him it has taught him the greatest respect for all things (in particular, he spoke of his respect for women, as that was a pressing matter for more intolerant people).

However, if you want to ask me if Islam is a religion of peace, then a billion followers like him do not prove that Islam ensures peace, and only a single violent follower is needed to prove that it does not.

If you want to ask me if I think that Muslims should be treated fairly as individuals, then of course I do. I've never assumed anything much about the nature of an individual based on their religion (further than a cynicism to their justification for belief).

What I can say is that I am unable to justify the idea that being peaceful is a necessary condition of being Muslim. And so how can I make a statement so broad as that it is a religion of peace?

I understand your concerns and like earlier if you go back and view all my posts in the Islamophobia thread you will see I believe all humans are to be entitled to respect and dignity. That's why like you , I respect guys like Fredrick Douglas. At the same time of course I commend people like the prophet M.

We have a major disagreement here with S.A. So we might see an amputation in S.A (but then I will ask for proof on this, when was the last time an amputation took place in S.A?) from my talks with Saudi nationals even if you get caught with hash its usually just a slap on the wrist.

This is a debate so I will continue to bring up the point that the U.S has the largest prison population in the world. So S.A has a different set of laws yet their prison population is low. Considerably lower then that of the USA so I would score this as a point for S.A over the USA.

prisoners per 100,000 population

1. USA - 716

90. Saudi Arabia -162

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...rceration_rate

The removal of hands for theft isn't even in dispute, regardless of your inability (or lack of desire) to do basic research, I think it is funny that you take the "so what if its a law that's on the books, it hasn't been used in a long time! I met some people when I was there and this is what they said!". I also have no idea what the relevance of the US prison numbers are but it seems to be an effort for you to make a point of some kind. It would be respectable if you were like "hey dude, I see that you listed that SA has a barbaric legal system and there are many serious humans rights violations there, I totally agree that is terrible and I feel for the people who suffer, I just happen to think that this has nothing to do with Islam because xyz". Instead you are denying that anything in the list of horrible things occurs, based on your exhaustive scientific analysis of "I met some people" and "whitney houston tho!".

You may look at Frederick Douglass and think to yourself "wow he's such a cool dude" but really you aren't honouring his legacy by being a complete apologist for the brutally oppressive SA regime (not to mention other regimes you defend as being humanitarian on the grounds of "they wear western clothes there", "Whitney Houston had a concert there" or "dude I met some people and they said X").

What exactly is your major disagreement with me on SA? Oh yah, it's that you are a complete apologist who is not interested in acknowledging facts and is instead interested in engaging in an elementary school level of debating where insults are hurled, the topic is shifted (like even in the quote above you are shifting the topic by mentioning the US appalling prison population numbers). You have an inability to criticise any element of Islam and you are ironically perpetuating the "Islamaphobia" problem by refusing to concede an inch on any issue and doubling down wherever you can. I happen to think the problem is a real one and it would make for an interesting thread -- just that you are not the person to make that thread, because your bias is so massive that you are simply unable to comprehend anyone's comments and its simply offensive.

Also, if you believe that all humans should be treated with respect and dignity, maybe you could stop being a complete apologist for governments like SA and Brunei who deny people basic ******* human rights (and somehow thinking that you are doing them a favour by doing this, because of "respect" or because you met some guy eating a snickers bar). I also urge you to reconsider your view that you are speaking for 1b+ Muslims as I have met and spoken with many who have differing opinions to you (and by possessing a sense of rationality, are better equipped to discuss/debate sensitive issues).

And don't even respond with the "but duude I already sorta acknowledged that woman should be allowed to drive" because that doesn't change the fact that you are an apologist who is willing to overlook massive injustices and tragedies that affect people every single ***** day so you can push your agenda. It is quite disgusting really. Hopefully one day you grow older and realise what a terribly flawed way of thinking this is.

I will come back to you, when you calm down. For instance you used a "!" twice, I never used a "!" in my sentences. I would imagine MLK would respect the ways of Islam, Pope Francis does so as a Catholic I do my utmost to go at this with an open mind.

My major disagreement with you on S.A is I believe it comes down to what the people of S.A want. A great man once said "it is the right of the people to decide on the country and its fate" not mine or yours.

Kid talks like he is some very peaceful calm debater, but that is BS. He has posted the most insulting ad hominem that I have seen in these discussions. Then when asked very politely to explain his amusement, he has chosen to pretend to not notice.


Personally, I think we should all simply boycott his absurd discussions.

Lol i am calm dude, just a note, you look like you don't really have a position that you have thought about enough to discuss when you say things like "you used ! twice, omg i am gonna wait until you calm down". This is so bad its satirical, i am starting to think of you as being insincere.

You obviously disagree, but i am pretty sure that the people who suffer from the human rights abuses of places like SA (and just decent people in general) do not support the policies which led to their suffering.

I am not even interested to see what your response is, you aren't interested in discussing the facts or the issues, you are a hardcore partisan who is not going to concede a single inch on an issue and its quite sad for me to see hardliner apologists trying to basically say "shhh look over there" while many people suffer human rights violations. You seem to think its clever to dress up your defending of totalitarianism in passive aggression like the above comment about me using "!" twice hurting your feelings (lol seriously?).

I understand your concerns but you were not involved at all in my two threads up until recently, and you came in after this post by wilcogold.

What is with this wilco guy and who is we?

I would argue that If you saw my other posts in the Islamophobia thread you may have taken a different approach in this thread.

This post by wilcogold has not been given any mention but instead you came in here to stir things up with me. If you have a problem with S.A then write the Kingdom a letter of concern or go post on the Saudi Gazeete online magazine. I'm not being sarcastic here, if you want to let someone whom is in power know your concerns there are outlets for this.

Firstly I am only acknowledging RLK'S post because he is trying to provoke some sort of response. I told the guy I will not be responding to him because of a absurd video he took seriously and just the whole tone of his argument. If you note in the Islamophobia thread there was one or two posters of which would take up 3 posts to link nothing but Islamic terror attacks to try and scare people. But then when they are confronted with a response it gets no mention. This type of issue can be connected to this conversation you and I are having at the moment. I fully understand your concern but I in my defense I am arguing things are not what you think they are in S.A.

S.A is far from any kind of totalitarian regime someone makes it out to be, folks do not walk around in fear, not saying that anyone is suggesting this but I am making sure the full story is told. Go after North Korea's administration if anything. After all S.A is a key ally with the USA and the situation in S.A is an ongoing improvement.

No, you do not "understand my concerns" because if you did you would address them rather than continue on with your weak attempt to divert the conversation by throwing smokescreens at it (like quoting a totally unrelated post to mine and trying to shift the debate toward it). Do you really think that you are good at debating these issues and that these tactics are doing anything other than making you look intellectually dishonest at best and delusional at worst?

As for writing letters to the SA, i don't think they would care too much what a random person has to say about their policies, after all there are many SA citizens who protest their government and they are detained and harassed. I presume that if a citizen is facing such difficulties, they aren't going to care much for a non-citizens view. I understand the wider point you are making here, that people shouldn't criticize and debate policies with other people, that they should appeal to authority. This is laughable for what should be obvious reasons.

You do not "fully understand" or even "partially understand" my critique of the SA regimes policies. You also clearly do not understand what the definition of totalitarianism is (i suggest you research this) given that you would say something like "SA is far from a totalitarian regime". This may blow your mind, but it is infact possible to be opposed to the way that both the SA and the NK regimes treat their people.

The only "facts" that you are making sure you get out is that you are a total apologist who doesn't have an argument and extracts his worldview from irrelevant anecdotes.

Please stop being knee-jerk defensive and see the situation for what it is. It could really benefit you to open your mind to the reality that you are an apologist for totalitarianism and by being like this, you are simply reinforcing the bigoted/inaccurate worldview of a random uneducated fox news viewer who thinks all muslims condone violence because of something Hannity or O Reilly said.

Bluffs you seem intelligent, don't waste your time with kid. You'll get nowhere and just end up frustrated as hell that someone can rationalize institutionalized atrocities through the flimsiest arguments imaginable while never addressing the actual issues. He has no interest in dealing with reality and I doubt he ever will.

Could you stop using the term apologist?

bluffs, take a look at this American woman living in S.A, according to her she faces discrimination from American expat men and not the Saudi population. Take what you want from it. She talks about how in S.A you have to change your attitude and preconception as S.A will not change for you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVSAiBUS4a0

me: *walls of text explaining why you are being totally unreasonable*
you: *random anecdotes + links to UTOOBZ*

This is seriously all you got? If you are going to defend totalitarianism, at least learn to post better.

Going to heed the other posters advice and stop engaging you for its painfully obvious that you aren't interested in debate/thoughtful analysis.

Serious question: Are you a paid shill?

Could you give me a single reason as to why i am using the term incorrectly by describing you as one? Pretty sure i am using it correctly.

Sometimes all it takes is getting older and having some life experience. I thought I had all the answers when I was 20

It's pretty worrying that it takes life experience to learn that oppressing people is indefensible.

The following doesn't cut it:
UTOOBZ
i met some guy who had a snickers bar and a lebron singlet
THE WEST THO
You are using "!" too much and i can't respond

I'm gonna give up on this thread, but i will ask one last time for you to provide a shred of evidence (or just anything really, even commentary would be good) as to why athiests are supposedly more predisposed to violence than theists.

*holds breath and passes out*

As for this point made by you, me and other posters have laid out our reasoning behind this claim in the Islam threads, you will have to read thru them. Examples were laid out and opinions discussed, if you don't' like them then you can disagree. After all should we not have a fair two way street? Considering the extent of criticism toward Islam in the Islam threads. including some pretty low level posts irt to Aisha and the perception that Islam is more prone to violence then other belief/non belief systems. So in other threads posters brought up that many atheist regimes were responsible for far more massacres then religious regimes. Also many scholars agree that religion was in fact able to prevent wars, people forget about this one.

I used to think S.A was a 3rd word country but I grew out of that. With just a little insight you will see S.A is a pretty cool place for lack of a better term. Great food , good people , yes its an Islamic State/ Monarchy not to be confused with a dictatorship. It is said every Saudi national holds a middle class lifestyle orbetter. As you know S.A is a very wealthy nation.