When did liberals fall in love with Islam/Islamics?

[renard_ruse]

They didn't use to like them, considering that Islam is generally against most everything the liberals believe on social issues (homosexuality, abortion, femanism, family values, modesty in ladies clothing, belief in God, etc).

Not to mention the longstanding animosity between Islam and Zionism, and the fact that traditionally American Jews were a significant force in the liberal establishment in the US. It seems like the Jews are no longer as prominent in US liberalism, which is another interesting discussion, but new groups that seem to have taken their place such as gays, athiests, femanists, etc, would not seem to be friendly with Islam either.

Perhaps, its now become a cause celebre to be pro-Muslim among liberals because many rightwingers are taking anti-Islamic positions in response to Islamic attacks on the west. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, in this case, conservatives and other rightwingers? Or perhaps, they just like the idea of a society in which nobody has anything in common and there is cultural chaos, and a minority religion helps further than end, even if in theory its hostile to their other social beliefs?

I always viewed the Islam question as a sideshow to the left-right debate. I'm still not exactly sure how it fits into that paradigm, if it does.

 

[DeYaKen]

They didn't use to like them, considering that Islam is generally against most everything the liberals believe on social issues (homosexuality, abortion, femanism, family values, modesty in ladies clothing, belief in God, etc).

Not to mention the longstanding animosity between Islam and Zionism, and the fact that traditionally American Jews were a significant force in the liberal establishment in the US. It seems like the Jews are no longer as prominent in US liberalism, which is another interesting discussion, but new groups that seem to have taken their place such as gays, athiests, femanists, etc, would not seem to be friendly with Islam either.

Perhaps, its now become a cause celebre to be pro-Muslim among liberals because many rightwingers are taking anti-Islamic positions in response to Islamic attacks on the west. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, in this case, conservatives and other rightwingers? Or perhaps, they just like the idea of a society in which nobody has anything in common and there is cultural chaos, and a minority religion helps further than end, even if in theory its hostile to their other social beliefs?

I always viewed the Islam question as a sideshow to the left-right debate. I'm still not exactly sure how it fits into that paradigm, if it does.

I would Imagine that words like these inspire the people you call Liberals


First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me. Martin Niemoller

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Attributed to Voltaire

The second quote can be changed to.
I don't agree with your views, but I defend your right to hold them. These people are not necessarily defending Islam as such, but they are defending people's right to believe in it without fear of persecution.

If you look closely enough you will also find that the bible has plenty to say that is anti gay, anti women's rights, and advocates violence.

 

[Iceprincess12]

They didn't use to like them, considering that Islam is generally against most everything the liberals believe on social issues (homosexuality, abortion, femanism, family values, modesty in ladies clothing, belief in God, etc).

Not to mention the longstanding animosity between Islam and Zionism, and the fact that traditionally American Jews were a significant force in the liberal establishment in the US. It seems like the Jews are no longer as prominent in US liberalism, which is another interesting discussion, but new groups that seem to have taken their place such as gays, athiests, femanists, etc, would not seem to be friendly with Islam either.

Perhaps, its now become a cause celebre to be pro-Muslim among liberals because many rightwingers are taking anti-Islamic positions in response to Islamic attacks on the west. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, in this case, conservatives and other rightwingers? Or perhaps, they just like the idea of a society in which nobody has anything in common and there is cultural chaos, and a minority religion helps further than end, even if in theory its hostile to their other social beliefs?

I always viewed the Islam question as a sideshow to the left-right debate. I'm still not exactly sure how it fits into that paradigm, if it does.

You must be a liberal. Meandering down a path of opinion but stating everything as if it's true.

"but new groups that seem to have taken their place such as gays, athiests, femanists, etc, would not seem to be friendly with Islam either."

So the liberal party is composed on non-jewish, gays, athiests, etc...?

Many rightwingers are anti-Islam...who?

What islam question?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

They didn't use to like them, considering that Islam is generally against most everything the liberals believe on social issues (homosexuality, abortion, femanism, family values, modesty in ladies clothing, belief in God, etc).

Not to mention the longstanding animosity between Islam and Zionism, and the fact that traditionally American Jews were a significant force in the liberal establishment in the US. It seems like the Jews are no longer as prominent in US liberalism, which is another interesting discussion, but new groups that seem to have taken their place such as gays, athiests, femanists, etc, would not seem to be friendly with Islam either.

Perhaps, its now become a cause celebre to be pro-Muslim among liberals because many rightwingers are taking anti-Islamic positions in response to Islamic attacks on the west. The enemy of my enemy is my friend, in this case, conservatives and other rightwingers? Or perhaps, they just like the idea of a society in which nobody has anything in common and there is cultural chaos, and a minority religion helps further than end, even if in theory its hostile to their other social beliefs?

I always viewed the Islam question as a sideshow to the left-right debate. I'm still not exactly sure how it fits into that paradigm, if it does.

It sure sucks to be a binary thinker in an age of progressive, multifaceted mentalities, eh?

Buck up, Renny! There'll be a manmade island sanctuary for you guys somewhere sometime in the future!

 

[Eyereadtoo]

Liberal Jews are liberals foremost and Jewish somewhere else down the line. It is perplexing how liberal Jews can stand beside those in government who embrace and celebrate a religion that calls for the extinction of the Jewish race.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Islam came to my attention when the Russians invaded Afghanistan. Mujahidin resistance fighters kicking Soviet butt. Funny how same guys are now bad guys.

During middle and dark ages for Europe, Islam was liberal and inclusive. Non-Muslims paid a small tax. Jews in Europe usually feared pogroms and mass deportation. When conquered by a Muslim nation, you were given a choice, if you were pagan, to become Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Christians just put pagans to the sword and made them their own brand of Christian. The Jews of Russia are remnants of Jewish nations who converted after being defeated by Muslim countries. Then later conquered by the early Russians, the Rus'. Even Vladimir I the first Russian leader flirted with Islam.

Only after the Islamic nations were conquered/dominated by Christian nations did any radicalism or debasement of Islam occur. For the most part anyways, all nations have their dark histories. Afghanistan Jirga's are a prime example of democracy and consensus making.

No one is perfect or completely innocent but Islam has a far wider history of liberalism than Christianity. If you look over a 1500 year period. The debasement of Islam started with colonial domination. The later Turkish Ottoman Empire was an Islamic colonial. Laurence of Arabia led nationalist Arab troops against the colonial Ottomans.

The enemy is radicalism and totalitarianism not Islam. We count like Muslims. Try multiplying MCXXIII by MMMCCCXXXIV. Algebra is a westernized version of the bloke who invented it. Our science and medicine rely heavily on early Islamic works. Architecture and art too. Check out Moorish Empire mosques and buildings in Spain. We have taken far more from Islam than we have given.

 

[renard_ruse]

I would Imagine that words like these inspire the people you call Liberals


First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me - and there was no one left to speak out for me. Martin Niemoller

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. Attributed to Voltaire

The second quote can be changed to.
I don't agree with your views, but I defend your right to hold them. These people are not necessarily defending Islam as such, but they are defending people's right to believe in it without fear of persecution.

If you look closely enough you will also find that the bible has plenty to say that is anti gay, anti women's rights, and advocates violence.

Interesting perspective, though flawed for many reasons.

First off, since when are modern/post-modern western liberals "tolerant" of views they don't agree with? They are completely intolerant of say the pro-white or white pride movement, Confederate flags, etc. They are intolerant of small businesses who don't want to bake cakes for homosexual weddings. They even push speech codes to censor views they don't approve of on college campuses and even entire countries in Europe, Canada, etc. So, I can't buy the "tolerance" or Voltaire argument.

Secondly, nobody mentioned the Christian Bible (maybe you just mean the Tanakh or Jewish Bible though). Regardless, its interesting the Bible is brought up when it wasn't mentioned. Perhaps this goes back to the idea that promoting minority or uncommon religions helps to "diversity" society for the sake of diversifying it which is part of post-modern liberal belief.

I once read that what we would call liberals in India sometimes flirt with Christianity in a similar way to that which liberals and counter culture in the west have often flirted with Hinduism and eastern religion (ie the Beatles, etc).

 

[renard_ruse]

Islam came to my attention when the Russians invaded Afghanistan. Mujahidin resistance fighters kicking Soviet butt. Funny how same guys are now bad guys.

Yes, I remember how they helped bring down world Communism. Maybe that's one reason I don't hate Muslims the way some people do. Of course, when they attack us it kind of changes the dynamic.

During middle and dark ages for Europe, Islam was liberal and inclusive. Non-Muslims paid a small tax. Jews in Europe usually feared pogroms and mass deportation. When conquered by a Muslim nation, you were given a choice, if you were pagan, to become Christian, Jewish or Muslim. Christians just put pagans to the sword and made them their own brand of Christian. The Jews of Russia are remnants of Jewish nations who converted after being defeated by Muslim countries. Then later conquered by the early Russians, the Rus'. Even Vladimir I the first Russian leader flirted with Islam.

Only after the Islamic nations were conquered/dominated by Christian nations did any radicalism or debasement of Islam occur. For the most part anyways, all nations have their dark histories. Afghanistan Jirga's are a prime example of democracy and consensus making.

I think this is a major oversimplification. There was plenty of killing off of those who wouldn't convert during the Muslim conquests.

 

[phrodeau]

Maybe liberals actually have respect for the Constitution and the First Amendment, despite the conservative pundits opposing the free exercise of religion.

 

[Paul_Chance]

I think the strange dichotomy arises from some fundamental flaws in the classic liberal world view.

First, I think that some liberals do not grasp that some people/groups/ideologies are fundamentally antithetical to the liberal world view which holds that people are essentially morally good and given the opportunity will choose to act accordingly. I'd say this accounts for a small portion of them.

Second, I think that some liberals, the "other" is simply not perceived as real. I personally am amazed that liberals aren't screaming for active intervention given that some groups under the umbrella of Islam are vehemently and active opposed to some fundamental liberal beliefs, such as the universal human rights of women and the LGBT community. As long as it happens "over there" to "them", it's just not real to them. They'd rather protest the perceived injustice of naming a building after someone they don't like than the real injustice of throwing gays off buildings or enslaving women.

Third, I think there is a dynamic tension within the liberal community (as there is in the conservative community) with some of the positions they take. As an example I would point out the dynamic tension between the more radical anti-war elements who believe that "all war is bad", which in turn lead them to cozy up with Saddam Hussein's tyrannical regime during the run-up to the second Gulf War.

Those are just my thoughts on it - make what you will of them. They don't apply to all liberals, just as the opposites do not apply to all conservatives.

 

[renard_ruse]

Maybe liberals actually have respect for the Constitution and the First Amendment, despite the conservative pundits opposing the free exercise of religion.

How so? They have wanted to ban religion for along time now. At least they have given that impression.

Perhaps its true they only hate Christianity due its historic majority status and influence on the culture. Maybe I was wrong in giving them credit for hating all religion. Maybe they only hate Christianity as an impediment to the three ring circus of dumbversity they want for society?

Maybe minority religions help to create more dumbversity and water down the majority culture, so long as they know their place on the margins of the movement and don't threaten the gay agenda, femanism, R-rated pop culture, etc.

 

[renard_ruse]

.. I personally am amazed that liberals aren't screaming for active intervention given that some groups under the umbrella of Islam are vehemently and active opposed to some fundamental liberal beliefs, such as the universal human rights of women and the LGBT community. As long as it happens "over there" to "them", it's just not real to them...

Femanism has nothing to do with "human rights of women." Its about getting rid of all differences between the sexes to further cultural chaos as well as make life worse for the majority of heterosexuals who enjoy the differences between the sexes and find the differences erotic.

Society is far less erotic now that women are doctors and men are nurses, or women are executives and men are secretaries or even worse women wear combat boots and men attend peace vigils. The whole thing is anti-erotic, which is the entire goal of femanism in the first place. Then, carrying it further, the disillusioned heterosexuals will be more likely to flirt with homosexuality and bisexuality because heterosexuality doesn't have the same cultural erotic appeal it used to. We see that now with the mass conversion of young women to bisexuality for example, or the growing numbers of men become transsexuals, etc. Its part of the Master Plan.

I was hoping Islam might be a counterweight to that, but even Iran has tons of women professionals now. It seems to be a worldwide phenomena. What that means for the future of heterosexuality remains to be seen.

 

[phrodeau]

How so? They have wanted to ban religion for along time now. At least they have given that impression.

Perhaps its true they only hate Christianity due its historic majority status and influence on the culture. Maybe I was wrong in giving them credit for hating all religion. Maybe they only hate Christianity as an impediment to the three ring circus of dumbversity they want for society?

Maybe minority religions help to create more dumbversity and water down the majority culture, so long as they know their place on the margins of the movement and don't threaten the gay agenda, femanism, R-rated pop culture, etc.

I have some shocking news. Islam is not a minority religion.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Femanism has nothing to do with "human rights of women." Its about getting rid of all differences between the sexes to further cultural chaos as well as make life worse for the majority of heterosexuals who enjoy the differences between the sexes and find the differences erotic.

Society is far less erotic now that women are doctors and men are nurses, or women are executives and men are secretaries or even worse women wear combat boots and men attend peace vigils. The whole thing is anti-erotic, which is the entire goal of femanism in the first place. Then, carrying it further, the disillusioned heterosexuals will be more likely to flirt with homosexuality and bisexuality because heterosexuality doesn't have the same cultural erotic appeal it used to. We see that now with the mass conversion of young women to bisexuality for example, or the growing numbers of men become transsexuals, etc. Its part of the Master Plan.

I was hoping Islam might be a counterweight to that, but even Iran has tons of women professionals now. It seems to be a worldwide phenomena. What that means for the future of heterosexuality remains to be seen.

http://i.imgur.com/JOtvvMm.gif

http://38.media.tumblr.com/748a7f5fcc23f9ce645b3c66af8638eb/tumblr_ntnkloUJhR1qgwi7to7_400.gif

http://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/mrric1z9bqejlwl7o28x.gif

 

[Sean Renaud]

I must not be liberal. Can someone point me to one of these Islam loving liberals?

 

[phrodeau]

Liberal Jews are liberals foremost and Jewish somewhere else down the line. It is perplexing how liberal Jews can stand beside those in government who embrace and celebrate a religion that calls for the extinction of the Jewish race.

One, there's no such thing as "the Jewish race", no matter how much Hitler talked about it.

Two, Christianity calls for the conversion of all Jews, just as Islam does. Did you not know that?

 

[Hard_Rom]

Femanism has nothing to do with "human rights of women." Its about getting rid of all differences between the sexes to further cultural chaos as well as make life worse for the majority of heterosexuals who enjoy the differences between the sexes and find the differences erotic.

Society is far less erotic now that women are doctors and men are nurses, or women are executives and men are secretaries or even worse women wear combat boots and men attend peace vigils. The whole thing is anti-erotic, which is the entire goal of femanism in the first place. Then, carrying it further, the disillusioned heterosexuals will be more likely to flirt with homosexuality and bisexuality because heterosexuality doesn't have the same cultural erotic appeal it used to. We see that now with the mass conversion of young women to bisexuality for example, or the growing numbers of men become transsexuals, etc. Its part of the Master Plan.

I was hoping Islam might be a counterweight to that, but even Iran has tons of women professionals now. It seems to be a worldwide phenomena. What that means for the future of heterosexuality remains to be seen.

I did not realize you were an LBJReloaded alt.

Yes part of my post was very simplified. I could have expounded on Christian pogroms and slaughter of pagans for pages. It was a long time ago. Everyone pretty much was killing everyone. My point was, you were given choices. Not just Islam but the other two Abrahamic sects too.

 

[DeYaKen]

Interesting perspective, though flawed for many reasons.

First off, since when are modern/post-modern western liberals "tolerant" of views they don't agree with? They are completely intolerant of say the pro-white or white pride movement, Confederate flags, etc. They are intolerant of small businesses who don't want to bake cakes for homosexual weddings. They even push speech codes to censor views they don't approve of on college campuses and even entire countries in Europe, Canada, etc. So, I can't buy the "tolerance" or Voltaire argument.

Secondly, nobody mentioned the Christian Bible (maybe you just mean the Tanakh or Jewish Bible though). Regardless, its interesting the Bible is brought up when it wasn't mentioned. Perhaps this goes back to the idea that promoting minority or uncommon religions helps to "diversity" society for the sake of diversifying it which is part of post-modern liberal belief.

I once read that what we would call liberals in India sometimes flirt with Christianity in a similar way to that which liberals and counter culture in the west have often flirted with Hinduism and eastern religion (ie the Beatles, etc).

Your first argument does not expose a flaw. Being tolerant of someone's right to hold views does not mean that you cannot speak out against them. That's exactly what Voltaire was saying. You can expect me to oppose you, but I will protect your right to freedom of speech. So they will do their best to defeat any sort of supremacist movement but will not prevent those people airing their views. Where I will agree is in the area of campus debating societies which deny certain people the chance to speak. The young are often the biggest hypocrites.

Secondly I mentioned the Christian Bible because it was something I was made to study as a child. In your original post, you listed some of the reasons that so-called liberals should disagree with Moslems. I was simply pointing out that it is not just Moslems that hold such views in the name of their religion. Some Christians use their own religion as an excuse for holding such views, and yes Jews do the same thing.
Currently, in the US, they have a prospective presidential candidate advocating that people should be registered and have to carry identity cards based solely on their religion. Anyone who believes in human rights should be speaking out about that. No one is demanding the same for people who hold white supremacist views, or any other views. He also proposes that people be banned from entering the country based solely on their religious views. Speaking out against that is not exhibiting a love for Islam it is simply defence of human rights, and fits the Voltaire quote very well.

Incidentally I refer to 'So-called liberals' because in the UK we have a Liberal political party.

 

[Eyereadtoo]

One, there's no such thing as "the Jewish race", no matter how much Hitler talked about it.

Two, Christianity calls for the conversion of all Jews, just as Islam does. Did you not know that?

Actually, according to Hitler, Himmler, Goerling, etc, it was a "Jewish question." But you say tomato, I say no thanks.

Christianity doesn't call for conversion of any person at the business end of gun, knife or sword; did you not know that?

 

[phrodeau]

Actually, according to Hitler, Himmler, Goerling, etc, it was a "Jewish question." But you say tomato, I say no thanks.

Christianity doesn't call for conversion of any person at the business end of gun, knife or sword; did you not know that?

Sure it does. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O9DHgnKeAxo

 

[Hard_Rom]

Liberals do not want to ban religion. It is just better preached in homes and churches. It has no part in government. Government services office should represent the separation of church and state. If this means government office workers have to keep their workplace free of religious symbols, so be it. Themselves personally I don't care. They can wear a dastar or full niqab for all I care. Or a crucifix on a chain. But no Merry Christmas hanging from walls. A Happy Holidays (Holy Day in Christianity) would probably live on the wall all year to be entirely fair.

As for business, your company, your rules. As long as they are not discriminatory. If Happy Holidays gets you 2% more sales attracting non-believers or Merry Christmas gets you 2% from believers that is your call.

If a big business wants to pander to 1% who complain in hopes of not decreasing sales by 1% that's up to their board of directors or whoever.

You want to publically fund religious schools? Watch what courts grant if government says yes to Christian symbols in schools. Everybody will want some representation. No representation, no taxes.

It's just so much fucking simpler if government is government and let people worship in their homes and churches how they like (within reason).

Here in Ontario, we have to support a separate Catholic school board. My taxes going to support a religion I don't support. I'm nor 'appy.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Liberal Jews are liberals foremost and Jewish somewhere else down the line. It is perplexing how liberal Jews can stand beside those in government who embrace and celebrate a religion that calls for the extinction of the Jewish race.

Islam has never called "for the extinction of the Jewish race." In the Koran Mohammed calls Jews and Christians "people of the book," and grants them tolerance in the society he is creating if they pay a tax.

The Koran frequently mentions events written about in the Old Testament, and recognizes Moses as a prophet.

Not only that, but in Sura XVII the Koran says, "We therefore gave to Moses nine clear signs...

"And after his death, we said to the children of Israel, 'Dwell ye in the land'."
http://www.sacred-texts.com/isl/qr/017.htm


This authorizes Jewish possession of Israel.

 

[The_Trouvere]

One, there's no such thing as "the Jewish race", no matter how much Hitler talked about it.

Two, Christianity calls for the conversion of all Jews, just as Islam does. Did you not know that?

Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardi Jews, and Mizrahi Jews are considered to be sub races within the Caucasian race. Each of these sub races has genetic markers pointing to the Israel of the Old Testament. Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Jews who lived in The Holy Roman Empire, Sephardi Jews are descended from Jews who live in Spain when it was governed by Muslims. Mizrahi Jews are descended from Jews who began to live outside of Israel after the destruction of solomon's Temple of Jerusalem in 586 BC.

Christianity calls for the conversion of everyone in the world. Nevertheless, the New Testament, unlike the Koran, does not call for violence as a way to spread the faith.

 

[The_Trouvere]

Leftist sympathy with Muslims is somewhat paradoxical because everything leftists dislike about the religious right and the Bible Belt is far more true of Muslims, and Muslim society.

This sympathy can be explained by leftist sympathy for those they consider to be "oppressed," as well as the leftist tendency to blame white racism, European colonialism, and American imperialism for all the evils of the world.

 

[Hard_Rom]

Ashkenazi Jews, Sephardi Jews, and Mizrahi Jews are considered to be sub races within the Caucasian race. Each of these sub races has genetic markers pointing to the Israel of the Old Testament. Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Jews who lived in The Holy Roman Empire, Sephardi Jews are descended from Jews who live in Spain when it was governed by Muslims. Mizrahi Jews are descended from Jews who began to live outside of Israel after the destruction of solomon's Temple of Jerusalem in 586 BC.

Christianity calls for the conversion of everyone in the world. Nevertheless, the New Testament, unlike the Koran, does not call for violence as a way to spread the faith.

The Quran does not call for violent conversion.

"There shall be no compulsion in religion" (2:256); "Say to the disbelievers [that is, atheists, or polytheists, namely those who reject God] "To you, your beliefs, to me, mine" (109:1-6)"

You are either misquoting, taking out of context, taking far too literally or not allowing for 1500 years of progress if you insist on spreading false statements about Islam. You and the ISIL fuckers.

Christians also have the Old Testament as a holy book. Lots of violence, killing, genocide and rape in that book. Calls for the killing of witches, I believe amongst other barbarities.