What I gather from the linked conversation: (In regards to a joke where a boy turns out to have a polygamous dad)
Sure, but that’s universal. Most of the Islamic theocratic have this problem, and it’s a point of general focus… but Islam is their excuse, not a functional cause. It’s not like Mormons did it any better.
Islamic theocratics are not the same as muslims. Theocracy is where the law of one’s god is seen as the ruling body, and tend to be more of the extremists of a religion - in Islam’s case, the ones more likely to use religion as a weapon of power to have multiple wives. Nothing in that conversation came across as “Being pro-Islam is being anti-feminism”.
I’d also point out, the user made several efforts to ask for better explanation from those disagreeing, but everyone was just digging for more words from him instead of discussing openly. This is how disagreement is manufactured.
It’s a consistent pattern of behavior from that person, which is why one thread might seem like people are overbearing. At some point you get sick of the disingenuous faux-intellectual “just asking questions”.
You’re claiming a pattern, but so far I’ve only been pointed to one example. On the other hand, the other participant in that conversation, you, has been posting giant screengrabs of this individual where they are claiming…that we shouldn’t generalize evil groups?
I’m all too aware of how people can “Sealion” the energy out of a discussion. But even your choice examples aren’t painting yourself in the best light here, nor a very strong impression towards Zorque. I could yet be convinced, but not so far.
I should have been more specific. Probably the standard pig headed refusal to acknowledge a point 🤷♂️
edit: yup that’s exactly what it was. Their failed attempt to call me out is a reference to where I saw them refuse to acknowledge when they’re wrong, or at least just keep it to themselves.
You’re flat out lying here. I oppose Trump’s DC police action, and basically everything Trump has ever done or said. What I said, clearly, was that the Mayor of DC instituted the curfew - for a reason and months ago + extended it a few times - and it has nothing to do with Trump. Which the OP of that post was too lazy to know before posting and misleading people. Accuracy matters.
All anyone has to do is search “dc curfew” to find nothing but articles about Muriel Bowser’s curfew. You will find nothing about Trump.
Press and hold on any user and you can add a tag. It is incredibly useful for a myriad of reasons. I started implementing a system for sharing/community tags but I didn’t like the implications of having a parallel voting system to the existing one and scrapped it.
Edit: the best part of the feature is that it can link you to why you created the tag. In this case the user in question argued that supporting women’s rights is the same thing as Islamophobia.
I couldn’t find the exact context of what you linked, but down from it I saw your opinion, which I don’t agree with, and doesn’t say what you’re claiming now.
I honestly don’t understand what you’re asking of me. Women having equal rights is a binary thing, they either do or don’t.
This is wrong. They can be equal in some parts and unequal in others. No culture gives identical rights to all other cultures. There are degrees to equality. It isn’t all or nothing. I would say most of the west is more equal than countries that follow Islam as a state religion, but most of them don’t have total equality. I assume you agree with that, right? And Saudi Arabia is better than Iran, right? Not significantly, but there are degrees to it, right?
Painting it as binary all or nothing is wrong, and probably is antithetical to progress. If it’s all or nothing, and something would take a step in the right direction, then why take that step if it isn’t all the way, right? Treating it as binary is bad.
Religion is the closest thing to true evil that exist on this planet. Insane cultists shouldn’t be allowed around children. Not even their own (they tend to mutilate them in order to mark them as members of their insane cult).
Painting with such a broad brush is how these people got to where they are now, don’t make the same mistakes they did.
Lmao thanks for the heads-up, past me.
Edit: this user thinks that equal rights for women are Islamophobic.
Oooh how do you do that user tag function? I couldn’t find it when I looked just now and it appears as though we’re using the same frontend…?
What I gather from the linked conversation: (In regards to a joke where a boy turns out to have a polygamous dad)
Islamic theocratics are not the same as muslims. Theocracy is where the law of one’s god is seen as the ruling body, and tend to be more of the extremists of a religion - in Islam’s case, the ones more likely to use religion as a weapon of power to have multiple wives. Nothing in that conversation came across as “Being pro-Islam is being anti-feminism”.
I’d also point out, the user made several efforts to ask for better explanation from those disagreeing, but everyone was just digging for more words from him instead of discussing openly. This is how disagreement is manufactured.
It’s a consistent pattern of behavior from that person, which is why one thread might seem like people are overbearing. At some point you get sick of the disingenuous faux-intellectual “just asking questions”.
You’re claiming a pattern, but so far I’ve only been pointed to one example. On the other hand, the other participant in that conversation, you, has been posting giant screengrabs of this individual where they are claiming…that we shouldn’t generalize evil groups?
I’m all too aware of how people can “Sealion” the energy out of a discussion. But even your choice examples aren’t painting yourself in the best light here, nor a very strong impression towards Zorque. I could yet be convinced, but not so far.
I should have been more specific. Probably the standard pig headed refusal to acknowledge a point 🤷♂️
edit: yup that’s exactly what it was. Their failed attempt to call me out is a reference to where I saw them refuse to acknowledge when they’re wrong, or at least just keep it to themselves.
Said the guy that actively endorses a fascist military coup.
You’re flat out lying here. I oppose Trump’s DC police action, and basically everything Trump has ever done or said. What I said, clearly, was that the Mayor of DC instituted the curfew - for a reason and months ago + extended it a few times - and it has nothing to do with Trump. Which the OP of that post was too lazy to know before posting and misleading people. Accuracy matters.
All anyone has to do is search “dc curfew” to find nothing but articles about Muriel Bowser’s curfew. You will find nothing about Trump.
So yeah, you tend to earn the tag I gave you.
Wait, how do you get that? I also use Voyager, but not seeing that :/
Edit: it’s called user tags. It’s not shared as far I’m concerned.
Press and hold on any user and you can add a tag. It is incredibly useful for a myriad of reasons. I started implementing a system for sharing/community tags but I didn’t like the implications of having a parallel voting system to the existing one and scrapped it.
Edit: the best part of the feature is that it can link you to why you created the tag. In this case the user in question argued that supporting women’s rights is the same thing as Islamophobia.
It’s also a feature of Piefed.
I looked at that link, and that’s a pretty shitty misrepresentation of what they said.
Thanks neighbor
Edit: Messed up a copy/paste.
I couldn’t find the exact context of what you linked, but down from it I saw your opinion, which I don’t agree with, and doesn’t say what you’re claiming now.
This is wrong. They can be equal in some parts and unequal in others. No culture gives identical rights to all other cultures. There are degrees to equality. It isn’t all or nothing. I would say most of the west is more equal than countries that follow Islam as a state religion, but most of them don’t have total equality. I assume you agree with that, right? And Saudi Arabia is better than Iran, right? Not significantly, but there are degrees to it, right?
Painting it as binary all or nothing is wrong, and probably is antithetical to progress. If it’s all or nothing, and something would take a step in the right direction, then why take that step if it isn’t all the way, right? Treating it as binary is bad.
Religion is the closest thing to true evil that exist on this planet. Insane cultists shouldn’t be allowed around children. Not even their own (they tend to mutilate them in order to mark them as members of their insane cult).
He is right you know