o_O.Q said:
"That's all I was saying is that with Muslims, a lot of judgement happens based on appearance, which isn't the case for most other religions."
why do you think that's the case?
Probably because Christians, atheists, and Jews all come from a wide enough variety of areas that there's no one skin color, cultural garb, or visible practice that would even be remotely useful to identify them by.
"But between Muslims and the rest of the populace, there are more things people use, like cultural garb, or skin color."
you mean like the burka? so you don't think the burka is a reliable way of determining whether someone is a muslim or not?
Cultural garb would definitely be more useful than skin color, yeah.
"Well she acted like it was a bad thing for there to be a lot of them. I think that's mean."
its about concern for people who have a different culture to you impacting your culture
muslims appear to have regressive views on women, such as, putting pressure on them to cover themselves
i can see why candace as a woman would be concerned about that for example if it appears that their influence is growing in her community
I could say the similar things about conservative Christians and their regressive views on women, but I don't. For a long time, the country was majority conservative Christian, only recently have they lost enough ground to progressive Christianity and atheism to lose majority status and move to plurality status. Yet in all that time, even though I disagree with them as a fellow Christian about what values are really Christian values, I never at any point said they should leave the country or that we should kill them, instead I just speak out against their views. I'll speak out against Muslim views when I dislike their views as well. After all, it's not just the Muslims or the conservative Christians that have those regressive views on women, it's all sorts of people. It's the regressive views that need to be combated in whatever form they take, not the people that hold them. Remember when Clinton called a whole bunch of people "deplorable"? That was pretty mean, no? Just because you disagree doesn't mean you call people deplorable like in Clinton's case or treat them like their very presence might be a problem like in Candace's case.
"Oh I do. Trust me. I just don't take the same approach to dealing with it as some people."
so why do you take issue with candace expressing her concerns about it? she simply seems to be saying that she does not want their influence on particular cultures to grow and i can understand that
It's not that she expresses concern, it's how she expresses it and what her solutions are for dealing with it. Like what is she even supposed to be saying with that thing about France building an army? You said it yourself, it doesn't make sense. Armies don't fix birth rates.
"No, I think he thought she was saying that to compensate for a lack of white birth rates, genocide was called for."
and that's his conclusion... what does that have to do with candace?
He got his conclusion from Candace's statement, or at least it would seem he did based on what he said. That's the only connection.
to go back to the previous example i used if a japanese man took "we need to combat falling birth rates in japan" as justification for raping japanese women does it mean that no one should therefore talk about these issues? that's preposterous
to meet this standard that you all appear to be pushing no one would be able to talk about shifting demographics ever
Well that's because it's not the demographics that are the issue. It's the values system. Like in Japan, they're grappling with the effects their own values system has had on their society. They teach women to expect a man to be rich and able to completely provide for them, and to date based on that, instead of love. It's like culturally encouraged gold-digging, and it hurts men, women, and the society as a whole alike. There are other reasons why they're struggling, and obviously not all Japanese women do that, but it is a noted cultural phenomenon discussed at length by academics in both Eastern and Western civilization when they examine Japanese society. You could find a good bit of value in most cultures, but no culture is perfect, and sometimes on a society wide scale they need to examine certain cultural values that maybe worked in the past but are just hurting themselves now.
To take this back to America (I know, Candace mentioned France and the shooter was New Zealand, but she's American and her experience informing her worldview is largely drawn from there), we have a multicultural society, unlike Japan's largely homogeneous society. To have a multicultural society, there have to be overarching values that we cherish across all the cultures. Those overarching values often inform the future direction of the multiple cultures living within the society. So for America, we value life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness. We value equal rights, liberty and justice for all. You've heard it all before. Well if we valued equal rights and liberty so much, how did we ever own slaves? Was it all a lie? Of course not. However, since those overarching rights trumped the slavery tolerating culture of the South, the South had to change. It just takes some time for the overarching values to shape the path of every culture in the nation towards the same goal. It's the power of our democracy. You saw the same thing again with women and the vote. If we're all equal, why can't they vote? Were our values all a lie from the beginning just because women haven't been voting? Of course not. The values are real, we just all came to a new understanding of what they meant for our daily lives. Sometimes it affects the whole culture, sometimes just one region of the country. Sometimes it just affects one nationality, like when we treated Italians like dirt until we realized that was wrong. Until recently Mormons were treated pretty crappily, though not on the same level obviously, but they were very disrespected and essentially treated like a bunch of nutjobs. Now we have like 5 or 6 of them in Congress. This process repeats itself throughout our history and will continue to. Eventually we return to our deepest rooted values, the ones in the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. They win every time and I pray that they always will.
In the case of Candace's concerns about the impact of Islamic cultural values on our own, I think rather than criticize the location and migratory habits of Muslims, I think we should criticize Islamic thought itself on an academic level. Doing so worked wonders for Christianity. Even the most conservative Christians you could ever find in America today (save for maybe the crazy offshoots like Westboro Baptist) are not as regressive in their attitudes towards women as they were 20 or 40 years ago. They maintained their cultural identity, but evolved towards the greater American culture of liberty and justice for all, with all of us equal. We can do the same with regressive Islamic views. Some of Islam's views are pretty irrelevant to everyone else, like when and how to pray if you're a Muslim. If you're not a Muslim, you just don't pray when they do, oh well. Others are more consequential, but can be respected, like abstaining from alcohol. You could drink it, your Muslim friend could be the designated driver. Still others are problematic and need to be confronted, like the views on women. I respect their right to wear a burka or hijab, but I disagree on a fundamental level with it, and at appropriate times, I'll tell them so. I support like-minded women in Iran right now who are taking off their head coverings in protest. Such a beautiful protest, I love it. Similarly, if I had a young female Muslim friend, I'd respect her right to wear a hijab or whatever, but I'd encourage her not to wear one, and support her if her family tried to punish her for it. Then there are even more serious things that not all American Muslims believe, but need to be confronted at all costs wherever it appears, like intolerance for other religions. I don't tolerate it when Christians hate on atheists, so I don't like it when Muslims suggest that theirs is the only acceptable religion, and wouldn't stand for that either if I ever saw it. Luckily I haven't, probably because such Muslims would rather live in a Muslim society than move to America, so there's not a lot of people like that over here.
"Oh I know I am. He's insane, you see."
i agree, so how can you ascribe logical arguments to an insane person?
I didn't, I ascribed an illogical one to an insane person.
"What's the point?"
that there is no evidence to demonstrate that candace owens has ever called for genocide
I'm not saying she did. I do think that the shooter thought she did.
"No, I'm saying he drew an illogical conclusion."
don't you see how dangerous it is to try to assign blame to someone based on how a crazy person interpreted their actions?
its like telling a woman who got raped that it was her fault for tempting a rapist because instead of focusing on the criminal you're instead looking to how that criminal interpreted the actions of someone else
I told you before, I don't blame Candace for the shooting. You may be confusing me for someone else in the thread. My initial quoting of that tweet was because you asked for an example of Candace Owens talking about Muslims, which seemed to come up because the shooter mentioned her. I'd never heard of Candace Owens before this thread, so I was curious too. It really was just a quick Google search that found that tweet I quoted earlier.
|
