Understanding the Left's stance toward Sharia Law

[ziggyfish]

I just want to understand why the left are not outraged about the discrimination that occurs under Sharia Law. If you were to find a system that was the opposite to what communists are striving for, it would resemble Sharia Law.

So my question why is it when you speak out about the discrimination (Sharia Law discriminates based on religion, gender and sexual preferences) that go in of the Sharia legal system, you get Restricted on this forum?

[Counterculturalist]

You got restricted for xenophobic comments about refugees, if memory serves, not for criticizing Sharia Law.

If not supporting Sharia Law were a restrictable offense, this forum's entire membership would be restricted.

Nice try, though.

[ziggyfish]

I mentioned that I was islamophobic, which I was referring to the Sharia Law part of Islam. Which to me is not xenophobic, its standing up for people who get discriminated against under Sharia Law.

I am islamophobic, because Sharia Law discriminates against so many people and believes in things that are so far outside of communism, socialism and the lefts view of the world. In fact the idea of free-market economics, and merchant capitalism became active during the Islamic Golden Age. The issue is that not many people actually know what Islam and Sharia Law actually is.

So that is what I don't understand, why restrict people who are fighting to defend this revolution?

[ckaihatsu]

F.y.i., I will note that the anti-war left right now is pretending either that ISIS doesn't exist, or that it's benign. Go figure.

[willowtooth]

I mentioned that I was islamophobic, which I was referring to the Sharia Law part of Islam. Which to me is not xenophobic, its standing up for people who get discriminated against under Sharia Law.

I am islamophobic, because Sharia Law discriminates against so many people and believes in things that are so far outside of communism, socialism and the lefts view of the world. In fact the idea of free-market economics, and merchant capitalism became active during the Islamic Golden Age. The issue is that not many people actually know what Islam and Sharia Law actually is.

So that is what I don't understand, why restrict people who are fighting to defend this revolution?

you should be more worried about the people near you and im guessing with a name like ziggyfish you just come off as another right wing conservative fantasizing about a race war or pleading for the genocide of all muslims

are you a muslim or living in a predominantly muslim country? because based on this thread i wouldn't be surprised if you were from the middle of corn country and have never met a muslim in your life

http://www.revleft.com/vb/amidst-ref...107/index.html

I would like you to explain why you think christianity is a better religion then islam

[#FF0000]

I just want to understand why the left are not outraged about the discrimination that occurs under Sharia Law. If you were to find a system that was the opposite to what communists are striving for, it would resemble Sharia Law.

From what I understand -- we do find it outrageous and oppose it. I may have missed a memo, though.

So my question why is it when you speak out about the discrimination (Sharia Law discriminates based on religion, gender and sexual preferences) that go in of the Sharia legal system, you get Restricted on this forum?

Why, it probably depends on the context. There's nothing remotely controversial about saying Sharia Law is bad. You might run into trouble, though, if you make xenophobic arguments against accepting muslim immigrants and refugees on the rather shaky assumption that every muslim wants to introduce Saudi Arabia's legal system to Europe or the US, or if you make excuses for imperialist bloodbaths because "Sharia law".

[ziggyfish]

you should be more worried about the people near you and im guessing with a name like ziggyfish you just come off as another right wing conservative fantasizing about a race war or pleading for the genocide of all muslims

are you a muslim or living in a predominantly muslim country? because based on this thread i wouldn't be surprised if you were from the middle of corn country and have never met a muslim in your life

I live in a suburb of Sydney Australia where its no longer safe to walk down the street. I get abused because I am a non-Muslim (I get called a Kafur). I have seen things I don't really want to see again. I have met heaps of Muslims, and a lot of them are peaceful people. However 95% of the Nazi's were peaceful people.

A few years ago, I was like a lot of people. I didn't know a lot about Islam and I really didn't want to know. However after hearing what happened at the Lint Cafe in Sydney, I was curious about what in Islam makes people do that sort of stuff. So I started to do some research, I read the Koran, the Hadiths and was shocked to at what I saw.

I would like you to explain why you think christianity is a better religion then islam

As I said quite a lot of times before, Christianity is no better than that of Islam. However Islam can't be compared to Christianity, if you want I can explain why this is so.

[ziggyfish]

Why, it probably depends on the context. There's nothing remotely controversial about saying Sharia Law is bad. You might run into trouble, though, if you make xenophobic arguments against accepting muslim immigrants and refugees on the rather shaky assumption that every muslim wants to introduce Saudi Arabia's legal system to Europe or the US, or if you make excuses for imperialist bloodbaths because "Sharia law".

I have nothing against Muslim immigration and I don't really care whether they worship Alah or Christ or whoever they want to worship. What I am concerned about is when these people want to force their religion onto others.

Your correct, not every muslim wants to introduce Sharia Law into Australia, however those who do are getting away with it. Just take a look at France, their are places in Paris, non-Muslims can't go. In fact the government of France advises where the no-go zones are in Paris.

The other point I would like to make is Sharia Law isn't a Saudi Arabia legal system, its the implementation of Islam. I can explain more indepth if you like.

[A Revolutionary Tool]

I have nothing against Muslim immigration and I don't really care whether they worship Alah or Christ or whoever they want to worship. What I am concerned about is when these people want to force their religion onto others.

Your correct, not every muslim wants to introduce Sharia Law into Australia, however those who do are getting away with it. Just take a look at France, their are places in Paris, non-Muslims can't go. In fact the government of France advises where the no-go zones are in Paris.

The other point I would like to make is Sharia Law isn't a Saudi Arabia legal system, its the implementation of Islam. I can explain more indepth if you like.

That's some pretty faulty logic. The Muslims are getting away with pushing Sharia Law in Australia! Need evidence? Look what they're doing in France!

You do realize that France and Australia aren't the same place right?

[#FF0000]

I have nothing against Muslim immigration and I don't really care whether they worship Alah or Christ or whoever they want to worship. What I am concerned about is when these people want to force their religion onto others.

You'd be more on the mark if you were worried about, for example, radical French Catholics, as opposed to people who make up a poor minority of the European population.

Your correct, not every muslim wants to introduce Sharia Law into Australia, however those who do are getting away with it. Just take a look at France, their are places in Paris, non-Muslims can't go. In fact the government of France advises where the no-go zones are in Paris.

No, this simply isn't true. Every single country seems to have its own "no-go zone" myth and in every single case, it's nonsense. And with France, what you're probably talking about are the designated "sensitive urban zones" (I don't remember the french term, acronym ZUS). These aren't "no-go zones" -- these are poor, at-risk neighborhoods that don't even necessarily have large muslim populations.

As for your claim that Sharia law is practiced in some of these areas -- I'd love to see a source. Because, as a matter of fact, I know of many places where Sharia Law is used in arbitration. However, these are always in civil cases, between two individuals who agree to proceed according to Sharia Law. In the United States, they allow the same sort of autonomy for civil cases in Jewish enclaves as well. Do I think it's silly? Sure, but I don't have that much reverence for the secular courts either, for that matter. At the end of the day, however, this xenophobic "creeping sharia" paranoia is completely unfounded.

The other point I would like to make is Sharia Law isn't a Saudi Arabia legal system, its the implementation of Islam. I can explain more indepth if you like.

No, I'm aware of what it is -- a legal framework derived from Islam. It's also a system that varies widely from one country to another, with some muslim-majority nations using Sharia only for personal affairs, and others (such as Saudi Arabia and Iran) which use it as the basis for all law.

Of course there's also the minor detail that there are plenty of Muslim or Muslim-majority countries which do not use Sharia law at all.

[Tim Cornelis]

Your correct, not every muslim wants to introduce Sharia Law into Australia, however those who do are getting away with it. Just take a look at France, their are places in Paris, non-Muslims can't go. In fact the government of France advises where the no-go zones are in Paris.

You mean this?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adavMcwoc68

By the way, I don't know if OP is on holiday, but his IP address is situated about 733km removed from Sydney.

[Counterculturalist]

I'd like to see evidence of any area in the west where non-Muslims are forced to abide by Sharia Law.

And yes, Islam goes against everything communism stands for. So does Christianity. There are places in the US where well-connected, powerful politicians are doing everything in their power to make US law reflect Christianity, and in some cases succeeding.

If we were anywhere near Sharia Law, I'd be up in arms too, but as it stands, Christian theocracy is a bigger threat.

And take it from someone who has read both the Koran and the Bible - they are both filled with horrifically vile and incredibly inspiring content. Neither are benign, and both could inspire terrorism. But every Muslim I have ever known - including some who dislike the west - has been nothing but disgusted and saddened by terrorism. Your stereotypes don't reflect reality.

As communists, we should be trying to change the material conditions that lead to people adopting religious fundamentalism. Then we can try to change their ideas.

[Anglo-Saxon Philistine]

Some ostensible "socialists" do support Islamic fundamentalism (remember "only religious in form", "comrades"?). Socialists, however, do not. We denounce all forms of Islamism, including the Khomeiniist butchers popular on the tailist "left". But don't kid yourself. You weren't restricted for opposing "Sharia law". You were restricted for opposing immigration.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

like this post if you think OP is a racist prick.

And to add to this topic, socialism is clearly opposed to sharia law, as well as all other laws that see themselves as 'naturally' arising from a god or deity. We are for socialist democracy; by, of, and for the working class. Or Jeremy Corbyn.

[ziggyfish]

Ok, I think I get it now.

The reason why Socialists or Communist are not actively against Sharia is because of its not seen as a threat yet.

[ziggyfish]

As for your claim that Sharia law is practiced in some of these areas -- I'd love to see a source. Because, as a matter of fact, I know of many places where Sharia Law is used in arbitration. However, these are always in civil cases, between two individuals who agree to proceed according to Sharia Law. In the United States, they allow the same sort of autonomy for civil cases in Jewish enclaves as well. Do I think it's silly? Sure, but I don't have that much reverence for the secular courts either, for that matter. At the end of the day, however, this xenophobic "creeping sharia" paranoia is completely unfounded.

I would send you to a few articles and videos, however the forum software doesn't allow me to give you some links. PM me if you really want to know the evidence I have to prove my claim.

[ziggyfish]

I'd like to see evidence of any area in the west where non-Muslims are forced to abide by Sharia Law.

And yes, Islam goes against everything communism stands for. So does Christianity. There are places in the US where well-connected, powerful politicians are doing everything in their power to make US law reflect Christianity, and in some cases succeeding.

If we were anywhere near Sharia Law, I'd be up in arms too, but as it stands, Christian theocracy is a bigger threat.

I can't post any links, however if you would like to know the evidence I have, please send me a private message.

And take it from someone who has read both the Koran and the Bible - they are both filled with horrifically vile and incredibly inspiring content. Neither are benign, and both could inspire terrorism. But every Muslim I have ever known - including some who dislike the west - has been nothing but disgusted and saddened by terrorism. Your stereotypes don't reflect reality.

Is this Taqiya or are they really disgusted and saddened by terrorism. Considering that there was only 30 people who marched against the Sydney Seige, and 50 who marged against the Paris attacks, does this sound like "most" Muslims are "saddened". Remember to call yourself a Muslim, you must submit yourself to Alah, and consider the Quran to be the verbatim word of God as revealed to the Islamic prophet Muhammad

As communists, we should be trying to change the material conditions that lead to people adopting religious fundamentalism. Then we can try to change their ideas.

ISIS is doing the same. They are changing the material conditions that lead people to adopting religious fundamentalism. Think about it.

[Counterculturalist]

Is this Taqiya or are they really disgusted and saddened by terrorism. Considering that there was only 30 people who marched against the Sydney Seige, and 50 who marged against the Paris attacks, does this sound like "most" Muslims are "saddened".

I'm talking about people I know personally, including some that I consider friends. I'll be sure to let them know that some guy on the internet thinks they're lying to me.

And I've never marched against mass shootings committed by white atheists, despite being a white atheist myself. By your logic, that means I condone what that asshat did in Oregon.

[Counterculturalist]

Anyway, the conversation about Islam always goes like this:

Reactionary: Ban Islam! All Muslims are terrorists.
Liberal: Well, no... They don't all think like that. Islam is a religion of peace.
Reactionary: Have you read the Koran? It's evil!
Liberal: Yeah, but most Muslims only like the good parts.
Reactionary: Well I have this poll that says 25% of Muslims want to kill everybody!
Liberal: Oh yeah? Well MY poll says only 3% do!
etc....

The Marxist approach is to shift the conversation away from beliefs and towards concrete, lived experiences. Religion is the "opium of the masses" - it's needed most by people in the most pain. People who are forced to live in desperate conditions and miserable poverty. Work on improving these conditions and then fundamentalism loses its appeal. Branding people as subhuman because of their beliefs is ass-backwards and idealistic.

[ziggyfish]

I'm talking about people I know personally, including some that I consider friends. I'll be sure to let them know that some guy on the internet thinks they're lying to me.

Next time you ask them, notice their facial expressions. You would be surprised. Ask them if they have read the Quran, they may not even know what their religion means or entails. For example most Christians haven't read the Bible.

"As communists, we should be trying to change the material conditions that lead to people adopting religious fundamentalism. Then we can try to change their ideas."

....

And I've never marched against mass shootings committed by white atheists, despite being a white atheist myself. By your logic, that means I condone what that asshat did in Oregon.

I see this changing of material conditions seems to be working, er not as you expected..