Quote:
Originally Posted by rubecube
I think Maher especially is completely clueless on why "liberals" make claims of Islamaphobia against him, and he's made a huge strawman out of the situation. I don't think anyone on the left, other than extreme cultural relativists, are okay with the treatment of women, homosexuals, etc., in Islamic countries. You can still criticize these aspects of Islam without devolving into Islamaphobia. It's when you make sweeping generalizations that all of Islam is one violent, radical doctrine, that threatens Western life, that many on the left start to role their eyes.
I also take issue with them singling out Islam for it's "violent doctrine" as being anymore violent than other religious and secular doctrines. The Old Testament advocates for some of the most heinous things one can think of. You might argue that Islam is more organized in its violence, but I think that's just moving the goalposts. Look at the unofficially state-sanctioned violence committed on an individual level against homosexuals in Russia and tell me that Christianity is playing no part in that.
But let's also look at secular doctrine, if we're going to really be honest with ourselves here. Has the violence that's been perpetuated by Islam even a fraction of the violence that's been perpetuated by adherents to classic state doctrines, whether it be Hobbes, Rousseau, Machiavelli, etc.? What about state and ethnic nationalism? What immeasurable amount of suffering inflicted upon the developing world by Western capitalism?
|
I think Maher does have a point in that liberals often do not criticize the poor treatment of gays/women/minority etc.. when muslims are the perpetrators. It's also true that islam is being treated differently than other religions. A great example is South Park pulling their picture of Mohammed.
Where Maher goes wrong is with his definition of all muslims as one gigantic block. His guest speakers metaphor or rings of intolerance is absurd. Each individuals beliefs are unique. Yes, some of islams scriptures are violent and archaic, but so are many scripture of all regligions. Judaism and Christianity both have sections devouted to executing gays.
I do think Maher makes a point that we need to be openly talking about what's going on in muslim countries more often, and we need to be defending the muslims who do speak out. He, however, crosses a serious line when he starts generalizing and putting people into groups. And Rubecube, you point about any doctrine being manipulated to create violence is 100% accurate.