Stuff Muslim Culture Likes

Stuff Muslim Culture Likes

(This post may be edited at a future time to add more links or other information.)

Groups such as left-leaning “Stuff Christian Culture Likes” (please see this previous post about “SCCL” if you’d like more background about them) enjoy regularly listing the shortcomings of Christians, including sexism as taught or practiced among some Christians. I too detail some of those examples on my blog and have in the past.

Strangely, though, like so many other liberals, those at SCCL are extremely hypocritical in that they turn a blind eye to the same sexism or other shortcomings as committed by some Muslims under Islam, and act as though Muslims are victims who need special protection.

Here are examples of “Stuff Muslim Culture Likes.”

(Imam = Islamic Clergy)

(See below for links for examples of each category. This is just off the top of my head. More categories and more links may be added later.)

  • DEFENDING OR PROMOTING WIFE ABUSE
  • BEHEADING NON-MUSLIMS
  • KILLING ATHEIST / SECULARIST BLOGGERS
  • BLOWING UP MARATHON RUNNERS WITH PRESSURE COOKERS
  • RUNNING OVER PEDESTRIANS WITH VEHICLES
  • STABBING PEDESTERIANS TO DEATH
  • SHOOTING NON-MUSLIMS IN NIGHT CLUBS
  • SHOOTING ARTISTS FOR DRAWING PROPHET MOHAMMED
  • FLYING PLANES INTO BUILDINGS, KILLING PLANE PASSENGERS AND PEOPLE IN BUILDINGS
  • BLOWING UP TEENS AND THEIR PARENTS AT POP MUSIC CONCERTS
  • RIOTING
  • RAPING CHILDREN
  • GROPING OR RAPING WOMEN / ACTING AS RAPE APOLOGISTS
  • SELLING WOMEN AS SEX SLAVES
  • KILLING WOMEN RAPE VICTIMS FOR BEING RAPE VICTIMS (HONOR KILLINGS)
  • FGM (FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION)
  • PROHIBITING GIRLS FROM RECEIVING EDUCATIONS
  • KILLING HOMOSEXUALS FOR BEING HOMOSEXUAL
  • REFUSING TO BAKE HOMOSEXUAL WEDDING CAKES
  • HATING PIGLET FROM WINNIE THE POOH
  • KILLING PEOPLE FOR WATCHING SOCCER GAMES
  • PROHIBITING VALENTINE’S DAY CELEBRATIONS
  • BEING OFFENDED BY BURGER KING ICE CREAM
  • BEING OFFENDED BY NIKE SHOES
  • FORBIDDING WOMEN TO RIDE BICYCLES
  • ARRESTING WOMEN FOR WEARING SKIRTS IN PUBLIC
  • JAILING WOMEN FOR HAVING CONSENSUAL SEX
  • DENYING THEIR RELIGION EVER PLAYS A PART IN ANY OF THE ABOVE

Some Examples and / or commentary:

♦ DEFENDING OR PROMOTING WIFE ABUSE

April 2017, Australia:

Radical Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir takes aim at mainstream Muslims who condemn domestic violence

Video, You Tube: Imam explains why it’s “ok” to beat a women.

 June 2016:

Top Imam Says Beating Wives Is The Only Way To Control Them

A leading Pakistani cleric has provided male followers with a step-by-step guide to controlling their women – with a “light beating” suggested at the end of the process for problem wives.

Continue reading “Stuff Muslim Culture Likes”

Tolerance, Compassion, and Knowing People Personally

Tolerance, Compassion, and Knowing People Personally

I keep running into politically left wing types or touchie-feelie Christians (some of whom may be somewhat conservative, which surprises me) on social media who assume the reason I must oppose certain things, such as–

-Mass Muslim immigration
-Allowing biological men into women’s bathrooms and fitting rooms under transgender laws

is due to some kind of personal animosity towards these groups of people.

The reason I object to, or am concerned about, things such as mass Muslim immigration or transgender bathroom bills has NOTHING to do with personal hatred on my part towards Muslims or transgender people.

I find this so frustrating that this is assumed about me from the start, and this assumption occurs constantly on Twitter and other blogs.

If you bother to get to know me, or read many of my blog posts on this blog, or stop and ask me my feelings about things (instead of JUST ASSUMING you know why I must hold thus- and- so an opinion on a given topic), you would discover I’m pretty laid back about things, more so than the people who yell at me online.

Continue reading “Tolerance, Compassion, and Knowing People Personally”

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin

(Before I get to the link proper, here is a long introduction by me.)

I agree with this guy’s editorial (linked to farther below). I’ve written of this phenomenon before on my own blog, going back a year or maybe as long as three years ago (see links at the bottom of this post under the “Related Posts” section).

I do not like legalistic jerks. I don’t think Christians should be rude, mean, hateful jerks to other people, even when condemning certain behaviors as being sinful.

However. HOWEVER.

I can’t say as though I’m a whole-scale supporter of legalism’s opposite characteristics, either – which amounts to extreme leniency and “watering down of standards” in the name of Love and Tolerance.

I have seen some Christians so very afraid of hurting the feelings of Non-Christians (or even that of fellow Christians) who are in sin, or in confronting Christians who are openly supportive of behaviors the Bible condemns, they tip toe around the sin in question to an absurd degree – where they end up practically supporting, condoning, or excusing said sin (whatever it may be).

These Christians are hyper-sensitive to other people’s feelings, and it is a huge annoyance to me.

This tendency to treat other people’s feelings with kid gloves has gotten so bad in Christendom (particularly in regards to sexual sin), that some preachers have admitted they are afraid to speak out against sin in public, in their blogs, TV shows, books, or from the pulpit.

It’s also very common among Christian lay persons, or by ex-Christians or liberal Christians, who confuse God’s propensity to love and forgive with the notion that God (and Jesus Christ) are hunky-dory with behavior the Bible thoroughly condemns, such as hetero pre-marital sex or homosexual sex acts, for example.

(Transgenderism is a sexual state which has become the new liberal Christian, moderate Christian, Theology of Hurt Feelings Christian, ex-Christian, and left wing secular Sacred Cow that you may not criticize at all.)

It’s also intriguing to me that on the spiritual abuse blogs I have visited, whose owners and members champion the downtrodden (i.e., adults who have been mistreated by churches, or victims of sexual abuse whose abuse was swept under the rug by their fellow church members), have forum or blog participants, who will, on one hand, quite understandably call for the heads of such abusive church members on a platter, rightly call out Christians as being naive fools about abuse in churches, but – many of these same people are also very dismissive of, or blind to, abuses by Muslim militants and homosexual militants.

They are very naive of abuses by Muslims and homosexuals. They seem to have a huge blind spot in those areas.

How they can so easily spot and repudiate Christian and church bungling of spiritual and child sexual abuse, or of preachers who exploit their church members, but fail to recognize the dangers of Muslim and homosexual militancy in American society and other regions of the world, I will never understand.

The blindness and naive nature by folks on those sorts of forums and blogs also extends to Roman Catholicism.

I have had a few Roman Catholic friends in the past, and they are fine people, but their church? No.

The Roman Catholic Church used to burn people at the stake, but one Roman Catholic individual recently thanked a (Protestant) blogger for bringing to everyone’s attention the anti-Roman Catholic commentary expressed by yet another blog (a Protestant one which was critical of perceived sinful RC behavior).

I mean, really? Some Protestant writing a critical comment about Roman Catholic behavior in general on a blog is thought somehow worse than the Roman Catholic Church in years past doing things such as:

-Covering up priest sexual abuse of children, or….

-Burning people to death for refusing to convert to Roman Catholicism, or for (Link to Wiki page): translating the Bible into English, or….

-The same Roman Catholic Church that historically has held the position that the Gospel (which includes sola fide) is anathema (to be damned)?

        (Off site link for more on that:

      Roman Catholic Church condemns the Gospel itself

          )

        Seriously?

        But you can’t easily point these issues of the Roman Catholic Church out at some forums or blogs – the ones who are into The Theology of Hurt Feelings – as it might offend a Roman Catholic somewhere.

        The Roman Catholic Church historically persecuted a lot of people (see again: burning people to death at the stake for things like not converting to Catholicism), but criticism on the internet of their church is considered by some of them to be the height of persecution against Roman Catholics.

        At any rate, I agree with the gentlemen quoted below.

        There is most certainly a Theology of Hurt Feelings, where-in some Christians are so incredibly concerned with not offending various classes of sinners (e.g., hetero fornicators or active homosexuals), they think Christians speaking out publicly (on blogs, radio shows, in church services, etc) is “unloving” and therefore Christ would object to it.

        The mind boggles at this. Jesus Christ died on the cross to pay for hetero fornication and homosexual sex acts, among other sins of humanity. But these “lovey dovey” types want other Christians to pipe down about all this and act as though God is totaly fine with, and accepting of, all manner of sin.

        The Bible presents a God who is not only loving, forgiving, and gracious, but also one who is Holy, just, and who does not tolerate sin, he does not like sin, and he won’t put up with sin indefinitely. God is not fine and dandy with sin. And the Bible does in fact call out hetero pre-marital sex, and all homosexual sex acts, as sin.

        I suspect that this well-meaning, yet wrong-headed, tendency to want to be Very Loving, Very Accepting, and To Spare People’s Feelings, is partially responsible for what gave rise several years ago to the ridiculous, non-sensical, un-Biblical habit of referring to fornicators as “Born Again Virgins,” “Spiritual Virgins,” and similar monikers (see links below, this post, for more about that).

        (Link): Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities

        Excerpts.

            BY ALEX MURASHKO , CHRISTIAN POST REPORTER 
            July 25, 2014|8:33 am

          Advocates for behavior considered immoral by Christians who believe the Bible is God’s inerrant word, have successfully used the idea of “love” to affirm homoerotic behavior, to redefine marriage and family, to justify pedophilia, and as theologian and pastor James Emery White recently pointed out, to justify assisted suicide.

          The problem, White writes in his blog, Church & Culture, is that the “love” described to normalize these behaviors is “not the biblical idea of love.”

          Continue reading “Theologian Says ‘Love’ Is the New Cultural Apologetic Affirming Immoral Activities – Theology of Hurt Feelings – Why Christians Are Reluctant To Call Out Sexual Sin”

          Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or Rhetoric

          Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or “Not All” Rhetoric
          ——————————-
          REMINDER

          If you are new to this blog, I possibly need to remind you that I am socially conservative, right wing, and a Republican.

          (Edit, Sept 2016. My views have shifted somewhat in the last couple of years, since I last wrote this post. I am still right wing but more moderate now.)

          Although I do criticize my fellow right wingers, as well as Christians, time and again on this site over some subjects, I am not liberal, progressive, Democratic, left wing, nor am I pro-choice or pro-homosexuality.

          I do not despise the notions of, belief in, or practice of, moral absolutes, Christianity, the nuclear family, traditional marriage, sexual purity, Christians, the Bible, or a literal biblical hermeneutic.

          (However, I do not always agree with other conservatives about topics, or how to handle those topics.)

          If you’re feeling very confused or duped at this point, as in, “Hey, I’ve been visiting this blog for months now, or I followed you on Twitter, and I thought you are liberal, and that you hate conservatives and Christianity like I do?!”

          No, you have misunderstood me or my positions.

          Just because I am sometimes critical of Christians, or how Christians and conservatives sometimes pontificate about certain matters, does not mean I am against either one or that I am automatically a liberal who supports abortion, Democrats, Obama, or homosexuality.

          You might want to see this blog’s “About” page for more about my views. I tend to criticize other right wingers more so than left wingers on this blog, but this is one of those posts where I have to criticize the left.
          ——————————-
          Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or “Not All” Rhetoric

          Secular feminists hate men who interject into feminist conversations online – or in real life – about sexism and rape apologia to say, “But not all men are like that; I am not.”

          Feminists are annoyed over this common behavior to the point they started using the “#NotAllMen” hash tag on Twitter and blogs.

          If you’re not familiar with the history of, or the bruhaha over, the “Not All Men” phenomenon, you can read more about it on Time magazine’s site here:
          (Link): Not All Men: A Brief History of Every Dude’s Favorite Argument, by Jess Zimmerman.

          (Edit. Since I wrote this post, I read one source that says that it was men who started use of the “#NotAllMen” hash to counter balance the feminist “#YesAllWomen” hash, but by the time I started seeing “#NotAllMen” it was being used by feminists against sexist men.)

          Not too long ago, in a conversation in the comments on a left wing site under an article criticizing a famous conservative journalist’s position about something related to sexism, I pointed out that not all conservatives and Republicans see eye- to- eye on every issue, so please don’t assume that one journalist’s views on that one issue are indicative of all conservatives – as the author of the article I was commenting on seemed to imply.

          I also pointed out in that same post that I myself, who am a conservative Republican, did not totally support conservatives on the particular topic under discussion, and some rude, liberal, Democratic jackass at that site gave me a sarcastic comment and dismissed my view by sarcastically using the “#Not All Conservatives” hash.

          (Among other snarky commentary from that person. This person was truly being an assh-le for no good reason.

          I said nothing to that point to provoke snarky, condescending remarks from anyone.

          After that person was rude to me, and only afterwards, did I tell her she was rude and could kiss my ass, but prior to that, before her rudeness, I was being polite.)

          On the one hand, I can certainly understand why, for example, women may find it rude or annoying when their feminist conversation about male privilege or sexism gets interrupted by some man interjecting to say, “But I am a man, and I respect women” because that can seem to diminish the experiences of sexism by women who are discussing the topic.

          On the other hand, nobody likes seeing a group they are a member of, or sympathetic to, being generalized unfairly, or painted with a broad-brush.

          Liberals are often hypocritical on this point. And they are also terribly blinded to their hypocrisy.

          #NOT ALL MUSLIMS

          For example, any time a conservative points out that quite a number of Muslims are terribly sexist against women (e.g., honor killings of female rape victims, extreme modesty teaching which blames women for male sexual crimes or male misbehavior, the practice of female genital mutilation, forced marriages of young girls to old men – are all common beliefs or practices in Islamic communities)-

          Or, when conservatives make the true observation that most terrorism in the world today is carried out by Muslims (enjoy this site, or this one (*and see a few more links at the bottom of this post)), your left wingers will quickly exclaim,
          “But not all Muslims are like that! I’ve even known some Muslims personally, and they are very nice people.”

          Hence, we see #Not All Muslims at play by left wingers in conversations about terrorism. Often.

          #NOT ALL ATHEISTS

          When I have visited theologically liberal or ex- Christian sites, which are sometimes populated by self-professing atheists (who usually claim to be former Christians), they get angry when Christians point to news stories of atheists who get arrested for murder, or rape, or what have you.

          Immediately, the atheists, or theologically liberal Christians, start saying (this one seems to comes up on Stuff Christian Culture Likes Facebook group about once a week it seems, eg. in (Link): this discussion),
          “How long until conservative Christians point to this news story of this atheist murdering this child as proof that all atheists are unethical, murdering slugs? Don’t they know that not all atheists are killers or child molesters?”

          Yes, I sometimes see anti-Christian atheists bring out the “#NotAllAtheist” commentary.

          However, many times, these same atheists like to bring up the Christian “#Not All Christian” habit of saying, “Maybe the preacher arrested for child rape was not a ‘real’ Christian,” by mentioning the “No True Scotsman” fallacy (you can read more about that here or here).

          You can see examples of Non-Christians complaining about the alleged Christian use of “No True Scotsman” (Link): here (link is to SCCL Facebook group page, a group which runs from theologically liberal to atheistic).

          Let us review.

          Some atheists get angry at Christians who assume all, or most atheists, are immoral scum balls, but atheists do not mind assuming these things are true of all Christians.

          Atheists detest the #NotAllChristians tactic by Christians, vis a vis the “No True Scotsman” stance, but atheists don’t hesitate to scream #NotAllAtheists in similar contexts.

          Oh, I see. We want to make exceptions for our side but not the other side; how convenient.

          We want to be angry atheists snarking on Christians all day long and pointing out Christian flaws, but Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid if Christians mention crimes or misbehavior by atheists! Talk about a double standard.

          NO TRUE SCOTSMAN

          I hate to disappoint the die-hard, irrational, frothing- at- the mouth variety of atheists out there (and many of you are indeed irrational – your hatred for God and Christians is based on emotion or personal dislike of Christians, not due to intellect or dispassionate reason as is often claimed), the “No Scotsman Fallacy” does not totally apply to Christianity to start with.

          Jesus Christ himself taught that not all who consider themselves Christians are in fact actual, real, genuine followers of his, even if they do claim to be so.

          See for example, (Link): this biblical passage or (Link): this one or (Link): this one.

          #NOT ALL HOMOSEXUALS

          I’ve noticed that any time crimes or bigotry by homosexuals against heterosexuals, other homosexuals, or other groups, are brought up on blogs or news sites, especially on forums or blogs that tend to have a large segment of left wingers, most of the left wingers are quick to jump in with the “not all homosexuals” argumentation.

          One case in point was a recent letter to the “Ask Amy” advice columnist.

          Here is a link to the letter:
          (Link): Mom worries about gym teacher in locker room

          Here is the letter:

          DEAR AMY:

            My seventh-grade daughter’s female gym teacher is openly gay. None of the parents or kids has a problem with this.

          The issue is that she observes the girls changing into and out of their gym clothes, and my daughter and many of her peers feel very uncomfortable having a lesbian watch them walk around in their underwear.

          I’m afraid to say anything because I worry that my daughter will be given a “special area” to change, and it will make her feel awkward.

          I understand that seventh-graders need supervision in the locker room, but it seems to me the school should know that it may not be appropriate to have a lesbian in the locker room with young girls!

          By the way, the teacher has never behaved unprofessionally — nor is anyone worried that she might — it is simply an issue of discomfort.

          What’s the right answer that respects everyone involved? — Concerned Mom

          Here is part of Amy’s reply:

          DEAR CONCERNED:

            …You might start this conversation by letting your daughter know that there is a likelihood some of her fellow students at school or on sports teams are also lesbians, and that in this environment, along with trusting her instincts, she also has to trust other people (gay and straight) to have integrity.

          You seem to think that because this teacher is a lesbian, she may also be attracted to — or be an unhealthy presence — for girls.

          Judging by the preponderance of recent alarming news reports of improper sexual relationships between teachers and students, a student is much more likely to be hit on by a heterosexual teacher than a gay one.

          — (end Amy letter)—

          First of all, notice that Amy’s tact here is pretty much a “Not All Homosexuals” argument. She even goes further to use a “Most All Heteros” argument.

          Amy is telling the mother who wrote the letter not to assume that just because a female gym teacher is lesbian that this necessarily means that the teacher is viewing the students in a sexual manner or will “hit” on them.

          That may very well be true, but note the “Not All Lesbians” rhetoric is being employed in the first place.

          When I visited sites that published copies of this letter and had a comment section, I noted that many of the commentators left statements to the effect of “the gym teacher’s sexual preference should not be an issue, as not all homosexuals prey on children.”

          It was remarkable how often the “Not All Homosexuals” cliche’ kept popping up under this particular “Ask Amy” letter and previous ones like it, that mentioned homosexual people.

          Secondly, per Amy’s comment that

            “Judging by the preponderance of recent alarming news reports of improper sexual relationships between teachers and students, a student is much more likely to be hit on by a heterosexual teacher than a gay one”

          there are more heterosexuals than homosexuals in American culture, so it would mathematically figure that there are more hetero predators than homosexual ones, based on “counting noses” of sexual offenders alone.

          However, based on various studies I have seen over the past ten or more years, there is a HIGHER PERCENTAGE of pedophiles among homosexuals than heteros.

          Continue reading “Hypocrisy of Left Wingers and Atheists and the #NotAll Hash Tag or Rhetoric”