These kinds of “morality” laws always have a built-in slippery slope that entrenches police and judicial corruption, see here:
the bill would also impose a minimum seven-year prison sentence for “promoting homosexuality,” which is undefined in the bill (…) While consensual gay sex is not explicitly outlawed under current law in Iraq, vague “morality” clauses in the country’s penal code are routinely used to target LGBTQ+ people (…) who said it was necessary to “preserve the entity of the Iraqi society from deviation and calls for ‘paraphilia’ [abnormal sexual impulses] that have invaded the world.”
First they speak of homosexuality, half an hour later they’re speaking about deviant behavior and paraphilias. What does count as any of those though? Practicing anal or oral sex? Having pornographic material? Wearing jeans as a woman, or letting your hair slightly long as a man? The vagueness is the purpose: by declaring a not very well defined enemy, people in positions of relative power (a policeman, a judge, a local governor) are capable of promoting witch-hunts about anyone who makes a faux pas.
Ruining the lives of 5-10% of your society’s population is bad enough, but the main purpose of these moves is promoting conformity and entrenching corruption as a means of exerting political power.
Okay why. What’s the reason to “kill the gays”. This is so unreasonably stupid that it exceeds the bounds of comprehensibility. Even the weirdest takes like “don’t let them marry” or “don’t let them have kids” I can at least see where they’re coming from, I firmly disagree, but I can understand what their take is. But why the actuall fuck do you need to kill them?
Inb4 the Russian trolls come here to try and argue this is all Bidens fault and if you vote for him you’re literally as bad as the people actively killing gays.
Maybe my english is not good enough or your sentence is weird. Are YOU saying its all Bidens fault or are the russian Trolls gonna say it’s all Biden fault?
the islamophobia is not really necessary considering right wing governments in a large portion of europe, australia, the us, and canada (the opposition in this case) are all pushing laws criminalising trans and gay people…
But are they chanting “throw the poof off the roof”? Are they willing to take the ultimate step of murdering someone for wanting the love of someone with the same parts as them? Yeah homosexuality is illegal in much of the world and was in most of Europe (even as late as the 60s but to the best of my knowledge, never punishable by death. Yeah Alan Turing went to jail for being gay, and that is inexcusably shitty, but there are different shades of shit.
Just ignore the fact Christians are doing the same thing. It’s not an Islamic issue. It’s a conservative issue. Muslims in America are predominantly left leaning and their views reflect it. I’m more worried about Christians in America trying to kill me than Muslims. They are more accepting of me here than Christians. My local mosque has a big trans rights flag in protest of our local politicians, and guess who were the ones to get upset about that. I’ll give you a hint. It wasn’t the people who were worshiping under the trans rights flag.
As a subject of hate born from essentialization, it’s bad. Don’t do it. Regardless of who you’re essentializing. Systemic oppression can only happen with underlying dehumanization that comes from this thinking. Before you say “what about Nazis?”, still no. It removes responsibility from them. That was the immediate and obvious excuse the people under Nazi Germany used to absolve themselves when the war ended. It was what was used to excuse the people brought to Western nations under programs like paper clip. They are people. They are just like you. You are capable of becoming just like them. Unless you’re willing to accept that, you’re much more susceptible to becoming like them.
I mean, he also messed up some temple peddlers pretty bad that one time. I haven’t read enough of the Quran to really know, but I bet it’s also a mixed bag.
I like the part about kicking over tables and whipping businessmen, but I think if you did the whipping now, a surprising number of them would enjoy it (no kinkshame), so not as effective.
The Gospel of Judas was rejected for the Biblical Cannon, but it would make Christianity make so much more sense. Basically says (along with other stuff) that the old testament god is a lower god that kind of gets off on making us suffer. Hence the impossible challenges used to damn us and the floods and stuff. All done to amuse them. Jesus is the son of the true god. The big boi who actually embodies love, but it so massive that they can’t directly interact with us as they have a lot more big picture shit to do. Jesus was just one of MANY entities sent around to all corners of the universe to spread the message of seeing past the tricks of the lesser gods and the hate and guilt that come from them and find the light of the real, all loving entity. Explains why old testament and new testament god is so different and Jesus seems to give a ton of contradictory messaging to earlier lessons.
Not religious btw. Just find the topic very fascinating.
It’s a rabbit hole. The book of Enoch is pretty wild too. It was so popular that the New Testament was written assuming you had read it, but again, it was rejected from the biblical cannon. There’s a bunch of references in the Bible that make much more sense if you know the Enoch. Some cool lore in there too. All of the apocrypha is cooler than anything in the official Bible cannon tbh. All ruled out because they wanted to make mass as boring as possible I assume.
But yeah, check out Gnosticism. It’s an early sect of Christianity that believes all of the apocrypha. Much more based than our Christians I think. It kind of goes in an eastern religion direction while maintaining western mythology. Interesting stuff. It’s considered the ultimate heresy which is reason enough to learn about it haha
This is a pretty quick intro to the topic. Sub 10 min to get the gist.
I never made that claim but that is the bulk of the link bomb. So once again, can you specifically cite your claim. Otherwise, I’ll just chalk you being incorrect as always.
I’m not making a personal attack. I’m asking you to specifically to back up your claim which you refuse. That means your claim is false since you can’t back it up. As I said I perused through the link bomb and didn’t see anything to backup up your claim. I on the other hand provided a cite that did backup my claim. So I’m leave it at that.
Otherwise, I’ll just chalk you being incorrect as always.
I do not moderate my own discussions, but I am going to be watching you from now on to make sure you do not make such attacks towards others.
If you wish to argue with me that it was not a personal attack, I guess you’ll be surprised when your post gets deleted when it happens again with someone else.
I get it. You can’t backup your claim so you throw the mod gauntlet down. Well played. I would expect a mod to act in good faith by backing their claim and not just link bombing then making personal attacks about the other persons I’ve learned you don’t act in good faith from this discussion.
You can claim I don’t act in good faith if you like and I am happy to continue this discussion if you wish, but I wanted to make it very clear to you first that personal attacks are not tolerated around here and if I had seen you say that to anyone else, it would be deleted. It was a violation of community rules and the only reason it wasn’t deleted by me was because you said it to me.
So I’m not sure why you think me saying I’m not going to moderate this discussion is some throwing “the mod gauntlet” down, but you’re welcome to believe that as well.
I have told you at least three times I read through the links. I asked you to specially callout the cite as I did not see anything to support your claim. A person acting in good faith would callout their evidence to further the conversation to add clarity. A bad faith person, tried to insult the person, throw down the mod gauntlet and won’t clarify their position.
When you want to be a good faith person, let me know. If trump really threatened to execute gay people, that would change my vote
Religion is just a way to try to legitimize hate these days. When you have an indefensible opinion you don’t want to change, say it’s your religion and find an obscure passage to support it. It’s the refuge of the deplorable more than its proclaimed peace and love.
I didn’t say hate didn’t exist outside religion. That would be your cognitive leap. I said religion is used to attempt to legitimize hate as belief so it can be protected from scrutiny on some levels.
Add comment