Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Blacks against Black Lives Matter [MATURE]

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Veteran Member

Why can't I (or anyone) acknowledge that yes, black on black crime is a problem, but at the same time be upset and outraged when an unarmed black (or any race) person is killed or excess force is clearly used is and the cop is fully aquitted? It sounds like the people in these videos are saying that if a black person is a killed by a cop, no matter how unjustified, I should just keep my head down and remember that "90 whatever percent of blacks are killed by other black people" so there's nothing to be upset about. That just doesn't match up for me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/1/2017 at 11:16 PM, ireallywannaknow said:

Why can't I (or anyone) acknowledge that yes, black on black crime is a problem, but at the same time be upset and outraged when an unarmed black (or any race) person is killed or excess force is clearly used is and the cop is fully aquitted? It sounds like the people in these videos are saying that if a black person is a killed by a cop, no matter how unjustified, I should just keep my head down and remember that "90 whatever percent of blacks are killed by other black people" so there's nothing to be upset about. That just doesn't match up for me. 

But the issue is that people aren't doing that.  They aren't addressing the bigger killer of blacks.  And, at the same time they're trying to play the victim card.  The leaders of this movement will organize a rally for a black person killed by a white cop, regardless of the facts.  But they usually won't do the same when a black cop kills a black suspect, and they rarely (if ever) organize one in places where blacks are getting killed by other blacks (gangs and stuff) in the streets.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
10 hours ago, ireallywannaknow said:

Why can't I (or anyone) acknowledge that yes, black on black crime is a problem, but at the same time be upset and outraged when an unarmed black (or any race) person is killed or excess force is clearly used is and the cop is fully aquitted? It sounds like the people in these videos are saying that if a black person is a killed by a cop, no matter how unjustified, I should just keep my head down and remember that "90 whatever percent of blacks are killed by other black people" so there's nothing to be upset about. That just doesn't match up for me. 

I think it's a matter of proportion. What these people seem to be arguing is that the biggest problem facing the Black community in their view is not police brutality, so why spend so much time and effort talking about that, rather than the more serious issues within the Black community. That's not to suggest that there is no racism in society, or no police brutality. I'm pretty sure that these people know that.

It also tends to be the case that many (although certainly not all) of those who are killed by the police are actual criminals, who are often resisting arrest. It could be argued that the response is disproportionate, but at the end of the day people are going to care more about an innocent young girl being killed, than a criminal being killed.

Aside from that, if you look beyond the 'black lives matter' slogan, which nobody who isn't racist can disagree with, the actual substance of the movement is troubling on many levels, and naturally many Blacks are going to object to it.

Edited by Haydar Husayn
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Just to reinforce what @Qa'im said in his post:

From their guiding principles:

Quote

We are committed to building a Black women affirming space free from sexism, misogyny, and male‐centeredness.

We are committed to disrupting the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and “villages” that collectively care for one another, and especially “our” children to the degree that mothers, parents and children are comfortable.

We are committed to fostering a queer‐affirming network. When we gather, we do so with the intention of freeing ourselves from the tight grip of heteronormative thinking or, rather, the belief that all in the world are heterosexual unless s/he or they disclose otherwise.

We are committed to embracing and making space for trans brothers and sisters to participate and lead. We are committed to being self-reflexive and doing the work required to dismantle cis-gender privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence.

We are committed to making our spaces family-friendly and enable parents to fully participate with their children. We are committed to dismantling the patriarchal practice that requires mothers to work “double shifts” that require them to mother in private even as they participate in justice work.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/guiding-principles/

What the hell? How can any Muslim support this kind of nonsense?

From 'Herstory' (instead of HIStory, geddit?):

Quote

Suddenly, we began to come across varied adaptations of our work–all lives matter, brown lives matter, migrant lives matter, women’s lives matter, and on and on. While imitation is said to be the highest form of flattery, I was surprised when an organization called to ask if they could use “Black Lives Matter” in one of their campaigns. We agreed to it, with the caveat that a) as a team, we preferred that we not use the meme to celebrate the imprisonment of any individual and b) that it was important to us they acknowledged the genesis of  #BlackLivesMatter.  I was surprised when they did exactly the opposite and then justified their actions by saying they hadn’t used the “exact” slogan and, therefore, they deemed it okay to take our work, use it as their own, fail to credit where it came from, and then use it to applaud incarceration.

I was surprised when a community institution wrote asking us to provide materials and action steps for an art show they were curating, entitled “Our Lives Matter.”  When questioned about who was involved and why they felt the need to change the very specific call and demand around Black lives to “our lives,” I was told the artists decided it needed to be more inclusive of all people of color. I was even more surprised when, in the promotion of their event, one of the artists conducted an interview that completely erased the origins of their work–rooted in the labor and love of queer Black women.

Pause.

When you design an event / campaign / et cetera based on the work of queer Black women, don’t invite them to participate in shaping it, but ask them to provide materials and ideas for next steps for said event, that is racism in practice.  It’s also hetero-patriarchal. Straight men, unintentionally or intentionally, have taken the work of queer Black women and erased our contributions.  Perhaps if we were the charismatic Black men many are rallying around these days, it would have been a different story, but being Black queer women in this society (and apparently within these movements) tends to equal invisibility and non-relevancy.
 

[...]

Black Lives Matter is a unique contribution that goes beyond extrajudicial killings of Black people by police and vigilantes.  It goes beyond the narrow nationalism that can be prevalent within some Black communities, which merely call on Black people to love Black, live Black and buy Black, keeping straight cis Black men in the front of the movement while our sisters, queer and trans and disabled folk take up roles in the background or not at all.  Black Lives Matter affirms the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, Black-undocumented folks, folks with records, women and all Black lives along the gender spectrum.  It centers those that have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.  It is a tactic to (re)build the Black liberation movement.

When we say Black Lives Matter, we are talking about the ways in which Black people are deprived of our basic human rights and dignity. It is an acknowledgement Black poverty and genocide is state violence.  It is an acknowledgment that 1 million Black people are locked in cages in this country–one half of all people in prisons or jails–is an act of state violence.  It is an acknowledgment that Black women continue to bear the burden of a relentless assault on our children and our families and that assault is an act of state violence. Black queer and trans folks bearing a unique burden in a hetero-patriarchal society that disposes of us like garbage and simultaneously fetishizes us and profits off of us is state violence; the fact that  500,000 Black people in the US are undocumented immigrants and relegated to the shadows is state violence;.the fact that Black girls are used as negotiating chips during times of conflict and war is state violence; Black folks living with disabilities and different abilities bear the burden of state-sponsored Darwinian experiments that attempt to squeeze us into boxes of normality defined by White supremacy is state violence.  And the fact is that the lives of Black people—not ALL people—exist within these conditions is consequence of state violence.

[...]

In 2014, hetero-patriarchy and anti-Black racism within our movement is real and felt. It’s killing us and it’s killing our potential to build power for transformative social change.  When you adopt the work of queer women of color, don’t name or recognize it, and promote it as if it has no history of its own such actions are  problematic.  When I use Assata’s powerful demand in my organizing work, I always begin by sharing where it comes from, sharing about Assata’s significance to the Black Liberation Movement, what it’s political purpose and message is, and why it’s important in our context.

http://blacklivesmatter.com/herstory/

Reading this, you get the impression that the only issues specific to the Black community that they do want to address, without specifically blaming it on the White supremacist hetero-normative patriarchy, are the issues of homophobia and transphobia (unless it was Whites that brainwashed Blacks into going along with their evil hetero-normative patriarchal agenda).

This LGBT stuff is not simply one faction of BLM, it's central to the whole movement. Supporting them means supporting this very important aspect of their agenda. This isn't the only objectionable part of their platform or tactics of course, but it's certainly a major one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Are people too dumb and blind to realise what this movement is, who it's funded by, and what's going on? I think George Soros and other liberal terrorists should be hung or at best behind bars. I wouldn't be surprised if Soros tried to 'fund' the likes of Noor Tagouri to go on Playboy again but this time slip in a pro LGBT or Muslims feminist line. And then you'd see the usually jumped up Muslim women scrambling to support Noor because she is promoted Islam. Pissoff... Promoting Islam. Whilst you're at that you might as well support her to do a porn shoot as well, it will be promoting Islam and women's equality right.  

As for Muslims who support groups like BLM, sorry but you are stupid as [Edited Out]. I swear to God I am seeing more and more Muslims turning into these retarded liberals. We need to donate funds to these liberal Muslims to have a CT scan or MRI. 

Edited by YAli
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

When I compare liberals with religious people, this is how I see it. Liberals talk about homosexuals but they also talk about equality for women and black people. I don't agree with their views about homosexuals but I feel that homosexuals make a very small percent of Muslims while women and black people make up a large percentage of Muslims. I see religious people are promoting racism and misogyny. I feel that my rights are more likely to be safe with liberals.

Liberals promote sexual immorality but religious people promote domestic violence and racism which causes violence against blacks. I believe that violence (which often results in people dying) is more dangerous than sexual immorality, so I feel inclined towards the liberals.

In the past, we always heard that no Ajmi is greater than Arab. And all the oppression that women go through, it's because of culture, Islam doesn't support it. Now religious people are changing their stance. We only hear islamic concept of justice and equality are not same as western concepts. So what is islamic concept? No one has the courage to say it in clear words. What's islamic view about women and black people. I have seen that the more religious people are more racist and more misogynist. I need protection from misogynist men and all the racist people in my community who are one or two shades fairer than me. If I find that protection with liberals, then of course I am going to support them. 

People here are always complaining about ridiculous things liberals do. What about all the ridiculous ideas religious people do? They constantly use quranic ayats to prove that white and beautiful people are chosen by God and they are more pious. Conversations revolve around who is whiter and who is black. Or they only like to talk about the never ending list of duties of women. I want to know: did Islam always support prejudice against women and black people or did this idea develop recently just to oppose liberals? 

Edited by rkazmi33
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@rkazmi33 Would you say your husband (or future husband) is a minsogynst if he is the leader of the house, and if he asks you to tell him where you are going when you leave the house. And if you want to meet up with friends at night, and you start doing it often, he tells you no and says you can't go. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@YAli The first sentence seems like a simple statement but it can be dangerous. The other problems you mentioned, these are not the problems common in Muslim households. When I talk about women rights, I am not talking about not wearing hijab, or leading the prayers or equal share in inheritance. My focus is mostly abuse. Abuse is happening on a wide scale in eastern countries and conditions are better in western countries. When people complain about moral problems in western society, I fail to see their point because there are bigger moral problems in eastern societies. There's no accountability for oppression and violence in other cultures. 

I will give my definition of misogynist :he expects his wife to do all housework for him, take care of his kids and always look pretty. She should never gain weight, her skin should be flawless, her cooking and cleaning skills should be better than all other women in his life. He can also get married to more women and all his wives should live in the same house constantly competing with each other and trying to get his attention. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@rkazmi33 I think women's rights should be renamed to Islamic rights then. With women's rights it will end up including all kinds of crap that western feminism churns out. 

Abuse exists and it's a very big problem. My family has seen its fair share. I would say unfortunately it's mostly cultural, for some reason it seems the man/husband is married not only to his wife but also his mother and sisters (not literally to the latter two). I see this a lot in the indo-pak communities. 

As for the last things you mentioned, well I believe the wise woman is the one that knows how to take care of her household, and raise her kids. As for looking flawless, no one is flawless, but she should try and be beautiful and love her husband. But the husband should also lover be back lots and lots, and stay clean. 

As for multiple wives living in the same house, I don't think this is part of Islam. Another cultural thing. They are supposed to have their own homes, they are not meant to share kicthens and lounges etc. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@rkazmi33 As for your first post about supporting liberal (I think you are open to supporting to BLM as well), maybe when you have children and they grow up a bit and they come under these influences via school, then you will have a sudden change of heart. Especially when it changes their behaviour. 

If you already have children... Then I don't know what to say. You sound like you are one of those that has tasted only cultural Islam, and if you are from the indo-pak region, then it would be highly likely this is the case. 

I believe what needs to happen to fix the problem... Is... Fix the problem. So these abuses which you say happen, they happen due to cultural tendencies. Or many times you may have a husband who is very short tempered (nature), just like some women can be like that. You will also find this among secular people as well, infact some of them can be very short tempered. 

So by fix the problem, I mean chuck the cultural crap away, and follow Islam. Women will have the rights which are good for women, as ordained by Allah. And men will get the rights which are good for them, as ordained by Allah. This will required a lot of education though, not of physics, but of what Islam truly is, how you behave, akhlaaq, haram halal, rights of man, rights of women, wife, husband, mother in law(!*^*) and everyone. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@YAli Many people think that black people and women are always playing victims. They have enough rights, why are they always complaining. Men are physically stronger than women and most people prefer fair complexion. Without any type of guidance, people would assume that men are better than women and white people are better than black people. That's why we need religion to remind people that these qualities are given by God and you cannot claim to be superior based on these qualities. For centuries, women and black people have suffered. These biases are still present in people. That's why it is responsibility of religious scholars to constantly remind people.

A woman should take care of the house but her performance is measured by her husband. She may be very good at it and she may work hard but if her husband is abusive, he will never like anything she does. So if the husband is unhappy, it's not always the fault of woman. 

Edited by rkazmi33
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/2/2017 at 6:47 AM, rkazmi33 said:

When I compare liberals with religious people, this is how I see it. Liberals talk about homosexuals but they also talk about equality for women and black people.

Yes, and this is the big appeal to these groups. However, what do they mean by equality for women for example? Do you feel that the way they have encouraged women to behave in the name of equality is a positive one? Their version of equality is predicated on promiscuity and abortion. They worship at the altar of the contraceptive pill, which 'freed' women to be able to have sex without 'suffering' the consequences of getting pregnant, and if she did get pregnant then there is abortion.

Quote

I don't agree with their views about homosexuals but I feel that homosexuals make a very small percent of Muslims while women and black people make up a large percentage of Muslims.

The issue isn't how many homosexuals there are.To see the dangers, it's a good idea to look at what has happened to Christianity. 15-20 years ago pretty much all Christian denominations were against homosexuality. But then there was a big propaganda push, and some ultra-liberal Christians were coming out with things like 'love matters', and Jesus never said anything about homosexuality.  The media was used to push the message that opposing homosexuality was backwards and hypocritical. For a while the conservative Churches stayed firm, but as more and more 'pro-LGBT' laws passed, and the culture moved decisively in favour of this stuff, many Churches started buckling, to the point that we are now seeing a total collapse on their position on this issue. Why? Because when people have been brainwashed into thinking that being gay is like being black, and just as people can't do anything about their race, they can't do anything about their sexuality either (even if this was true, the argument is still logically fallacious), then they become internally conflicted, and this leads them to question their religion. This can only be amplified when you are campaigning shoulder to shoulder with people who are supporting this agenda. If pro-LGBT people are fighting for your rights, and you are fighting for their rights, is it really going to be so easy to maintain that their behaviour is majorly sinful? At best, it will lead to a desire to push those issues to the back of one's mind. Just as with Christians, sooner or later, this liberal mentality is going to conflict with a person's religion, and from experience it tends to be liberalism that wins for most people.

Quote

I see religious people are promoting racism and misogyny. I feel that my rights are more likely to be safe with liberals.

Which religious people promote racism and misogyny? I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but are there any examples that immediately come to your mind.

As for your right as a Muslim, once being 'LGBT' becomes seen fully as just being Black, do you think that these same people are going to tolerate Muslims having beliefs that include thinking that this is sinful and theoretically deserving of death? Think about what would happen to a religious that had these kind of teachings about Blacks. At best, the religion would have to remove those teachings, as the Mormons did with some of their racist teachings. People may think this would never happen, but I would like to hear an argument as to why it couldn't, since the comparison between race and sexuality is constantly made.

Quote

Liberals promote sexual immorality but religious people promote domestic violence and racism which causes violence against blacks. I believe that violence (which often results in people dying) is more dangerous than sexual immorality, so I feel inclined towards the liberals.

Again, I don't know how widespread religious people promoting domestic violence and racism is. I listen quite a bit to both Muslim and Christian religious people and I can safely say that I've never heard them promoting anything that would even be close to this.

On the other hand, Liberals certainly do promote the mass murder of unborn children. Or do you agree with them that a baby doesn't become a human life until it is born, and so its life doesn't matter? The way in which Muslims have become desensitised to abortion is a perfect example of how allying themselves with Liberals and consuming their propaganda has been disastrous for their ethical principles. We love talking about how Islam stopped the Arabs from killing their infant daughters, and then we go and support people that positively celebrate killing unborn children on a mass scale.

Quote

In the past, we always heard that no Ajmi is greater than Arab. And all the oppression that women go through, it's because of culture, Islam doesn't support it. Now religious people are changing their stance. We only hear islamic concept of justice and equality are not same as western concepts. So what is islamic concept? No one has the courage to say it in clear words. What's islamic view about women and black people.

Who tries to justify racism and misogyny by saying that the Islamic concepts of justice and equality are different to Western ones? While I would agree with that statement, I don't think that implies treating Black people any differently to anyone else. As for women, I would say that they have different roles to men, but have their rights just as men have theirs. Islam doesn't promote Western-style feminism though.

Quote

I have seen that the more religious people are more racist and more misogynist. I need protection from misogynist men and all the racist people in my community who are one or two shades fairer than me. If I find that protection with liberals, then of course I am going to support them.

Again, I would like to see some examples of these religious people being racist and misogynist, because to me that is a contradiction in terms.

As for seeking the protection of liberals, I think the Qur'an teaches us not to seek the protection of non-believers.

O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are [in fact] allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you - then indeed, he is [one] of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people. [5:51]

And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion. Say, "Indeed, the guidance of Allah is the [only] guidance." If you were to follow their desires after what has come to you of knowledge, you would have against Allah no protector or helper. [2:120]

I think this is definitely worth reflecting on in this day and age (just replace Jews and Christians by Liberals).

Quote

People here are always complaining about ridiculous things liberals do. What about all the ridiculous ideas religious people do? They constantly use quranic ayats to prove that white and beautiful people are chosen by God and they are more pious. Conversations revolve around who is whiter and who is black. Or they only like to talk about the never ending list of duties of women. I want to know: did Islam always support prejudice against women and black people or did this idea develop recently just to oppose liberals? 

Please give me a single example of religious people using ayats to justify White people being beautiful or chosen by God, because I can't think of a single ayat that could support this.

As for duties, men have far more duties in Islam than women do. In another post you mention women having to cook and clear, but Islam specifically says that women don't have to do this.

It sounds to me like you may have had some bad experiences in your life with some Muslims, but they certainly don't sound representative of what Islam teaches at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@rkazmi33 Sister, allying with BLM or any other similar Movement which promotes LGBT causes is a very unwise thing to do. 

As bro Haydar said, you have probably had bad experiences with Muslims who don't truly know much about Islam. But this doesn't mean you hold hands with the devil. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

 

I don't like many of the positions of Dr Umar Johnson, as from watching several of his videos seems just as racist towards White people as real White supremacists are towards Black people. Nevertheless, this was an interesting conversation with a lesbian feminist member of the BLM movement. What I found particularly revealing is her statement near the end of the video (at around the 10:10 mark), where she stated that the founding members of the BLM movement are "not about the liberation of Black people without the liberation of gay people". Says it all really.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Haydar Husayn  I will try to answer all your points. I agree with you about the effects of accepting homosexuality can have on religion. 

What example I have about all the things I have said? Well, Donald Trump represented religious Christians and he was racist and misogynist in clear words. In eastern cultures, women rights and racism are bigger problems compared with west. Abortion should only be allowed when there's a danger to woman's life but the opponents of abortion think that women should have many kids, so that they remain busy and they don't have time to fight for their rights. In those countries, where birth control is not accessible, women have many kids but they are not able to raise them properly and they become bad people. That is also bad for society. 

There is a verse in Quran: on judgement day, sinful people will have black faces and pious people will have black faces. I will try to find the exact verse but you can see that a racist person can use this verse. My extended family was very irreligious until few years ago. Now they have become more religious and I think only reason is that now religious speakers are openly saying things which are compatible with our culture. I have felt this after listening to lectures at my local center. During Muharram, one speaker said: no women is equal to her husband. Arrijalu qawwamoona Alan nisa. Women are mahkoom to their husbands. Only Hazrat Fatima (a.s.) and Hazrat Ali (a.s) were equal. When they are mentioning enemies of Ahlulbayt , they focus on them being ugly and black. 

@YAli and @Haydar Husayn if you have not seen this behavior at your local mosque, then may be your communities are not so traditional. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

@rkazmi33

Abortion is not a small thing to kick away, it is a baby being murdered. Millions of babies are murdered each year by abortion, and yet this does not seem to be making the headlines among these Muslim "feminists" and Muslim "womens rights advocates".

Edited by magma
Replaced quote with tag
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/2/2017 at 1:20 PM, rkazmi33 said:

@Haydar Husayn  I will try to answer all your points. I agree with you about the effects of accepting homosexuality can have on religion. 

That's good.

Quote

What example I have about all the things I have said? Well, Donald Trump represented religious Christians and he was racist and misogynist in clear words.

Actually, this isn't really true. Religious Christians were actually deeply sceptical of Donald Trump because of his lack of morality or commitment to Christianity. Not to mention his past support for abortion, and current support for the LGBT movement. The main reason he obtained so much support from the religious right was because of the fear of Hilary Clinton being in power, and most importantly the effect that would have on the Supreme Court. That is by far the most common reason I heard and read from conservative Christians for supporting Donald Trump. On a personal level, many despise him, and I can give you many examples of that. To the extent that many still refused to back him to the end. They just couldn't bring themselves to vote for such an openly morally corrupt person, despite their loathing for Hilary Clinton. They also didn't trust him to keep his promises in any case.

Quote

In eastern cultures, women rights and racism are bigger problems compared with west.

I agree, but it's not supported by Islam. So if Muslims are oppressing people, then what is needed is a Muslim movement against that, not a movement that will seek to subvert Islamic morality.

Quote

Abortion should only be allowed when there's a danger to woman's life but the opponents of abortion think that women should have many kids, so that they remain busy and they don't have time to fight for their rights.

Why do you say that? What makes you think people don't oppose abortion simply because it's murder?

Quote

In those countries, where birth control is not accessible, women have many kids but they are not able to raise them properly and they become bad people. That is also bad for society. 

This seems like a massive stereotype. Until recent times women didn't have access to abortion, and they often had large families. That didn't mean they were bad people.

Anyway, abortion isn't birth control. Or if it is, it's a very sick form of it.

Quote

There is a verse in Quran: on judgement day, sinful people will have black faces and pious people will have black faces. I will try to find the exact verse but you can see that a racist person can use this verse.

Yes, there are many such verses, but it doesn't have a racist connotation. The 'white faces'  are ones that are brightened with noor, while the 'black faces' are darkened with dirt. That seems fairly clear by looking at all these verses together (http://turntoislam.com/community/threads/the-faces-of-believers-and-disbelievers-on-the-day-of-judgement.8013/). Anyone who tries to make a racist point out of this is an uneducated idiot. Do they think that Western Europeans are then less sinful than Arabs or Asians? If you do encounter such morons, then I would suggest you change mosque if you can.

Quote

My extended family was very irreligious until few years ago. Now they have become more religious and I think only reason is that now religious speakers are openly saying things which are compatible with our culture. I have felt this after listening to lectures at my local center. During Muharram, one speaker said: no women is equal to her husband. Arrijalu qawwamoona Alan nisa. Women are mahkoom to their husbands. Only Hazrat Fatima ((عليه السلام).) and Hazrat Ali ((عليه السلام)) were equal. When they are mentioning enemies of Ahlulbayt , they focus on them being ugly and black. 

@YAli and @Haydar Husayn if you have not seen this behavior at your local mosque, then may be your communities are not so traditional. 

There is no doubt that there are many extremely uneducated and racist people who are unfortunately in a position to speak in mosques and centres, but these people do not represent all religious people (since they can hardly be called religious themselves), let alone be said to represent Islam. Do you listen to speakers and scholars on TV or the internet? If so, do you hear them saying these things?

Racism is rife within Muslim communities, and does need to be addressed. I don't think the solution to that is to join arms with people who stand for values that are completely opposed to Islam though.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
13 minutes ago, E.L King said:

Abortion is not a small thing to kick away, it is a baby being murdered. Millions of babies are murdered each year by abortion, and yet this does not seem to be making the headlines among these Muslim "feminists" and Muslim "womens rights advocates".

Also, just so you know, abortion is not allowed after the soul has entered the baby even if the woman's life is in danger, as per obligatory precaution (Sistani).

It is only allowed prior to the soul entering the baby when the woman's life is in danger. (Sistani).

Just thought I would get that fact out the way because there seems to be a lot of confusion on this topic.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
2 minutes ago, E.L King said:

Abortion is not a small thing to kick away, it is a baby being murdered. Millions of babies are murdered each year by abortion, and yet this does not seem to be making the headlines among these Muslim "feminists" and Muslim "womens rights advocates".

I've even seen a hijabi Muslim 'civil right activist' boasting in a TV interview that Islam supposedly had 'very liberal' laws on abortion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

"We need to abolish the police. Period."

Quote

California State University, Los Angeles professor Nana Gyamfi, who has worked as an attorney for Black Lives Matter protesters, said in an interview this weekend that she is “not concerned about blue lives” and wants the police to be dismantled and abolished.

http://dailycaller.com/2016/07/11/black-lives-matter-attorney-dismantle-and-abolish-the-police/

Quote

If you’re the girlfriend of Philando Castile and just watched a police officer shoot your partner dead for simply complying with an officer’s orders, what good would a 911 call do? If you’re the daughter of Luis Rodriguez and just watched police beat your father to death, would you ever feel safe calling the police about anything in the future? Is there a better way to have a peaceful society without police officers threatening violence or death against the guilty and innocent alike? Will society remain intact if we abolish the police entirely?

In a short answer, yes.

http://usuncut.com/black-lives-matter/abolished-police-instead-full-social-equality/

Quote

The group, Millions March NYC, makes a solid point: it is imperative to defund police departments across the country immediately, redirecting that money instead to black futures and the marginalized. Because while reparations paid to next of kin for police abuse is already a billion-dollar business, there is no need for anyone to be executed in the first place.

As Millions March accurately explains, “Policing is a violent, anti­-black institution that originated as slave patrols and expanded into the domestic occupying force seen today in working­ class communities and communities of color.”

Policing doesn’t work.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/03/new-york-millions-march-nyc-black-lives-matter-defund-police

Oh, and obviously abolish prisons too:

Quote

 It’s a one-issue movement. Although it is true that much of the protesting to date has been centered on the issue of police brutality, there is a range of issues that movement work will likely push in years to come. One is the issue of our failing system of public education, which is a virtual school-to-prison pipeline for many black youth. Another is the complete dismantling of the prison industrial complex. Many of the movement’s organizers identify as abolitionists, which in the 21st-century context refers to people who want to abolish prisons and end the problem of mass incarceration of black and Latino people. 

http://blacklivesmatter.com/11-major-misconceptions-about-the-black-lives-matter-movement/
 

Quote

Imagining a world without policing is the central task for activists. A complete take-over of the criminal justice system and the police force should be the preliminary demand.  Building a new system to replace the old is essential. But it is not enough. Ending policing and abolishing prisons are just the tip of the iceberg. Now is the time to think big.

[...]

1)Policing Replaced with Conflict Mediation and Violence Interrupters
Policing is backwards—by design. Rather than stop crime it manufactures it. Policing criminalizes people; it doesn’t catch criminals. It does nothing to prevent violence. Instead, it is violence. Preventative conflict resolution and violence interrupters, on the other hand, do it right. Pilot programs based on these ideas have been run by community members in schools and local neighborhoods with great success. We must demand that all money currently allocated to police forces be turned over to community controlled and operated organizations focused on building peaceful communities. Conflicts between persons should be resolved before escalating to violence. Conflicts over private property can be prevented by economic justice (see below) or by transitioning away from private property altogether (also see below). These panels will further offer much needed income to community members and encourage everyone to participate in building a grass roots sense of community.  Black women will likely take the lead.

2) Prison Industrial Complex Replaced with Restorative Justice
So what happens when harm still happens? Here we need a parallel justice system that diverts black bodies away from state violence. When a wrong occurs despite our best efforts to prevent it, justice must be restored to victims, communities, and offenders. When coupled with violence interruption, restorative justice can turn tragedies into community building opportunities. The key principle is that those who are wronged must be made whole by those who wronged them. The community at large must come back together to unite and support all those effected by a breach in justice—including the offender. Rather than individualize, criminalize, and punish, this system of restorative justice becomes a modus operandi for communities and individuals to build lives together, establish trust, and iron out the wrinkles along the way.

http://www.aaihs.org/victory-for-black-lives-matter-10-ideas-for-a-lasting-revolution/

These people are completely insane. But, according to some high-profile Muslims, we need to support Black Lives Matter, because they are standing up against 'injustice' and 'oppression'. Even if I fully agreed with that, just because someone accurately diagnoses the disease, it doesn't mean they will be able to prescribe the best treatment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

@Qa'im

Who wants to study books about raping nature?

Quote

Sandra G. Harding (born 1935) is an American philosopher of feminist and postcolonial theory, epistemology, research methodology, and philosophy of science. She taught for two decades at the University of Delaware before moving to the University of California, Los Angeles in 1996. She directed the UCLA Center for the Study of Women from 1996 to 2000, and co-edited Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society from 2000 to 2005. She is currently a Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Education [2] and Gender Studies [3] at UCLA and a Distinguished Affiliate Professor of Philosophy at Michigan State University[4]. In 2013 she was awarded the John Desmond Bernal Prize by the Society for the Social Studies of Science (4S). (Earlier recipients of this prize include Robert Merton, Thomas S. Kuhn, Mary Douglas, and Joseph Needham.)

During what is known now as the "Science Wars", she was part of a debate regarding the value-neutrality of the sciences. This aspect of her work has been criticized by some scientists.[2] Harding referred to Newton's Principia Mathematica as a "rape manual" in her 1986 book "The Science Question in Feminism", a characterization that she later said she regretted.[3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandra_Harding

This is what she said:

Quote

One phenomenon feminist historians have focused on is the rape and torture metaphors in the writings of Sir Francis Bacon and others (e.g. Machiavelli) enthusiastic about the new scientific method. Traditional historians and philosophers have said that these metaphors are irrelevant to the real meanings and referents of scientific concepts held by those who used them and by the public for whom they wrote. But when it comes to regarding nature as a machine, they have quite a different analysis: here, we are told, the metaphor provides the interpretations of Newton's mathematical laws: it directs inquirers to fruitful ways to apply his theory and suggests the appropriate methods of inquiry and the kind of metaphyiscs the new theory supports. But if we are to believe that mechanistic metaphors were a fundamental component of the explanations the new science provided, why should we believe that the gender metaphors were not? A consistent analysis would lead to the conclusion that understanding nature as a woman indifferent to or even welcoming rape was equally fundamental to the interpretations of these new conceptions of nature and inquiry. Presumably these metaphors, too, had fruitful pragmatic, methodological, and metaphysical consequences for science. In that case, why is it not as illuminating and honest to refer to Newton's laws as "Newton's rape manual" as it is to call them "Newton's mechanics"?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators

Malarkey. Plato's Academy is being run by the Athenian fish market. When education is subservient to the free market, universities look to raise their revenues as much as possible. Their strategy is to lower acceptance rates, create more accommodations (safe spaces, censoring course content for political correctness), increase class sizes, give fewer professors tenure, and create more fluff programs and departments to broaden their target audience. All of this only works to dilute education.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Forum Administrators
4 hours ago, Qa'im said:

and create more fluff programs and

I've always thought of such courses as 'applied sociology', but it reminds me to do a separate blog post about the related issue of Mickey Mouse degrees.

In summary.

Having looked at what I previously considered to be a 'Mickey Mouse' degree I learnt to appreciate that in the 21st century we need e.g. 'degrees' in hospitality and tourism in order to train people to become check-in clerks for hotels and airlines for example.

In a previous age, dominated by manufacturing, these people would have done apprenticeships, but in today's service economy their 'training for work' in a service economy can be undertaken in a university and even better for employers the cost of such training is borne by the student.

The word degree applied to such programmes makes the student feel good, but usually their level of intellectual rigour is quite limited.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/4/2017 at 6:44 PM, Bazzi_ said:

I heard George Soros (Jewish Israeli Elitist Billionaire) was funding black lives matter.... 

strange huh..

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/aug/16/black-lives-matter-cashes-100-million-liberal-foun/

Yeah, somehow they don't make much mention of the fact that they are being funded by 'the white man'.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/5/2017 at 4:29 AM, Haydar Husayn said:

Yeah, somehow they don't make much mention of the fact that they are being funded by 'the white man'.

of course there are always a lot of nonsense posts and comments with regard the general topic

 There are persons that are self identifying as "White" and persons that are self identifying as jewish funding everthing that may be funded in the US.

 It is however a serious topic will not go away in the US and continues to be a serious topic.

 The essence of truth being that America could if America liked vet recruits being considered for new hire as policemen in America's cities and do not choose to do so.

 -  -  CONSISTENTLY  CHOOSE  TO  NOT  DO  SO   ! ! ! m

 The police departments in American cities consistently give a first preference to White men who have returned from military service overseas, while many of these had through their lives been bullies who wanted to pick up a gun and shoot, returning from Iraq or Afghanistan they wish to put America's urban Blacks in their place. These are day after day being hired on as police officers in America. 

 American police departments could easily use psychological profiling and analysis to determine whether a candidate may have a propensity toward dislike of Blacks or not and very pointedly does not do so and under the fascist White racist Donald Trump anti-Semite regime will not consider doing so.

ي س

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
On 1/9/2017 at 3:07 PM, Ahmed Ismael said:

of course there are always a lot of nonsense posts and comments with regard the general topic

 There are persons that are self identifying as "White" and persons that are self identifying as jewish funding everthing that may be funded in the US.

 It is however a serious topic will not go away in the US and continues to be a serious topic.

 The essence of truth being that America could if America liked vet recruits being considered for new hire as policemen in America's cities and do not choose to do so.

 -  -  CONSISTENTLY  CHOOSE  TO  NOT  DO  SO   ! ! ! m

What is your evidence for this? As far as I can tell, this is mostly untrue:

Quote

By some estimates, more than 90 percent of law enforcement agencies in the United States use some form of psychological screening of their applicants.

https://www.thebalance.com/psychological-exams-and-screening-for-police-officers-974785

Quote

 The police departments in American cities consistently give a first preference to White men who have returned from military service overseas, while many of these had through their lives been bullies who wanted to pick up a gun and shoot, returning from Iraq or Afghanistan they wish to put America's urban Blacks in their place. These are day after day being hired on as police officers in America. 

There may be some truth to this, but it seems like something that would be hard to substantiate. Not to mention that black police officers also kill black suspects, and some studies have cast doubt on whether black suspects are more likely to be killed by white police officers than black ones, and also whether black suspects are more likely to be killed than white ones. However, there is evidence that blacks are subjected to other forms of physical treatments in greater proportion to that of whites.

Quote

A new study confirms that black men and women are treated differently in the hands of law enforcement. They are more likely to be touched, handcuffed, pushed to the ground or pepper-sprayed by a police officer, even after accounting for how, where and when they encounter the police.

But when it comes to the most lethal form of force — police shootings — the study finds no racial bias.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/12/upshot/surprising-new-evidence-shows-bias-in-police-use-of-force-but-not-in-shootings.html

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/dec/26/black-suspects-more-likely-to-be-shot-by-black-cop/

This is actually completely rational if you think about it. To the extent that a police officer may be thinking clearly in such circumstances, you have to wonder why they would want to risk their career shooting a black suspect (or any suspect for that matter), and go through the stress of the investigation and possible media scrutiny. If someone was a racist, it would make much more sense to engage in the kind of abuse that would be less likely to be detected, and that the officer could get away with more easily.

Quote

 American police departments could easily use psychological profiling and analysis to determine whether a candidate may have a propensity toward dislike of Blacks or not and very pointedly does not do so and under the fascist White racist Donald Trump anti-Semite regime will not consider doing so.

Like I said, it does seem that most police officers undergo psychological screening, even if it might not always be for racial bias. But there could be good reason for this, since it doesn't seem clear how reliable such tests are, and in any case what matters if how someone behaves, not thinks. Most people might have racist tendencies, but as long as they do their job properly, then it's not really an issue. Where it becomes an issue is when they let their prejudices influence their actions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

  regard :  "Most people might have racist tendencies, but as long as  .  .  . "

  No.  racist, White racist, in the United States is an issue quite unique in itself. Racism in the US is a matter of people disavowing the humanness of the Black. Persons who have such disgust toward Black absolutely  ARE  NOT  obvious in having such extreme feelings toward them. White Americans very rarely discuss anything at all about so called color differences, the average White, not the White person who appears on American television. The particular extreme does not ordinarily come out as most Whites who live in the US are very well adjusted to the idea of getting along well with Blacks.  A deeply intensive thorough psychological vetting of potential police recruits indeed would be necessary for an otherwise ordinary enough seeming former veteran of the US military to be revealed as one having deep seated regards for Blacks as being less than human or other than human. This is extremely widespread among Whites in America that seem to for all intents and purposes be ordinary enough in every way, and would easily make the difference between life and death to a Black citizen in the communities in which such officers patrol. He might be a problem. Shoot, kill him first. The proverbial "ask questions later."

This is racial social reality in the US and has been for hundreds and hundreds of years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 years later...

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...