Still reeling from a moment from a McCain rally where it more or less went:
Woman: “But Barack Hussein Obama is a Muslim!”
McCain: “No ma’am, he’s an upstanding American. I don’t agree with his policies, but he’s a good man.”
The implication of course being that those are mutually exclusive things.
You could read it that way, you could also read the “no ma’am” as a rebuke, like “no, that’s uncalled for, we aren’t doing that here”
I was never a McCain fan and I personally think civility politics are stupid (I want to go back to having brawls in Congress), but I think this is a case of uncharitable interpretation
That’s an interesting take I hadn’t thought of. It’s a shame he didn’t elaborate so we can only speculate.
It’s not a mystery, McCain was big into civility. We can intuit his meaning here, instead of picking the words apart
I was nicely saying you were being an uncharitable reader/listener
Some people just can’t take an admission that they’re probably right without twisting the knife.
Here’s me nicely saying I don’t care what you have to say any more. Enjoy the block!
Of all the hypocrisies, I think I’m most bothered by the fact that conservative strategy these days is nearly 100% identity politics
Did you expect them to sell themselves based on their identity and then to come at their competitor with arguments based on ideology? Of course they’re making this about identity.
Jesus, the wealthy should count their lucky stars we only want to tax the motherfuckers.
Speak for yourself, a lot of us want the MoP.
I’ve tried, but I can’t figure out MoP. Not even with the help of the Internet.
Means of Production
Jesus how long have I been on Lemmy yet couldn’t figure that out. For shame me.
So? He can’t fucking screw things up worse than you christians.
Islam has its flaws: it oppresses women, for example.
I don’t see anything about Islam or women in El-Sayed’s platform though, so that’s irrelevant.
I was addressing the OC point.
Which is?
Look it up.
https://lemmy.world/comment/25433501Again, this only becomes relevant to policy if El-Sayed has said he plans to vote according to this or that Islamic ruling. To my knowledge he’s said no such thing.
I don’t think we can separate a politician from their beliefs and preferences. Even if said politician isn’t mentioning it in the agenda.
right, Christianity totally doesnt have these problems :D they not only also opress women, they also diddle little kids.
Do you think I would defend Christianity? I’m not a fan of it by far.
they also diddle little kids
In Islam the very prophet of it had a wife of 6 at marriage and 9 when the marriage was consummated.
you didn’t defend Christianity. but you’re still attacking a fundamental religious group which has nothing to do with the candidate. why would you do that, when it gives the impression of conflating Muslim believe and Islamism?
Because religion is a cancer.
Religious people tend to extend their restrictions to non-believers.and your solution is to restrict peopled believes? same thing bud.
To restrict religious beliefs.
there’s nothing in Islamic scripture that says “thou shalt oppress women”. there may be cultural oppression but that goes for many societies irrespective of their religion.
“no true Scotsman…”
there may be cultural oppression
Religion is a cultural phenomenon.
Nice changing the goalposts.
You said Islam oppresses women.
If your point is the cultural oppression of women why didn’t you open with that rather than rely on lazy stereotypes about Muslims?
My point is the same: Islam oppresses women.
I live in a Muslim area and you dont know what you’re talking about.
It doesn’t though, some Muslims do. Just like some Christians do. You got mad when someone else used a No True Scotsman argument, but “Islam oppresses women” implicitly uses the exact same argument. “Islam oppresses women, therefore any “Muslim” that doesn’t, isn’t practicing real Islam.”
It doesn’t though, some Muslims do.
I think they got the idea from islam.
What do you think?
That’s patriarchy, not Islam. Inform yourself about christianity and you’ll find much the same. It’s just a different flavour of misogyny. In medieval times, arabic/islamic countries were the educated centers of culture and christian Europe was the barbaric part of the world. Now the scale looks tipped the other way. All the while, evangelical misogynists kill women by denying them life-saving treatments when they are suspected to be pregnant.
All religions are fucked up. If any of them was truly about belief, and not controlling people (and especially women’s bodies), there’d be zero need for an institutionalized belief system.
We’re talking about now.
And don’t use the “no true Scotsman” thing.yeah, right now Christians, especially in the USA, opress women. row v wade was overturned as one of veeeeery many examples, they’re hell bend on stripping rights and bodily autonomy from women. for most Christian idioligist in politics women are reduced to breeding machines, totally dehumanizing them. so, what’s the track record of Muslims in american politics? or are you just scared?
idioligist
ideologist*
And about your message:
Should the USA trade bad for worse?P.S. One of you, poor bastards, went to all my recent comments in other posts and downvoted them.
One could only aspire to this level of pettiness 😀
@EmptyAsparagus@piefed.social , was that you?no, wasn’t me, I have faaaaar better things to do. also, what would even be worse then a religious extremist group controlling multiple states and influencing the president to opress non believers? Muslims have the potential to do similar things, but Christians are right now doing it. which is worse do you think? maybe you are just scared of things you dont know
Muslims have the potential to do similar things
I think they fully revealed their potential in, for example, ISIS and Afghanistan.
I don’t see Mamdani talking about Allahs will every week. You see, it is not about religion, it is about educated people with good will. Now stop with this whataboutism
