Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to think we all need to take responsibility for challenging islamophobia

540 replies

karbonfootprint · 24/06/2015 18:38

It is so common and so hurtful to some of our fellow citizens. I don't think any of us should let it pass when we hear it, in private, but especially in public.

OP posts:
fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 26/06/2015 15:50

Oh I beg to differ

Stinkersmum · 26/06/2015 15:52

No Fanjo, they're not. Just as not all muslins are terrorists. But ALL these recent atrocities are in the name of Islam. So whilst people are pretty dumb if they think all Muslims agree with these attacks, these very attacks are the reason for islamaphobia. And quite justifiably too.

WhetherOrNot · 26/06/2015 15:55

Especially with this afternoon's headlines.

Gemauve · 26/06/2015 16:10

Are all Catholics pro IRA then?

Hardly, given that Sinn Fein are a largely socialist political party that supported same-sex marriage (in the south) and voted en bloc last week for same-sex marriage in the north. As I recall, Sinn Fein are also supporting changing the abortion laws in the six counties, which will probably cause them some difficulties at mass on Sunday as well.

The IRA are not a Catholic organisation, nor is the UDA are a Protestant organisation. They just draw most of their members from those respective communities. Republicanism is nominally Catholic, in that it seeks to extend the borders of a traditionally Catholic country, but has many strands which are wildly antithetical to Catholicism, and it is not fighting to impose Catholicism on anyone. Loyalism is nominally Protestant, in that it seeks to maintain an Anglican presence in the six counties, but no-one rational has ever suggested that their main difference with the IRA is over the nature of transubstantiation. The troubles are not a religious conflict; they are a conflict between two communities that happen to be notionally religiously different.

You might as well dress up the second world war as a conflict between a largely Catholic alliance (Germany and Italy) and a largely Protestant alliance (UK and USA).

fanjoforthemammaries7850 · 26/06/2015 16:29

Well a nice reasoned approach to Islam like that would be so nice

RosesareSublime · 26/06/2015 16:59

Quite honestly I would rather see more muslims standing up and saying that they do not support the violence people are perpetrating in their name.

^ This.

and this "Agree with Islam being a lifestyle choice. If I were yo go around saying I believe in aliens I would expect people to disagree with me, laugh at me etc. Being a muslim is no different they choose to live a certain way so I don't really see it as being racist, its not the same as discriminating against someone for skin colour/sexual orientation and other things people are born with and have no choice over "

I am a lapsed catholic but my goodness if people were committing the same wicked atrocities in the name of Catholicism even for my parents sake, I would be drumming up support to make huge rallies, huge signs not in the name of the pope and so on.

I would be in my church at the altar, chained to it, imploring the worshipers to ACT, make a stand, never keep our feelings about the atrocities out the news. I would be doing it for the atrocities and also to protect catholics from attack generally in retaliation.

I would also understand if people did say " bloody Catholics " etc why they were saying it, and wouldn't get defensive.

RosesareSublime · 26/06/2015 17:00

Fanjo so what if they are?

You are allowed to not like religions you do know that?

Gemauve · 26/06/2015 17:07

Well a nice reasoned approach to Islam like that would be so nice

The crucial difference is that Catholic organisations universally, unequivocally and without the use of the word "but" condemned violence. They didn't claim they were forced to do it by the British Army, not least because, as we're doing historical accuracy, the original reason for the British Army to be posted to Belfast was to protect Catholic communities who were being attacked by the UDA; it got a lot more complicated after Bloody Sunday, obviously. They didn't claim that the violence was justified by cause of nationalism or of republicanism, they didn't propose that the British government hand over the six counties to Ireland and then stand idly by while the inevitable bloodbath ensued, and they didn't say that their were forced into it by hussies on the mainland using contraception. They just condemned violence, without equivocation.

There was, for practical purposes, no fifth column, which was why there was never a serious existential threat to the UK. They lacked the support, even in the six counties, never mind Ireland, and there was extremely limited supported within the Irish community on the mainland, where extremely limited meant "undetectable". There was probably more support from wankers on the hard left who thought the IRA were a jolly fun bunch of ruffians than in your local Irish centre. That was why the IRA found it very difficult to operate on the mainland.

They were also asking for a deliverable political agenda and were willing to negotiate on it (as the Good Friday agreement showed), had reasonable paramilitary discipline (as the delivery of post-Good Friday decommissioning shows, along with the generally democratic behaviour of Adams and McGuinness since then) and realised that if they behaved like psychopaths they would lose such little support as they actually had (it was the Omagh bombing that finished even the offshoot IRA organisations: killing pregnant women and children disgusted even their staunchest supporters).

There was, for practical purposes, no flow of British Catholics to Ireland to join in the bloodshed, no fundraising in the UK (the US is a different story, one which tragically it took 9/11 to end) and no revelling in bloodshed.

ISIS do not have a deliverable political objective, nor are they willing or able to negotiate in any case, and their violence presents a genuinely existential threat to the west. There is simply no comparison with what was, in the end, a bunch of student radicals with slightly better weapons, who did not want to end up dead and had a vaguely deliverable political objective.

PyjamasLlamas · 26/06/2015 17:23

*Quite honestly I would rather see more muslims standing up and saying that they do not support the violence people are perpetrating in their name.

and this "Agree with Islam being a lifestyle choice. If I were yo go around saying I believe in aliens I would expect people to disagree with me, laugh at me etc. Being a muslim is no different they choose to live a certain way so I don't really see it as being racist, its not the same as discriminating against someone for skin colour/sexual orientation and other things people are born with and have no choice over "

I am a lapsed catholic but my goodness if people were committing the same wicked atrocities in the name of Catholicism even for my parents sake, I would be drumming up support to make huge rallies, huge signs not in the name of the pope and so on.

I would be in my church at the altar, chained to it, imploring the worshipers to ACT, make a stand, never keep our feelings about the atrocities out the news. I would be doing it for the atrocities and also to protect catholics from attack generally in retaliation.

I would also understand if people did say " bloody Catholics " etc why they were saying it, and wouldn't get defensive.*

Nope. Not doing it. Not standing up and saying hey I'm not a terrorist. Nope. Not saying sorry these people are terrorists and killing people. I'm
Not saying sorry for other people's actions. Not walking around with a big sign saying I don't support terrorists.

I will say ISIS are evils psychopaths but I'm not going to put myself in the same bracket as them and apologise for their actions as though I have somethjng to apologise for

sugar21 · 26/06/2015 17:41

I was brought up to be a Christian but I don't go to church although I do believe in God. I think everyone should be allowed to practice their faith if they have one, just the same as if someone is an atheist they are entitled to their belief or non belief as the case may be. Why can't we all live in peace and let people alone. Terrorism does not equate to Islam, it's just a few people who are extreme and in the end they will have their punishment. I just do not understand why all wars and acts of terror seem to involve religion.

TTWK · 26/06/2015 20:19

I am a lapsed catholic but my goodness if people were committing the same wicked atrocities in the name of Catholicism even for my parents sake, I would be drumming up support to make huge rallies, huge signs not in the name of the pope and so on.

Well bloody get on with it then. The catholic church continues to cover up for child rapists. The anti condom stance is Africa that the catholic church pushes is responsible for more deaths than Isis could dream of. The catholic church is the most corrupt organisation on the planet. The last pope who is still alive has a mountain of evidence against him that he personally was involved in the covering up of child rape whilst he was Cardinal Ratzarse and in charge of church discipline in North America.

So stop piddling about on MN and get going with your protests.

Nullandvoid · 26/06/2015 21:49

Pyjamas you have the wrong end of the stick and are being defensive when you don't need to be.

No-one is asking you to 'say sorry' because most people recognise that of course the vast majority of Muslims are not beheading people, shooting them etc.

However these acts are being done in the name of your faith.

I, like many of those above, am Catholic, and let me tell you, if just one of these massacres (how many have there been this year, month, week, DAY???) happened by someone claiming they were doing it for my faith, I would be on a 'not in my name' march the very next day, just as rosesaresublime said above.

And at the very least I would be saying so vehemently on social media, rather than getting defensive and angry and saying 'I'm not going to say sorry' when no-one had asked you to.

People want reassurance that most 'normal' Muslims (i.e. the ones who don't chop people's heads off) don't condone this behaviour. Not a lot wrong with that, is there?

karbonfootprint · 26/06/2015 21:54

My favourite LBC clip!

metro.co.uk/2015/01/10/this-is-how-to-deal-with-people-who-blame-muslims-for-charlie-hebdo-attacks-5017034/

OP posts:
TTWK · 26/06/2015 22:04

I, like many of those above, am Catholic, and let me tell you, if just one of these massacres (how many have there been this year, month, week, DAY???) happened by someone claiming they were doing it for my faith, I would be on a 'not in my name' march the very next day,

No you wouldn't because it's happening and you are doing nothing. See my post above.

RosesareSublime · 26/06/2015 22:10

And at the very least I would be saying so vehemently on social media, rather than getting defensive and angry and saying 'I'm not going to say sorry' when no-one had asked you to.

Indeed and its this ^ I do not understand - naval gazing. Dredging up Ira etc. * Gemauve Fri 26-Jun-15 17:07:57 One cannot put it better than this post really, beautifully put.

TTWK Yes they are corrupt, and yes, abuse children has been un covered, But really where has abuse of children not been un covered recently? Abuse of children is rampant.

Right now, right now, people are being blown up, put in cages, slaughtered in really creative and disgusting ways, gunned down on beaches as they sun bath, turfed out of their homes, and made sex slaves in the name of Islam.

If I was a Muslim, no I would not apologise either but I would say with a very loud SCREAM NOT IN THE NAME OF MY GOD.

MistressMia · 26/06/2015 22:25

Day after day, week after week, year after year there are terrorist atrocities committed by the adherents of Islam who cite justification through their interpretation of their Islamic texts.

In all other societies when aberrant members do wrong, the decent members of that community question and embark on introspection and examination of how and why these situations occur.

A critical evaluation of the source quoted by the perpetrator would take place. Wholesale condemnation both of the atrocity and its inspiration would have happened.

The question of why the doctrine can be so easily mis-interpreted would be a hot topic.

Doubts would arise as to whether the supreme deity really was worthy of worship given that HE/SHE/IT being omniscient would have known that it would be very easy to twist verses such as those below when no clarity is given that these are recounts of events passed and not to be used going forward:

"then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush" Quran 9:5 quran.com/9/5

&

"The only punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is that they should be murdered, or crucified, or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides, or they should be imprisoned. This shall be a disgrace for them in this world, and in the Hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement" www.comp.leeds.ac.uk/nora/html/5-33.html

There would be anger, revulsion, huge demonstrations and a refusal by these people to be known as followers of such a doctrine or to reform it. .

Instead what do we get:

  • A wilful refusal to countenance that any of these faults lie within their 'faith'

-Not self-reflection and rejection of religious texts but the blaming of others and and increased adherence.

  • A push for that ideology to further encroach into the public space and to be given special concessions
  • Adoption of victimhood- the small instances of muslim people being rebuked or having their hijabs pulled off, deplorable as they are, are accorded far greater importance than the wholesale slaughter and genocide of entire minority communities in Islamic countries or killing of non-muslims elsewhere.

On another thread elsewhere the usual hand wringing and excuses are being made. However the comments on other liberal sites show that the vast majority of previously tolerant people have lost patience. The elephant in the room needs to be confronted head on and unless the muslim community does so, Islamophobia is soon going to turn to Muslimophobia and the future will be extremely ugly.

PyjamasLlamas · 26/06/2015 22:34

The people who know me, who work with me, my non-Muslim friends, my neighbours know very well it's not in my name. That's enough for me. I don't feel
The need to march on the street with a banned.

PyjamasLlamas · 26/06/2015 22:39

Mistress You don't want reflection and introspection of Muslims to make the world a better place. You want reflection and introspection so that Muslims will see Islam for the evil religion it is and renounce it like you have. That is your agenda every time you appear on a Muslim thread (do you ever post anywhere else? Oh yes about cats or dogs
Or something).
Your agenda is to encourage apostasy. That is the only reason you post. You don't care about Muslims, not the ones dying around the world at the hands of other Muslims and Non Muslims alike. You don't give a shit about them. All you care about is promoting the downfall of Islam and encouraging Muslims to give up their faith.

(I said I wouldn't respond!! Agh!!!Angry

PyjamasLlamas · 26/06/2015 22:42

And you have all been told a thousand times that dozens and dozens and dozens of community leaders/groups/charities/imams etx in the UK HAVE condemned and decried terrorist groups. What else the fuck do you want them to do? Self flagellation in the streets?

PyjamasLlamas · 26/06/2015 22:44

ISIS killed Muslim people in a mosque on the holy day of Friday. You expect me to say not in my name to that too??

No one gives a shit about them only about France and Tunisia.

MorrisZapp · 26/06/2015 22:47

Gemauve thank you so much for your last post. I'm largely ignorant of the whole IRA thing despite growing up in the seventies.

You have made such clear and cogent points it's hard to see how anybody could dispute them.

I've always felt that the comparisons with current Islamic terror and the IRA were totally tenuous and you have crystallised my views on the matter.

DioneTheDiabolist · 26/06/2015 22:50

YANBU OP. Challenge, challenge, challenge. But be prepared to meet resistance.

Some people need to belittle, mock, sneer and look down on people. The only way they can feel good about themselves is to portray themselves as superior to others. And they don't understand the concept it's ok for people to think/believe different things to them and still be brilliant, useful, kind members of our society.

Stinkersmum · 26/06/2015 22:54

Dione - 'YANBUOP. Challenge, challenge, challenge. But be prepared to meet resistance.

Some peopleneedto belittle, mock, sneer and look down on people. The only way they can feel good about themselves is to portray themselves as superior to others.'

Talk about hypocritical....

OTheHugeManatee · 26/06/2015 23:13

Apostasy isn't a thing, unless you live in a mad theocracy Confused

BuriedSardine · 26/06/2015 23:14

Ohthehuge sadly, in fact heartbreakingly so, that just isn't the case.

I really wish I were wrong.

It's a 'thing' here in the UK.