Mumsnet censorship

[anonymouselephantx]

Mumsnet has been deleting any comment at all that criticises Charlie Kirk... just because he has died does not mean he is infallible. He is still an evil person who did and said evil things, contributed to so much suffering of families at the hands of ICE etc., mocked the Palestinians undergoing a genocide? Mumsnet, disturbing much? I had to get MN by email to delete a thread of mine as I was getting bullied and people were making personal attacks against me (the talk guidelines say personal attacks will be deleted, yet I had to BEG for this), but they are censoring anything anyone says about Charlie Kirk? Why are we not allowed to have freedom of speech and freedom to debate, especially when it is someone who did and said SO MUCH EVIL!

Death penalties should be public, should be quick, it should be televised. I think at a certain age, its an initiation...

You removed my post yesterday because it was critical of him.
It didn't mock it celebrate his death.
It specifically said he didn't deserve to be murdered .

He was an odious fascist.
Nobody deserves to be killed for expressing their views.
Both of these things can be true.

Yet they leave right wing abelist views for days and don’t monitor abelist threads ie they only respond to reported posts.

So how come MN HQ has the time to monitor Charlie Kirk threads but not abelist threads?🤔

Welll. Non censored if your views align with the mods forum.

It’s very curious to me that the left are so enraged by the religious right’s views on homosexuality and women’s right etc at precisely the same time as they’re bending over backwards to make allowances for Islam. The core views of both on a number of issues are essentially the same.

I also find that puzzling

It's very curious to me that you think the left is bending over backwards for Islam. Can you give an example of what you mean?

That's a straw man argument if ever there was one.

People with a religious faith have a right to practice their religion and believe what they want to believe (within reason, obviously), as per their Human Rights. I am not a person of faith but agree that you (the royal you) should have the right to practice your religion in peace, whether you are Jewish, Christian, Muslim, Hindu, whatever.

However, I object when people who subscribe to a particular set of religious beliefs try to apply to those to other's lives, as is happening with the religious right, which is trying to push their religious beliefs into policy and legislative change. I would feel the same way if it was the religious teachings of another faith, such as Islam, to use your example. The reality though, is that fundamentalist Islamic lobbyists aren't the ones currently making huge headway in their quest to merge church and state.

@GasperyJacquesRoberts the lack of unified support from the left for the women of Iran is one of many examples. Queers for Palestine is another.

Confused by this. Does that mean that gay people shouldn’t be against the deaths of Palestinian children, because they happen to be Muslims?

@SleeplessInWherever no, it means that the universal outrage from the left towards the suppression of women’s and gay rights when these awful views are expressed by right wing religious figures seems to be somewhat muted when the same views are expressed by followers of Islam.

Came across this amazing explanation:

Empathy for every situation is not empathetic in the same way that a friend to all is a friend to none. For example, if someone were to come up to me and say, I'm okay with sacrificing your child's life, because those are my beliefs. And I turned around and said, I empathize with you. That is not empathy at all. That is the absence of empathy. It lacks empathy for myself, for my child, for my entire system of beliefs. At that point, it ceases to be empathy, and it starts to be a lack of morality. Do you understand that? Like, we're not talking about some run-of-the-mill guy who was kind of conservative, voted Republican. We're talking about a guy who made a career out of going on a campaign to say how little other people's lives matter. He's literally said out loud, Black lives don't matter. He said he would force his 10-year-old daughter to give birth regardless of what it did to her. He said women's roles should predominantly only be to be homemakers. His rhetoric and his influence were so powerful that he fueled hate crimes against trans women who had done nothing wrong. He supported people being kidnapped off of the streets and sent to literal concentration camps. I don't think that having a removed response about his passing is lacking empathy. I think it is a presence of empathy. I am an empathetic person, which is why I don't have empathy for this situation. Because a friend to all is a friend to none, and empathy for every situation is just a lack of morality.

Stop generalising Muslims.

Indeed. You can have humanity and empathy for victims of genocide whilst understanding that they follow a religion or live under a regime which is hostile to an aspect of your lifestyle or culture.

That’s such a ridiculous take. Christianity is also historically anti-gay, yet no one goes around saying “Christians don’t deserve empathy.” Every major religion has conservative strands, but also progressive ones- there are gay Muslims, gay Palestinians, gay Christians. There are countless Muslims who aren’t anti-gay, just like plenty of Christians aren’t.
Stop stereotyping an entire religion of over a billion people. You’d never get away with making that sweeping a claim about Christianity or Judaism, so don’t do it about Islam either.

Yes we must be tolerant of certian religious beliefs but not others says the lefties manual.

So anti abortion, not a supporter of trans care for kids is ok somerimes but not if you're Charlie Kirk.

Tolerance and respect of beliefs is all very selective.

I don't understand how you view a lack of unified support for the women of Iran as the left "bending over backwards for Islam". Can you walk me through how you connect those two statements?

Eg there's a lack of unified support for the women if Iran among the right. Do you also see the right as bending over backwards for Islam?

All the hate and vitriol posted online seems to be rightly getting absolutely condemned though. That is reassuring.

They just need to get rid of that Oxford union president with his piss poor ABB who seemed to find the whole thing hilarious. Wtf is wrong with people.

Of course there are moderates of all religions. Of course there are gay Muslims. You are getting the wrong end of my stick. It was more a comment about the queers for Gaza stuff whereby the assertion is you can't support the victims of the genocide because the Hamas regime is oppressive and fundamentalist and LGBT people experience enormous persecution and violence. It is not a moderate Muslim society, nor is it representive of Islam in general.

But that’s not it. I am “a leftie” and therefore am certainly not anti abortion.

I also believe people, all people, are entitled to a different view and don’t deserve death for it.

In the case of Islam that the PP uses - I don’t agree with lots of that either. But I am able to respect that other people have different cultural and religious beliefs, and that doesn’t mean I’m dismissive of the deaths of thousands of Muslim children in Palestine.

It is possible to disagree and remain empathetic.

@GasperyJacquesRoberts that’s a fair point but it’s not the right who are so enraged by the views of the likes of Charlie Kirk on say women’s and gay rights.

@Gloriia the A B B for PPE at Oxford is really quite something.

Thanks for clarifying, Apologies, the way you worded it made it sound like “Muslims = anti-gay,” which is a sweeping generalisation and really harmful. Palestinians are not a monolith, and Gaza is not “all of Islam.” There are queers and allies in those communities who deserve support and empathy just like anyone else. So supporting victims of genocide isn’t about endorsing Hamas, it’s about recognising the humanity of ordinary people who are suffering.

'But that’s not it. I am “a leftie” and therefore am certainly not anti abortion'

Yes and that is fine. Most intelligent people tolerate other people's beliefs and values.

My point it the rabid haters online who cannot stand Kirk's views on LGBT and abortion are strangely silent about other religion's views on the same topics!

Why the intolerance for what he believed but not others?

Whereas the right, particularly the American right, is openly intolerant of any religious belief other than Christianity. And they tend to be quite selective over even which flavours of Christianity counts.

What you're missing, perhaps deliberately, is that in the US it's not the Muslims, the Jews, the Hindus etc who are leading a vociferous and increasingly successful campaign to impose their religious beliefs on everyone else, it's the Christians. It's not the Scientologists who are waging a war against the separation of church and state, it's the Christians. It's not the Sikhs who are relentlessly pushing to get their prayers into schools, it's the Christians. It's not the Buddhists who are putting obstacles in the way of women's healthcare, it's the Christians.

If the Christians don't want their beliefs to be questioned or opposed they shouldn't try to make them laws.