UER Mobile Forum UER Mobile - Not logged in
Home  Search   User Search   Login  Register  
Messages   New Posts   Favourites   Recent Posts   Recent Views   My LDB   My Buddies  

< (1)[2](3)(4)>
UER Mobile > Private Boards Index > Religious Discussion > Rape by Muslims (Viewed 12628 times)

post by MutantMandias   |  | Perverse and Often Baffling

Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 20 on 7/12/2013 12:21 AM >

Posted by Aleksandar
your lack of specificity isn't useful for proving your case, and doesn't give me anything to work with to disprove it.







Reply with Quote


post by jukebox fuckup   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 21 on 7/12/2013 2:48 PM >

Posted by Aleksandar

it is fairly clear in most writings on this subject by evangelical conservatives (and even agnostic or atheist conservatives) that their anti-abortion position is predicated on the belief that an unborn child has the same human rights as the mother, and that the fetus' right to live outweighs the mother's right to choose to have an abortion. the disagreement between the sides isn't about women being second class citizens, it's about unborn children having (or not having) basic human rights. you are using the tired straw man argument put out by abortion supporters to try to ridicule what appears to be a genuine and modern ethical (moral?) position taken by abortion opponents. the core question remains, do unborn children have basic human rights or not?


In playing devil's advocate, there are some points I would like to reference:
1) I agree-- opposition to abortion generally arises from the notion of human (fetal?) rights. However, there is an inherit paradox to this view; many opponents of abortion accept abortion in the cases of rape/incest/when the mother's life is at-risk. From this supposition, can it be inferred that rape/incest/high-risk babies are less 'human'?
2) the "women's rights" stance is inferred from the secondary consequences of having a kid, IMHO. I think there's little debate in the statement that children are expen$ive, women of a childbearing age may struggle to raise them, and being reared in poverty has negative neurodevelopmental consequences. Lone mother households receive a lot of flak for the feminization of poverty; however, there is a wealth of literature suggesting otherwise (Geronimus has an excellent publication on this http://www.pdcnet....008_0001_0001_0005).
3) from my perspective, it seems like the clash resides in human/fetal rights v. reproductive rights. There seems to be shades of grey on both sides of the scale (e.g., conservatives usually make exceptions for rape/incest and I have never met a liberal that advocated for 3rd trimester abortion).
4) in short, it's the social stratification that liberal and conservatives should point the finger at.


Reply with Quote


post by Aleksandar   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 22 on 7/13/2013 5:22 PM >

this is heading off-topic, but i'm into it. curious where the resident atheists will take it, too.

Posted by jukebox fuckup
can it be inferred that rape/incest/high-risk babies are less 'human'?


in terms of high-risk, i imagine at that point it is triage, making a decision to save one life instead of losing two. i haven't heard an answer in the case of rape/incest that is compatible with the underlying ethos of basic human rights, and certainly this seems like an important inconsistency to address. abortion opponents do not seem to be in agreement on a number of questions -- when life begins, what the exceptions are, etc. i don't know that this lack of agreement or the presence of inconsistencies invalidates the ethical position of assigning human rights to a fetus, though.

Posted by jukebox fuckup the secondary consequences of having a kid, IMHO. I think there's little debate in the statement that children are expen$ive, women of a childbearing age may struggle to raise them, and being reared in poverty has negative neurodevelopmental consequences.


I expect abortion opponents would nominate adoption as the mechanism for minimizing or avoiding those consequences. i'm no expert but my understanding is that, in the case of the USA, every state has an abundance of public and private agencies able to facilitate an adoption when one is desired by the mother.

certainly there are cases where bringing a child to term carries with it a stigma and burden, particularly for young or low-income mothers. i suppose the argument from abortion opponents with a genuine belief in basic human rights for a fetus is that these consequences are preferable in order that another human would be allowed to experience life.

Anyways. I feel like neither side is really understanding the other. Protection, empowerment, equality and betterment of the condition of women must be a priority of any advanced society -- because this should be sought for all people, regardless of gender, race, beliefs. I certainly understand why abortion opponents include unborn children in this societal aspiration.

Personally I wish a different aspect of the conversation was more commonly discussed. If personal and social consequences are serious enough to make the destruction of a developing human organism desirable, how can we work to mitigate or prevent the personal and social consequences so that a termination is not desired? As our society develops it seems the difficulties of pregnancy should be examined and support systems improved or designed anew.


Reply with Quote


post by Samurai   |  | Vehicular Lord Rick

Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 23 on 7/13/2013 7:11 PM >

Posted by Aleksandar
this is heading off-topic, but i'm into it. curious where the resident atheists will take it, too.


where is there to take it that the subject hasn't been taken before? most religious discussions, or discussions with religion as a overtone, end going round and round the mulberry bush ad infinitum, so what's the point with arguing? you're never going to sway either side in the beliefs, or in the case of an atheist, their unbelief.



Reply with Quote


post by splumer   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 24 on 7/15/2013 12:27 AM >

Posted by Aleksandar
this is heading off-topic, but i'm into it. curious where the resident atheists will take it, too.


in terms of high-risk, i imagine at that point it is triage, making a decision to save one life instead of losing two. i haven't heard an answer in the case of rape/incest that is compatible with the underlying ethos of basic human rights, and certainly this seems like an important inconsistency to address. abortion opponents do not seem to be in agreement on a number of questions -- when life begins, what the exceptions are, etc. i don't know that this lack of agreement or the presence of inconsistencies invalidates the ethical position of assigning human rights to a fetus, though.


OK, I'll bite. Life doesn't begin at conception. It's an unbroken chain going back millions of years. The question to ask is, when does a clump of cells cease being solely a part of the mother's body and become a separate individual? There is no scientific consensus on this. Christian abortion opponents are now found of stating the Bible passage about God "knowing you" before you were formed in the womb, and using that as a basis to argue that "personhood" begins at conception. However, there is no medical basis to make this claim. Something like a third of all blastocysts never implant in the uterus and are expelled, with the mother often not even knowing it has occurred. Were these children? I think not. The question remains: at what point does a fertilized egg become a human?

There is no easy answer, if we are honest with ourselves. No one likes abortion. I know several women who have had them, and they all say they were last resorts. That doesn't mean that's true for everyone, of course, but I think it's a little naïve to assume that abortion is simply a way for sluts to avoid their responsibilities. I don't think it's a decision arrived at lightly.

That said, I prefer to err on the side of letting the mother decide. I don't like abortion, and I think the world would be a better place if we didn't have the need for them. But notice I said "the need." Birth control needs to be cheap and easily available, and the stigma attached to using it needs to end. Having a child at a young age and out of wedlock is a one-way ticket to poverty, and preventing unwanted pregnancies in the first place would reduce the need for abortions as well as the number of children born into poverty.

To me, abortion is like crime. The way to reduce crime isn't to just keep tossing criminals in jail and hope things will work out; the way to reduce crime is to eliminate the need to commit crimes. The same with abortion. If you want to eliminate them, eliminate the need for them.


I expect abortion opponents would nominate adoption as the mechanism for minimizing or avoiding those consequences. i'm no expert but my understanding is that, in the case of the USA, every state has an abundance of public and private agencies able to facilitate an adoption when one is desired by the mother.


I was adopted myself. Not being female, I can't really say, but I can imagine that after bringing a child to term, giving it up for adoption must be about the hardest thing one could do.




Anyways. I feel like neither side is really understanding the other. Protection, empowerment, equality and betterment of the condition of women must be a priority of any advanced society -- because this should be sought for all people, regardless of gender, race, beliefs. I certainly understand why abortion opponents include unborn children in this societal aspiration.


Indeed. Sadly, the most religious among us (and Christianity is not unique in this) doesn't agree regarding women.


If personal and social consequences are serious enough to make the destruction of a developing human organism desirable, how can we work to mitigate or prevent the personal and social consequences so that a termination is not desired? As our society develops it seems the difficulties of pregnancy should be examined and support systems improved or designed anew.


To revisit my earlier point, it would be better still if women never had to make that decision.



Reply with Quote


post by Aleksandar   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 25 on 7/15/2013 5:24 AM >

Posted by splumer
OK, I'll bite.


I'm glad you do, and make some interesting points.

Posted by splumer
at what point does a fertilized egg become a human?


vocabulary here can be tricky. i tend to define in terms of the human organism, which is the biological entity with a lifecycle of genesis, growth, maturation, decline and death. the lifecyle of this organism begins shortly after an egg is fertilized and the process of a fetus developing begins. there is no scientific problem referring to a fetus even in the early first trimester as a human organism, albeit one at a very early point in its lifecyle -- because left to its own biological process, it will continue its lifecycle until it is birthed, matures, declines and dies. it is unquestionably unique, with the self-contained potential to become the specific, unique individual adult. the destruction of a fetus even at the beginning of the first trimester is the destruction of the specific and unique individual that would develop thereafter, because they are one and the same along a definite continuum.

but to your point -- when does a fetus become "human"? i see this as a question of "when does a fetus gain a certain attribute or combination of attributes that give it enough commonality with already-birthed human organisms" and therefore the destruction of the fetus becomes similar to the destruction of already-birthed human organisms and is easier to connect to cognitively.

anyhow. that is just how i see it.

Posted by splumer
There is no easy answer


I am curious how future generations will look back on this issue. I honestly have no idea, but the question interests me. I wonder if, as ethics evolve, society will come to a consensus and find the "easy answer" -- one way or the other. I do agree with you that we have no consensus today and the problem remains unsolved. maybe it will remain unsolved in the future as well.

Posted by splumer
That said, I prefer to err on the side of letting the mother decide

Posted by splumer
I was adopted myself.


Playing devils advocate, I am certain you are happy your mother decided as she did.

Posted by splumer
If you want to eliminate them, eliminate the need for them.


I agree. I don't think outlawing them is the right answer, and I don't think legalizing them is either. I feel like there is a systemic issue going on here and to that point "eliminating the need", seems like the ideal course of action.

Posted by splumer
Sadly, the most religious among us (and Christianity is not unique in this) doesn't agree regarding women.


I know many christians (and muslims, and buddhists, and jews) who are compassionate advocates for women's empowerment. opposing abortion is not incompatible with advocacy for women's empowerment. the issue of abortion is not the whole of women's empowerment, nor is it even the majority of the issue. only in the States is it politicized this way, and generally just by proponents of abortion. women's issues are not black and white, and opposing abortion does not automatically make someone anti-women.






Reply with Quote


post by jukebox fuckup   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 26 on 7/15/2013 6:07 PM >

This is one of the rare moments when I see the topic of abortion being discussed in an intelligible manner.

Some additional thoughts: married women and couples with children have been a growing demographic of abortion recipients. In qualitative studies, the recession/economic factors have been commonly cited as a factor.

Teenage pregnancy has been declining in recent years; however, much research indicates that when teens *do* have children, they tend to be lower in SES and 'see' little opportunity for having much of a career/future. Relative economic deprivation and social stratification have been correlates (and potential causes?) of teenage pregnancy. Also, it's a fact that girls reared in stressful environments go through puberty younger, die younger, and have their "prime years" for safe, healthy, childbirth at a younger age. In that regard, teenage pregnancy "makes sense" (for lack of better phrasing).

After informally polling friends that have aborted, I discovered a reoccurring trend: "I didn't think it could ever happen to me, so we didn't use protection and I didn't bother using HBC." That is so bizarre to me; these include people that I went through sex ed with, so it's not like they're 'uneducated.' It's almost like there's a prevailing bias or assumption that "everybody" is doing it without preventative measures. My friends that went the teenage parent route seemed to have an attitude of "oh? I'm pregnant? Guess I'll become a parent, now," which seems painfully capricious (atleast to me) for such a major life decision. "Oh? My ground beef spoiled? Guess I'll have vegetarian lasagna tonight, instead."




Reply with Quote


post by Roland   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 27 on 7/16/2013 1:28 AM >

I think that the main thing to be taken from this thread is that, despite how they like to portray one another, pro life people are not necessarily women hating monsters, and pro choice people are not necessarily child hating monsters.


Reply with Quote


post by underdark   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 28 on 1/7/2014 5:27 PM >

Posted by Aleksandar
this is heading off-topic, but i'm into it. curious where the resident atheists will take it, too.


I'll be boring, atheist, and Libertarian at the same time...

If you don't have a uterus, you can't have one.
If you can't have one it is none of your business.
If you can have one, but don't want one, nobody should make you (China, I'm looking at you...)
I don't like paying the NSA to read this post, but I have to. Guess that means tax money can be used to do things you don't support. This is especially relevant since the NSA is violating the 4th Amendment (I know, I know, that's another thread, take it there), while paying for an abortion is not something specifically prohibited. (You can insert your own favorite Constitutional violation here. Just change out NSA for whatever the fed/state/local government is doing that really pisses you off)

A religious opinion that isn't even supported by the club handbook most in use in this country is not a valid reason to make law.



Reply with Quote


post by Soldat   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 29 on 1/9/2014 1:22 PM >

Posted by splumer
Do you have a source for that?


Seems true in Norway.

http://www.youtube...=YiVVvJIM5UI#t=122


Reply with Quote


post by KublaKhan   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 30 on 2/5/2014 7:20 PM >

Posted by MutantMandias


It says so right here.


Indeed. DevilC...the Fox News of UER. Which are you, DC? O'Reilly or those other morons (who I cannot name...but when I say 'morons' please accept that I'm being totally inclusive)


Reply with Quote


post by DevilC   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 31 on 9/17/2014 2:48 AM >

Did anyone catch the whole Rotherdam mess?
Ugly stuff.


Reply with Quote


post by Soldat   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 32 on 9/17/2014 10:36 PM >

Posted by DevilC
Did anyone catch the whole Rotherdam mess?
Ugly stuff.


Indeed it is.


Reply with Quote


post by blackhawk   |  | This member has been banned. See the banlist for more information.

Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 33 on 4/16/2016 1:48 AM >

Posted by DevilC
Did anyone catch the whole Rotherdam mess?
Ugly stuff.


Talking about ugly atrocities, let's take a moment to remember Elin Krantz, she was literally the Swedish spokes model for racial integration in Sweden. Ironically she was brutally rape and killed by a black muslim immigrant.
http://liefdenetwe...im-african-refugee



religionofpeace.com A primer for infidels (you).

To understand Islam this is the place to learn all about them and why they love to kill and rape infidels so much.




Reply with Quote


post by blitz   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 34 on 4/20/2016 1:44 PM >

Posted by blackhawk


Talking about ugly atrocities, let's take a moment to remember Elin Krantz, she was literally the Swedish spokes model for racial integration in Sweden. Ironically she was brutally rape and killed by a black muslim immigrant.
http://liefdenetwe...im-african-refugee




This link is dead...

But doing a little more research, the murderer was from Ethiopia, had been living in the United States for years prior to emigrating to Sweden and had a thorough criminal record in the US.

Also, there is no mention of his religion anywhere (he is assumed to be Muslim by right-wing lunatics)... Only about 30% of Ethiopians are Muslim, so it's more likely he was actually Christian.

EDIT: The murderer's name was Yohannes, AKA John. Muslims don't name their son after John the Baptist. That's like a Christian naming their son Muhammad.

Posted by blackhawk
religionofpeace.com A primer for infidels (you).

To understand Islam this is the place to learn all about them and why they love to kill and rape infidels so much.


thereligionofpeace.com: Working to streamline America's war on terror courtesy of the Fred Horowitz Freedom Center.

The narrative that all Muslims are terrorists has been thoroughly debunked & confirmed to be an opinion held only by the truly obtuse, insane, or militantly Christian. Even Donald Trump isn't so retarded as to say that.

Where in that holy trinity of ignorance do you live?



[last edit 4/20/2016 1:51 PM by blitz - edited 1 times]

Reply with Quote


post by blackhawk   |  | This member has been banned. See the banlist for more information.

Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 35 on 4/20/2016 2:40 PM >

Posted by blitz


This link is dead...

But doing a little more research, the murderer was from Ethiopia, had been living in the United States for years prior to emigrating to Sweden and had a thorough criminal record in the US.

Also, there is no mention of his religion anywhere (he is assumed to be Muslim by right-wing lunatics)... Only about 30% of Ethiopians are Muslim, so it's more likely he was actually Christian.

EDIT: The murderer's name was Yohannes, AKA John. Muslims don't name their son after John the Baptist. That's like a Christian naming their son Muhammad.



thereligionofpeace.com: Working to streamline America's war on terror courtesy of the Fred Horowitz Freedom Center.

The narrative that all Muslims are terrorists has been thoroughly debunked & confirmed to be an opinion held only by the truly obtuse, insane, or militantly Christian. Even Donald Trump isn't so retarded as to say that.

Where in that holy trinity of ignorance do you live?




Site is dead. Here's a worse one:https://www.stormf...org/forum/t934622/

Muslims can't even tolerate each other.
History speaks for its self. It doesn't seem to agree with you though.


Reply with Quote


post by blitz   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 36 on 4/20/2016 2:49 PM >

You completely failed to respond to the fact that the guy was not a "Muslim rapist" as you so claim... correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this thread called "Rape by Muslims"?

The guy was a Christian (or at least his name suggests it). He killed a Christian. Maybe Christians just can't tolerate eachother? Maybe you're not familiar with something called the Reformation and the 30 years war and the millions who died due to differing interpretations of Christianity?

But this isn't even about religion, it's about sectarianism and multi-culturalism in societies that accept immigrants, a point you're CLEARLY missing.

Come back to me when you've got something other than vague anecdotes.

[last edit 4/20/2016 2:54 PM by blitz - edited 3 times]

Reply with Quote


post by blackhawk   |  | This member has been banned. See the banlist for more information.

Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 37 on 4/20/2016 4:01 PM >

Posted by blitz
You completely failed to respond to the fact that the guy was not a "Muslim rapist" as you so claim... correct me if I'm wrong but isn't this thread called "Rape by Muslims"?

The guy was a Christian (or at least his name suggests it). He killed a Christian. Maybe Christians just can't tolerate eachother? Maybe you're not familiar with something called the Reformation and the 30 years war and the millions who died due to differing interpretations of Christianity?

But this isn't even about religion, it's about sectarianism and multi-culturalism in societies that accept immigrants, a point you're CLEARLY missing.

Come back to me when you've got something other than vague anecdotes.


Ephrem Tadele Yohannes, yeah that's a nice Christian name. Ephrem is Hebrew in origin and is found in the Old Testament of the Bible. The Quaran "borrows" many names from the Bible. The Bible predates Islam.
Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken. Think I'll eat some bacon now...

Oh and here's some more recent mass rape news links:
http://www.dailyma...ating-attacks.html

http://www.bbc.com...ld-europe-35231046



[last edit 4/20/2016 4:35 PM by blackhawk - edited 2 times]

Reply with Quote


post by blitz   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 38 on 4/20/2016 4:43 PM >

Posted by blackhawk


Ephrem Tadele Yohannes, yeah that's a nice Christian name. Ephrem is Hebrew in origin and is found in the Old Testament of the Bible. The Quaran "borrows" many names from the Bible. The Bible predates Islam.
Feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken. Think I'll eat some bacon now...




Sure.

Yes, the Qua'ran borrows SOME names from the Old Testament, yes, many Muslims are given Arabized versions of Biblical figures such as "Ishmael" (Isaac in the greek/latin Christian tradition). "Yahya" is the arabic form of John, and is a somewhat common name in certain Muslim countries, whereas "Yohannes" is Greek. You may know that Ethiopia has been a sanctuary for Orthodox Christianity (some people call it greek orthodox) for over 1,500 years.

Yohannes has been the name of at least a half-dozen, CHRISTIAN, Ethiopian emperors.

Ultimately, if his parents were Muslim, he would have been named "Yahya" or "Yahia", not "Yohannes". If he had converted to Islam, he most likely would have changed his name to either "Yahya" or "Yahia". Again, my point is this thread is supposed to be about "rape by muslims", but there has been no evidence suggesting he is Muslim. In fact, it seems more likely that he is NOT Muslim.

The fact that she was raped & killed in this manner is indeed unfortunate & completely disgusting. Why you would place the blame on Muslims, however, just doesn't make any sense (scapegoat much?).

But hey, I'll go ahead and put my "generalization hat" on and start assuming every white person who assaults innocent people, commits a murder, or rapes someone is a Christian and thus Christianity is a religion of crime, murder, and rape.

Do you understand how retarded that sounds? Well, that's how you -- or anyone who thinks "religionofpeace.com" is an objective, authoritative source on Islam -- sounds.

[last edit 4/20/2016 4:44 PM by blitz - edited 2 times]

Reply with Quote


post by Harvestman   |  | 
Re: Rape by Muslims
<Reply # 39 on 4/20/2016 5:31 PM >

Isn't this subforum dead? I thought it was. Which was perfectly fine as there wasn't any excuse for petty name calling.


Reply with Quote



Reply
< (1)[2](3)(4)>


This thread is in a public category, and can't be made private.



62 ms gen time