Regressive Cognitive Distortions

Ben Reilly wrote:

Interesting.

As when do innocent Muslims get attackd on here?

Might want to check again who you are defending

Case in point two Muslim students refusing to shake hands with a female teachr. When they could if they bothered to wear gloves, to a country that has accepted them fleeing persecution, only for them to come and refuse to shake the hand of a woman. Based on beliefs that degrade women

Go figure

We had that debate and I made it clear that I don't accept the premise that the Islamic custom of not shaking hands with the opposite sex when you're not related or married has anything to do with a belief that women are inferior.

It's based on the idea that touching leads to sex, much how there are still a lot of Southern Baptists who ban dancing on the idea that it leads to sex.

In an environment as appropriate as a school, wouldn't the lesson that a tolerant society tolerates customs like not shaking hands be a lot better than the lesson taught by forcing them to shake hands?

Ben Reilly wrote:We had that debate and I made it clear that I don't accept the premise that the Islamic custom of not shaking hands with the opposite sex when you're not related or married has anything to do with a belief that women are inferior.

It's based on the idea that touching leads to sex, much how there are still a lot of Southern Baptists who ban dancing on the idea that it leads to sex.

In an environment as appropriate as a school, wouldn't the lesson that a tolerant society tolerates customs like not shaking hands be a lot better than the lesson taught by forcing them to shake hands?

And I provd you wrong as its bases has everything to do around cleanliness and backed this up with evidence

Again even if we went down the road of your view that touching can lead to sex, what does that say in a society where we warmly hug, hold hands with our partners and embrace each other showing our love to each other?

This is in complete conflict with that and is being then intolerant of the cultures of this country when again they could have warn gloves.

The point is the whole concept it can lead to sex is not even raised when the same Muslims would shake the hands of other men, not thinking for one second, the person their hands they are shaking could be of someone that is sexually attracted to them?

Does it lead to sex?

No, so its a poor based view around how sex is viewed as unclean and that is what you fail to grasp

All you proved is you are a conceited brain dead hypocrite that cant see the Fucking Obvious flaws in his fanatical extermeist radicalised intolerant thinking.

So your views are Poor since they do not in any way include the way this makes you look in the perception of others including thoase you wish to convert to you views.

veya_victaous wrote:All you proved is you are a conceited brain dead hypocrite that cant see the Fucking Obvious flaws in his fanatical extermeist radicalised intolerant thinking.

So your views are Poor since they do not in any way include the way this makes you look in the perception of others including thoase you wish to convert to you views.

And there we hav regressive thinking, all insults and nothing reasoned

I am against bad beliefs and my views are balanced whether it be in regards to neo-consrvative religious beliefs, no matter the religion when it effects the well being and equality of others.
You just proved again all regressives can do is be abusive

Thanks

Didge wrote:

veya_victaous wrote:All you proved is you are a conceited brain dead hypocrite that cant see the Fucking Obvious flaws in his fanatical extermeist radicalised intolerant thinking.

So your views are Poor since they do not in any way include the way this makes you look in the perception of others including thoase you wish to convert to you views.

And there we hav regressive thinking, all insults and nothing reasoned

I am against bad beliefs and my views are balanced whether it be in regards to neo-consrvative religious beliefs, no matter the religion when it effects the well being and equality of others.
You just proved again all regressives can do is be abusive

Thanks

it is Poor beleif
that you get a say in other peoples Cultures or choices, IF they are not impacting others.

not shaking hands Doesn't affect anyone
So you Are now Forcing Your beleifs on someone who has hurt No one.
If you can't see how that makes you a hypocrite, do the world a favour and Shut the Fuck up.
AND
Until YOU stop forcing Your Beleif on others
you have ZERO right to tell other people to stop forcing their beleif on someone else.

Literally Your constant Assertion that they have 'Bad Beleif' and should mindlessly just do what you say
justifies their ignoring you as a hypocrite

A Bad Beleif is Also that 'the UK is not evil'. unless you say the Uk is evil (like you want them to say of Islam) then you have a bad beleif that hurts world peace. there is so much bad blood around the world from all the Evil commited by the UK.
SO Shut the fuck up with your one sided Perspective.
YES me And Ben and many people understand What you are saying
BUT we also understand WHY it is Wrong
It is Your own lack of congnative ability that is the problem, stop trying to 'teach ignorance' and learn something !!!

1) Wrong, I am challenging poor beliefs that effect others.
So do you think we should sit back and do nothing when people are oppressd like homosexuals in countries no matter whether Islamic or Christian, that are punished from simply being gay? Your view is surrendering to their oppression and is appalling.

2) Its not the hslling hands but trhe belief behind not to which is why you constantly fail to understand why something like this is a bad belief. Its teaching a view that to touch by handshakes is somehow sexual and unclean, when its to women, when thouigh as stated they shake the hands of men with no issue. They could be shaken the hand of a male that fancies them, and there is no case of it leading to a sexual encounter. The belief is based on something that makes out the mere case of touching someone is somehow sexualized and to mak out people cannot control themselves.

3) Lies again, as not forcing anyone, in fact show me where I have?
This is where you constantly make nonsense up. where I am challenging a bad belief held by some Islamic sects one based around a belief. Now I stated this before and this is why you end up defending poor beliefs.

The purpose based off the view to touch leads to sex off poor backward beliefs that claim and blame women for the belief also men cannot control their sexual desires.
The emphasis is placed on women more so on dress to cover up as well as not to touch, that the mere case of touching will lead to sex and that men need help to control their sexualize desires.

I mean imagine this for one second based on the beliefs of some Islamic sects
If this deity existed.
Either he is incompetant that he would have created men with a flaw they have such uncontrollable desires, that now women suffer by having to cover up (based on a misguided belief it will protect them) and to not touch with a handshake to prevent sexual harrasement all the way to cases of rape, which even then provides an excuse in Islam for rape. Even though women covered up are raped anyway by sex offenders.

Or this deity deliberately created men this way and knowingly created a vastly increased possibilty and risk of women being raped. Thus vastly increasing the suffering of women and girls. As well as the fact it allows for sexual slaves from lands conquered and thus Non Muslim women are seen as perfectedly okay to rape and abuse.

That is sick beyond belief.

You see you again are defending a poor belief that has a centreal belief that casts blame on women

The rest of what you posted is again just gibberish
So when it comes to a lack of understanding Veya, its you everytime as everytime youi make the same accusations and allow bad beliefs to go unchallenged.
Life never progressed by not challenging bad beliefs
If we placed you back in time and you were the one to make that had the deciding vote on progression when it conflicted with bad beliefs
Homosexuals would be persecuted world over, women, would not even have the vote and religious minorities and ethnicities would be suffering appallingly.

veya has a sort of point...HOWEVER if these people wish to continue with their stone age backward ideology and apply that ideology within the framework of our western world....then there can be no objection to us treating them as backward stone age types

Lord Foul wrote:veya has a sort of point...HOWEVER  if these people wish to continue with their stone age backward ideology and apply that ideology within the framework of our western world....then there can be no objection to us treating them as backward stone age types

lol but his is claiming I have no right to say whether I think some of their beliefs are wrong , even though he is contradicting himself in the same vein by telling me I am wrong.
Its again a leftist double standard, where he will happilly speak out on what he sees wrong to othrs but wants to wrap up in cotten wool some people who hold beleifs that most definately effect people in our societies, for example women, homosexuals, other religious and non religious peoples. Of which again its not even me directly attacking any people here but being rightly critical of a belief that here for example demeans women. He is trying to shout down any criticism and he does this in the most hypocritical manner possible by being bigotd towards those who rightly are critical. He uses abuse, where I point out why something is a bad belief and bad lesson in life. Based  on the principles of the well being and equality of others.

Lord Foul wrote:veya has a sort of point...HOWEVER  if these people wish to continue with their stone age backward ideology and apply that ideology within the framework of our western world....then there can be no objection to us treating them as backward stone age types

Don't I propose the Uk to be so backward as to be denied Nukes
Of course I think we should Stop trying to sell weapons to them.
which is more than half the problem is the wests desire for profit fucking up their countries.

Also a big thing Didge misses is While we can and should get them to conform to secular ideals when they become members of our community we cant do anything but antagonise nations that disagree with us, thus Fuelling anti-western propaganda which makes it harder for us to work with the Muslims here and build their commitment to secular ideals.

I can be done, we have Muslim here that are..
and we can see the exact same process as the Mediterranean Catholics that immigrated a generation earlier
the reduction if religious concerns in the generation raised here, but "don't tell their parents"
and the Mediterranean now, that they are one further, hardly go to church

Really Veya.
So your belief is we must not speak out incase we hurt the sensitivities of nations, even though we already do to many Non-Muslim nations for example.

Again what has helped change people in the west was forward thinking people that spoke out against discrimination, prejudice based on enlightenment, secualrism, equality, science etc. It was people not afraid that they may hurst the feelings of some of which the west has already gone through over the last few centuries with Christianity. What feeds anti-western propaganda is nothing mor than disinformation, falsehoods and fundementally hate based around again por beliefs found within the religion itself. Transgression, Martydom, Jihad etc, concepts that promote to act whn they feel as if a slight has happened to Muslims world over. Yet we do not see the same problem with many other countries or people who suffer persecution like Christians, Yazidis etc in the Middle East.

We have seen others nations have despots and bad rulers removed and even be in occupation and have seen not anything like Islamic extremism where people still today are committing terrorism to events that happened decades ago. This is why the left constantly lok to blame the west for where the problem lies within the Philosophy taught within Islam itself in certain quarters.

Its like I said to Victor earlier:

I do se Bens point though Victor on not caring about others, when we have a history of going to the defense of countries aggressively attacked wihin the last century. By saying it would be wrong to do that is kind of like saying they all died in vain. Or the very fact many groups have suffered genocide in the 20th and 21st century and this is the biggest point here.

What disappoints me more than anything is how constantly a play is made on westrn aggression in the Middle East and claims based off natural resources. In most campaigns it has been to remove a threat, whether the Taliban, Saddam Hussein and the most important one the left constantly forget.

Bosnian Genocide

Nobody speaks ever of what the West did to help Muslims from Genocide by the Serbians. This is easily forgotten when how and why this should be spoken about more to counter the hate naratives based from some of the left and Muslims on how we did help stop the genocide of the Bosnian Muslims. What would have happened if we had not intervened? What numbers would we be looking at now? Hence why those who blame the west are doing so off a false pretence and looking to excuse the violence in the Middle East that isd not something new but has been going on for centuries. The problem to me is two fold. One a fear of losing religious control as we once saw in the west, which caused endless wars. And something again that has gone on for centuries. Second, anongoing conflict for supremacy in Islam, between Sunni and Shia Muslims. All again what has happened in the west within Christianity, which again cost countless lives through many wars.

Lol yeah we speak out against others and if they are strong enough they tell us to Fuck off and double their efforts in whatever is annoying us

has helped change people in the west was forward thinking people that spoke out against discrimination, prejudice based on enlightenment, secualrism, equality, science etc.

When Western people were the ones pushing the west.
You are not Muslim therefore You pushing Islam is NOT THE SAME.

When Islam Was pushing the west with early maths and science, we had crusades against them
Now we push them and they have Jihads against us.

So others tll us to fuck off and in the case of Islamic nations, we get terrorism

Thanks for proving my point

The rest failed to answer a single point

So thanks for your input, as per usual it failed to live up to any standard

Oh and to your point on the crusades, I think you will find it was Islamic Arab colonialist aggressive expanionism in the 7th century as to where your root cause would start if you are going off past events as a cause.

You just justifid the Crusades based off again poor methodology, basd around a previous event.

The Crusades, just as Muslims invaasions were based on religious Holy War.

Didge wrote:Oh and to your point on the crusades, I think you will find it was Islamic Arab colonialist aggressive expanionism in the 7th century as to where your root cause would start if you are going off past events as a cause.

You just justifid the Crusades based off again poor methodology, basd around a previous event.

The Crusades, just as Muslims invaasions were based on religious Holy War.

You mean when they tried to enlighten Europe, the root cause was the fact europe was in the dark ages and being the backward hillsheperds that we currently associate with the Middle east now.

their expansion, the attempt to bring Maths, Science, education, medicine, legal reform etc etc to the Europeans...
AKA exactly what you think you are good for doing to them now.

If it was their fault then it is OUR fault now, which is it? our do you just want to blame the other regardless. cause you can't accept responibilty or blame.

You mean the Arabs learnt from previous empires like the Greeks, Babylonians and passed them off as things they invented themselves? A few centuries after their invasions, Islam was in a stage where it did encompass learning with scholars, mainly again as they had access to thousands of years of learning at their fingertips and you still fail to understand what is meant by the dark ages which is most amusing.

Enlightenment is a term found later in history specifically about the beginning of the 17th century, where we really start to se the beginnings of people really question religious dogma. So again your ability to understand history brings me great amusement, as its based on a constant negativity and an inability to move on from the past