re: #120 Mattand

I was half-following the whole sordid affair. I actually had a hard time following Stabby’s point. Was it the Bill Maher-esque “Islam is the worst religion on the planet” argument?

It’s the “the rules of what constitutes proof change when discussing Islam” thing.

1. Circular reasoning is suddenly okay because Muslims are Muslims.
2. You’re entitled to assume the worst because Muslims.
3. Historical and economic context never matter when talking about Islam and Muslims.
3. Islam has a core ideology in spite of having no central interpretive body. If you’ve obtain the gnostic lore of Islamophobes, you can divine the true meaning of Quran verses that have been debated for centuries.
4. If you’ve obtained the gnostic lore of Islamophobes, you also can divine the true meanings of statements by Muslims…which, coincidentally, are always damning and negative.
5. Historical and economic context regarding post-colonial and post-dictatorship effects in the Middle East don’t matter, because Muslims.
6. The answer to the question “Where are the moderate Muslims?” is always, No True Scotsman.
7. The answer to the question “Where are the moderate Muslims?” should never incorporate the phrase “They were threatened, exiled, and/or killed, which the Western World didn’t give a shit about because (1) OIL and (2) theocrats were preferable mild socialists because Cold War.