Wednesday, February 15, 2017

Is this a picture of Mohamed?

Jordan B. Peterson offers some  thoughts about anti-Islamophobia Parliamentary motion M-103:


Xereos said...

A phobia is defined in the dictionary as

an extreme or irrational fear of or aversion to something.

So, to take the definition forward, Islamophobia is an extreme or irrational fear of Islam. And if you act based on an irrational fear, then your actions tend to be extreme and potentially biased or wrong. The incident in Quebec could be construed as an action based on an irrational fear.

But what about non-irrational fears? What about healthy concerns of Islam, which would typically be voiced in debate or discussion? What about actions that are taken as a result of that debate? Is that considered Islamophobia? If any negative action or discussion is considered Islamophobia then we have removed the context of the word and replaced it with something else.

This needs to be part of any rational discussion, and hopefully will be part o the discussion in Parliment.

Anonymous said...

old white guy says..............history shows that mohammed was a paedophile warlord who murdered and killed tens of thousands. he was also illiterate and did not write anything much less the koran. mohammed was not a man to be admired but I have no doubt he was feared.

Martin said...

Theodore Dalrymple said it best in 2006 and this applies to Canada today:

"We do not, most of us, respect Islam any more than we respect people who speak in tongues. What we respect is the right of Muslims to practise their religion in perfect peace, in so far as it does not conflict with our laws. We also hope that we can find common ground with them in many other aspects of human existence: in business, in the professions, in literature and so forth. Tolerance is not a matter of respecting what is tolerated — if it were, tolerance would hardly be necessary. Tolerance is the willing, conscious suppression of distaste or disdain for other people’s ideas, habits and tastes for the sake of a wider social peace"

"Instead, Muslims should be told quite clearly that our citizens have the legal right to criticise, lampoon, ridicule and mock Mohammed to their heart’s content, in any way that they wish: that Islam and Muslims have no special claim to protection from the rough and tumble of post-Enlightenment intellectual, political and social life. If they cannot live in a society in which this is the case, they should go somewhere else"

Not a viewpoint one will see much expressed in media today, but one that has some merit.


JR said...

All points well taken. Going along with Dalrymple's sentiments, there is much about Islam to be DISrepected, some of which we should tolerate, some we should not, and none of which we should shut up about, as those who sponsored and supported M103 would have us do.