Arab boycott on France begins!

[Albrenia]

State atheism is very different from what you have in the US. Letting everyone believe what they want but not to have legal backing for or against beliefs is most certainly not state atheism.

State atheism is the state actively discouraging religion, while secularism is the state not caring about the matter at all

Yep. Which is why I support secularism and oppose state atheism.

No religion should have government backing, or government condemnation. The deeds of the religious should be judged based on the law as with anyone else.

[Nakena]

State atheism is the state actively discouraging religion, while secularism is the state not caring about the matter at all

Yep. Which is why I support secularism and oppose state atheism.

No religion should have government backing, or government condemnation. The deeds of the religious should be judged based on the law as with anyone else.

Catholic churches and stuff are maintained and paid for by the state in france if I am not mistaken.

[Albrenia]

Yep. Which is why I support secularism and oppose state atheism.

No religion should have government backing, or government condemnation. The deeds of the religious should be judged based on the law as with anyone else.

Catholic churches and stuff are maintained and paid for by the state in france if I am not mistaken.

I'm not really cool with that, but that's for the French to decide.

[Lost Memories]

State atheism is the state actively discouraging religion, while secularism is the state not caring about the matter at all

To be fair french laïcité is somewhere between that.

Yep, that was my point.

There is no "mutual" non-interference between civil and canon law (or religious law for non-christians), in the french version of it.

There is a clear bias of state laws over religious matters, in the french version of "separation of church and state".
Other western nations are also similar, but less involved, compared to france.

The matter is different with islam, compared than with christianity, because islam, like also judaism(it would seem), make a point that their same religious laws are also effective as laws to regulate a nation, whereas christianity has always used both civil and religious laws according to the area of competence, and the issue in the past was having authorities of either one side interfering with the other side (kings trying to appoint bishops, or bishops electing/crowning kings, the kings were christian in most cases btw, that was still an issue on the legal level, for both).

The concept of separation of church and state is a christian creation, precisely because in christianity the religious law is not an administrative tool for governing nations, it's a set of moral principles which are independent from the ever changing politics, administrations, state structures and economic setting.


So with islam, even if there was a balanced "separation of church and state", in its original form, there would still be conflict, as islam sees denied its claims over more typical state matters, like ruling over justice, and deciding who is innocent and guilty, and what is the punishment. In the case of less civil muslims, deciding who dies as punishment.

France having a state biased separation, only inflates the incompatibility between western-state and islamic-religion, that is already there in islam.


To go back at the starting comment of this convo, islam isn't a political ideology, it's a religion which also claims to manage state matters. Even if the two sides may be hard to separate (civil and religious side), calling islam a political ideology just discounts the religious part which has nothing to do with civil politics.
Whereas it makes very little sense to call christianity a political ideology. As it lacks any civil side.

[Albrenia]

Religious law doesn't really have a place outside of people choosing (and continuing to choose) to be a part of it. Apostate Muslims should not be executed, even if they originally consented to being beholden to Sharia law, for example. Any such executions are murder, and their religious nature should offer no protection.

[Insaanistan]

Religious law doesn't really have a place outside of people choosing (and continuing to choose) to be a part of it. Apostate Muslims should not be executed, even if they originally consented to being beholden to Sharia law, for example. Any such executions are murder, and their religious nature should offer no protection.

Real shariā doesn’t actually allow killing people for apostasy.

[Insaanistan]

France loses 28 million dollars in the first day of the boycott as they beg Arab nations to end it. France’s response and recent actions have led to support for the boycott growing rapidly throughout the Muslim community.
Meanwhile, top Muslim figure Sheikh Yasir Qadhi urges Muslims to condemn the killing of Samuel Paty and use peaceful means to stand up to Islamophobia, which he says are in accordance with what Islam teaches.

[Nanatsu no Tsuki]

Macron and Erdogan: pot meet the kettle.

[Lost Memories]

Speak of the devil, look at these percentages of muslims answering if they want to apply islamic law to their nation (or the nation they reside in)

From a study in 2013
https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the ... ut-sharia/

[Washington Resistance Army]

France loses 28 million dollars in the first day of the boycott as they beg Arab nations to end it. France’s response and recent actions have led to support for the boycott growing rapidly throughout the Muslim community.
Meanwhile, top Muslim figure Sheikh Yasir Qadhi urges Muslims to condemn the killing of Samuel Paty and use peaceful means to stand up to Islamophobia, which he says are in accordance with what Islam teaches.

28 million dollars is quite literally nothing to a multi trillion dollar GDP. If that's the most they can get out of day one of their boycott it'll have no impact whatsoever.

[Insaanistan]

Speak of the devil, look at these percentages of muslims answering if they want to apply islamic law to their nation (or the nation they reside in)

(Image)

From a study in 2013
https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the ... ut-sharia/

Notice how almost all of these are Muslim majority countries where people already use shariā in villages. Or often, “shariā”, because real Islamic law doesn’t allow blowing up mosques and churches or killing gay people.

[Insaanistan]

France loses 28 million dollars in the first day of the boycott as they beg Arab nations to end it. France’s response and recent actions have led to support for the boycott growing rapidly throughout the Muslim community.
Meanwhile, top Muslim figure Sheikh Yasir Qadhi urges Muslims to condemn the killing of Samuel Paty and use peaceful means to stand up to Islamophobia, which he says are in accordance with what Islam teaches.

28 million dollars is quite literally nothing to a multi trillion dollar GDP. If that's the most they can get out of day one of their boycott it'll have no impact whatsoever.

I agree it’s quite little. Nevertheless, France really wants them to stop.

[Insaanistan]

I understand that protecting free speech is imperative. But imagine. Imagine.
Imagine if in the aftermath of the Norte Dame fire, a Muslim made a comic making fun of the cathedral, and mosques were putting up that comic.
Most, not all, but most, of the people talking about free speech would be calling for surveillance of all Muslims. They’d call us ungrateful and traitors. They’d say, “How offensive! Don’t they have any respect?”
And don’t try to deny it: you KNOW that’d happen

Oú est l'égalité, mes frères et sœurs? Oú?

[Aureumterra III]

Macron and Erdogan: pot meet the kettle.

Macron is an insane far right irredentist theocrat with populist tendencies?

[Ethel mermania]

Time to buy more French wine to show my support

[Insaanistan]

I don’t remember the exact words of the song, but:
“If you are Christian, know I love your Jesus (pbuh)
If you are Sunni, Ūmar of Islam in your protection.
If you are Druze, your six holy things are dear to me.
Let us all, of every faith
Stand together all in peace
Lament your chests, O Shiās!“

[Albrenia]

I understand that protecting free speech is imperative. But imagine. Imagine.
Imagine if in the aftermath of the Norte Dame fire, a Muslim made a comic making fun of the cathedral, and mosques were putting up that comic.
Most, not all, but most, of the people talking about free speech would be calling for surveillance of all Muslims. They’d call us ungrateful and traitors. They’d say, “How offensive! Don’t they have any respect?”
And don’t try to deny it: you KNOW that’d happen

Oú est l'égalité, mes frères et sœurs? Oú?

Bitching and moaning about something offending you is entirely acceptable, if rather annoying, behaviour. Unless they actually tried to put Muslims under surveillance solely for being Muslim, or hurt people, it's just hot air.

[The Two Jerseys]

Speak of the devil, look at these percentages of muslims answering if they want to apply islamic law to their nation (or the nation they reside in)

(Image)

From a study in 2013
https://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the ... ut-sharia/

Was not expecting Morocco to be that high...

[Thermodolia]

It's... not supposed to be accepted by anyone. That's not how judicial decisions work.

You know what delegitimizes courts faster than anything else? Blatantly ideological decisions with no popular support. Even the Islamophobes don't have an appetite for this. Ignoring for a second that anyone trying to argue this would get laughed out of court, any court that came down on this would be ignored at best.

It's supposed to be implemented, and it'll take no more than two generations of thorough education for everyone to stop giving it legitimacy by calling it a religion.

Imagine having to lie to win

How else would politicians exist?

[Thermodolia]

Religious law doesn't really have a place outside of people choosing (and continuing to choose) to be a part of it. Apostate Muslims should not be executed, even if they originally consented to being beholden to Sharia law, for example. Any such executions are murder, and their religious nature should offer no protection.

Real shariā doesn’t actually allow killing people for apostasy.

I laughed

[Nerfing]

oh no

[Purpelia]

Religions are political ideologies. The only people who disagree are believers that want their special ideology to be something special and get special treatment.

I'm not talking about religions in general. Islam in particular is a proto-fascisic Arab supremacist ethnic ideology that should be given the same treatment as Nazis and Marxist Leninists by the German Constitutional Court.

What applies to all of them in general also applies to this one in particular by definition. And my point, in case you were wondering, is that I absolutely agree with what you say and would go further to underline it should be applied across the board so as to finally strip religions of their special status.

[The Alma Mater]

28 million dollars is quite literally nothing to a multi trillion dollar GDP. If that's the most they can get out of day one of their boycott it'll have no impact whatsoever.

I agree it’s quite little. Nevertheless, France really wants them to stop.

Well, yes. They want muslims to stop acting like a few drawings are a far bigger insult to their prophet than people grooming teenagers to murder in his name. Which makes sense.

[Phoenicaea]

^in this inconvenience, which movie? ..this is the most unsuccessful ‘boycott’ ever witnessed. the turk ruler does not even care, he wishes merely talky-show for keeping his subjects in line.

[Insaanistan]

Real shariā doesn’t actually allow killing people for apostasy.

I laughed

I’m not joking. Actual shariā doesn’t allow it, but empires, kingdoms, sultans and presidents over the years went: