Maher: ‘Naive’ and Wrong to Say Islam Isn’t More Violent Than Other Religions

[rug]

by Josh Feldman | 10:05 pm, September 11th, 2014

Bill Maher is an outspoken atheist and critic of religion, but Islam in particular has set off Maher in the past. And he sparred with Charlie Rose this week over his belief that Islam is far worse and more violent than Christianity.

Maher made it clear that “all religions are stupid,” but for anyone to say ISIS isn’t Islamic (like President Obama did last night) is ridiculous, because “there is a connecting tissue.” He and Rose sparred over the “illiberal beliefs” held by a significant number of Muslims all over the world.

Rose argued that there are Christians with backwards beliefs too, but Maher jumped in to explain why you can’t compare the two:

“Vast numbers of Christians do not believe that if you leave the Christian religion, you should be killed for it. Vast numbers of Christians do not treat women as second-class citizens. Vast numbers of Christians do not believe that if you draw a picture of Jesus Christ you should get killed for it."

He said it’s “naive” and plain wrong to say Islam isn’t more violent than other religions, because aside from ISIS, there are beheadings in nations like Saudi Arabia that no one is up in arms about. And in addition, Maher said women are “brainwashed” and treated horribly in the Muslim world.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maher-naive-and-wrong-to-say-islam-isnt-more-violent-than-other-religions/

It's interesting that The National Review and The Blaze are pushing this.

[montanacowboy]

1. Can't watch Bill anymore

tried to watch his show last night, ugh, what a guest lineup- he loves to have the righties on and now he talks about supporting Randy Paul

[Joe Magarac]

2. There is an unfortunate tendency among liberals to equate religion with niceness ...

... and that religion is not authentically religion if it is not nice.

Even when adherents are lopping off heads while screaming "God is great!" and can point to scriptures that appear explicitly to authorize it. If they do that, it can't be about religion, because religion is niceness. Right?

To my way of thinking all religions are not nice, but at any given time and place not necessarily equally not nice.

[cbayer]

14. Do you then extrapolate this to "all religious people are not nice"?

[Joe Magarac]

33. Of course not n/t

[LiberalAndProud]

3. Do we have a basis for comparison?

I think a Christian theocracy may have the potential to be equally violent and hateful, in the hands of fundamentalists.

[louis-t]

4. Given absolute power over our country

there is no doubt in my mind that a Christian theocracy would closely resemble an Islamic theocracy.

[LiberalAndProud]

6. Our American Dominionist movement

is no friend to women, or children, or the poor, and will not brook apostasy. I guess I'm not so arrogant as to think it could not happen here.

[rug]

5. If you look at it historically you can.

But then you're talking history and all its extant circumstances, not religion.

[LiberalAndProud]

7. You can ... what?

and what historical contexts were you thinking of?

[rug]

8. You can compare societies that have specific religious overlays in various areas and eras.

The Iron Maiden and other implements of torture used in Europe 500 to 1,000 years ago would put to shame anything ISIS does today. While it proclaimed itself Christendom, that label ignores all the social, political and economic developments occurring simultaneously. Maher and Harris are ignoring those circumstances with ISIS today, preferring to dwell on the inherent "evil" of Islam.

I won't even mention what was done to the indigenous peoples of the Americas. Imperialism and colonialism are not evangelism.

[LiberalAndProud]

10. Thank you. Yes.

[cbayer]

16. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Whether it is religiously based or not makes little difference, imo.

[Promethean]

39. We've already seen a Christian Theocracy in history.

It led to such wonderful things as the Inquisition and witch hunts.

[LiberalAndProud]

40. Yes, that's true.

I must admit though, I'm really not qualified to comment on which of the two doctrines is more eviler "[sic]" than the other, because I am not familiar with the Qur'an at all.:

[Promethean]

41. I don't really care which is more evil.

I just care that both cross my threshold of "too evil to be allowed to continue unopposed." That said one person can only devote so much of their energy to a cause. So you'll find me and many others choosing to focus primarily on the homegrown evil that we can make a real impact on (dominionists and creationists). Instead of the overseas evil that really can only effectively be fought by natives of where it comes from.

[LiberalAndProud]

42. Maybe I care on some intellectual plane.

It might be fun to select the more militant passages from each, assign some sort of "scale of badness" and count the egregious passages. The idea is not intriguing enough for me to actually undertake the exercise, mind you.

I do believe any earthly principality that lays claim to authority from God must necessarily undermine human rights and dignity.

[rug]

43. You may find this interesting:

https://depravitystandard.org/

It's not about religion per se but it attempts to measure depravity.

[LiberalAndProud]

44. Yes, I did. Thank you!

Are you participating?

[rug]

45. No, but I used this psychiatrist to examine a client who stabbed his wife.

He was successful in getting him moved from a maximum security state hospital to one less secure and more fitting for his illness.

I don't know how successful he will be with getting this scale adopted but he does know what he's talking about.

[cbayer]

47. I would love to actually see and take the survey, but I don't want to sign up.

Interesting stuff, though.

[rug]

48. You could email them at the link.

https://depravitystandard.org/contact_us.html?PHPSESSID=b7n8bbdiuppmk953v1pakl6i70

They're pretty responsive to questions about methodology and preliminary results.

[cbayer]

49. I may do that. Thanks for the info.

[ZombieHorde]

9. He's making a sociological claim,

so he can just use some sociological studies to back up his claims, unless of course he is using "other ways of knowing."

[cbayer]

11. Is there some kind of correlation between activist atheism and islamophobia?

There is something fundamentally wrong with condemning an entire, huge group of people because of the extremists among them.

That goes for muslims, christians, jews and atheists.

[beam me up scottie]

12. Yes.

It exists in the minds of hypocrites everywhere.

[edhopper]

15. No

Some of the most virulent anti-Islam voice in this country are conservative Christians.

[cbayer]

17. Can you name names? I'm not challenging you, I am genuinely curious.

[edhopper]

18. Don't feel like googling it

Obvious people like Pat Robertson and Louis Gohmer.
If you ever watch a Fox News discussion of Islam,( I don't recommend it) always at least one or two Islamophobes.

[cbayer]

21. Pat Robertson and Louis Gohmer are islamophobic?

I don't watch FOX or any other TV, so I don't know about this. But bigots are often bigoted about multiple things.

OTOH, I think that those who embrace "rational thought" and are also bigoted should be openly and vigorously challenged.

[edhopper]

27. And they should welcome the challenge

on the islamophobes

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/23/pat-robertson-islam-nazism-evil-video_n_3134711.html

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/02/20/meet-foxs-new-anti-muslim-national-security-ana/198148

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/fox-news-top-five-islamophobic-smears

none of them are atheist.

[beam me up scottie]

28. I can do better than that.

Islamaphobia Today

Gohmert: Radical Muslims ‘being trained to come in and act like Hispanics’

Texas Congressman Louie Gohmert (R) on Wednesday connected the Monday bombings in Boston to the immigration debate and warned that “radical Islamists” were “being trained to come in and act like Hispanics.”

Referring to the Boston Bombing, Pat Robertson Declares: “Don’t Talk To Me About ‘Religion Of Peace,’ No Way”

Right-wing Christian evangelist and famed Skeletor impersonator Pat Robertson is at it again, implying that the Boston Bombings were committed by Muslim terrorists. To be clear for the hundredth time, no one knows who committed this horrible act, or why.

I look forward to your thoughts regarding these influential christian islamaphobes.

[LiberalAndProud]

19. Good grief, cbayer ... did you just use a very broad brush?

It might be helpful if I understood what you mean by "activist atheism."

[cbayer]

20. Well, I might have broad brushed, but, OTOH, there seems to be

some significant islamophobia by some of the most outspoken and media savvy atheists. And I would consider them atheist activists.

[LiberalAndProud]

22. In my opinion, their emphasis has been poorly placed.

I would rather be discussing the nature of theocracies than the merits of one belief system or another. Any ideology, when placed in the hands of fanatic lunatics, will become corrupt, as you have already pointed out.

ETA: Am I to understand, then, that an activist atheist is a person who speaks publicly about their world view?

EATA: Beyond Bill and Christopher Hitchens, which activist atheists would lend credence to your correlation hypothesis?

[cbayer]

23. The terms are sometimes problematic. I see activist atheists as a broad group.

They are the ones who are involved in groups and constitute the "movement". I think most atheists do not fit this criteria, but there is a growing and no insignificant group that does.

It's not just about speaking publicly. The extreme is the group that labels all religion as bad and voices the wish to eliminate it.

[LiberalAndProud]

25. Groups, like FFRF? Those sorts of groups?

Please stop. Atheist Activist is not a denomination of atheism. There are those among us who do police the wall that separates church from state. As far as I'm concerned, that is a good thing. Beyond that, I am glad that the voice of reason is extant and strident.

[cbayer]

26. Please stop? At what point did I denigrate activist atheists.

I am a big supporter of FFRF and other groups that promote 1st amendment issues and anything that decreases the prejudice against those who do not hold religious beliefs.

Not only do I support you, I am one of you.

[LiberalAndProud]

30. Not here? Then I'm reading it with the wrong tone.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1218152342#post11

[font size="1"]denigrate: criticize unfairly; disparage[/font]

[cbayer]

32. Yes, you are definitely reading it with the wrong tone.

[LiberalAndProud]

34. Well then, let me be the first to apologize.

[okasha]

36. Sam Harris is also Islamophobic.

[LiberalAndProud]

38. How so?

"I would not want to create the impression that most Muslims support ISIS, nor would I want to give any shelter or inspiration to the hatred of Muslims as people," the atheist author states.

"In drawing a connection between the doctrine of Islam and jihadist violence, I am talking about ideas and their consequences, not about 1.5 billion nominal Muslims, many of whom do not take their religion very seriously."

Harris, who has criticized atheist voices who have claimed that all religions are equally as bad, added:

"Understanding and criticizing the doctrine of Islam — and finding some way to inspire Muslims to reform it — is one of the most important challenges the civilized world now faces. But the task isn't as simple as discrediting the false doctrines of Muslim 'extremists,' because most of their views are not false by the light of scripture. A hatred of infidels is arguably the central message of the Koran."

http://www.christianpost.com/news/atheist-author-sam-harris-slams-obamas-comment-that-isis-is-not-islamic-126308/

Again, maybe I'm confused about definitions. Islamophobic: what does it mean?

[beam me up scottie]

24. You expect us to believe that you're completely unaware of conservative christian islamaphobia

and yet you seem to think you are well informed about "some significant islamophobia" by "some of the most outspoken and media savvy atheists."?

You go on to claim that you "don't watch FOX or any other TV"

How are you aware of one and not the other?

Where do you get your information?

Your continuous criticism of atheists in this forum sure sounds like it comes from a FOX fan.

[arcane1]

13. The amti-Muslim backlash after 9/11 made a lot of liberals hesitant to say anything negative.

I remember Michael Moore on Bill's show once, and some politician (I forget who) on another occasion, twisted themselves into pretzels over this. Even a factual claim like "many Islamic cultures treat women worse than ours does" was met with denial, and responses like "women get raped in our culture, so we're just as bad" even though rape is illegal here.

Back to my point: liberals had to counter a huge wave of unfair anti-Islam commentary from the right, and as a result it is hard for many liberals to be objective or critical about middle-eastern societies now.

[bluestateguy]

29. His remarks seem sound to me

No good progressive should make excuses for Islam's violent, anti-woman, anti-gay and anti-Semetic tendencies. Sure there is some of all that stuff in Christianity too, and it must also be criticized. But I agree with Maher that on the whole, you find more of it in Islam.

That does not make individual Muslims inherently bad people.

[LeftishBrit]

31. At present, there are more Muslim theocracies and dictatorships than those of other religions...

but e.g. the Inquisition wasn't particularly benign either. Nor was the way that ancient forms of religion were used by e.g. the Roman emperors. Nor was the quasi-religion of Communism, when interpreted by the likes of Stalin and Mao; or the quasi-religion of fascism, when interpreted by anyone at all.

[okasha]

37. I'm not sure that Stalinism and Maoism

rise (or perhaps the word should be sink) to the status of quasi-religion. If we're to use that term for them because, I assume, they were "cults of personality," then what about fan responses to Elvis or the Beatles, or for that matter, the awful Paris Hilton and the Kardashian spawn? Wouldn't those qualify as "quasi-religious," too?

[Hari Seldon]

35. Redigiolous