Topic: Why do islam hates people? - page 89. (Read 437405 times)

Quote from: harlenadler on July 08, 2015, 11:53:07 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

Quote from: jambola2 on July 10, 2015, 12:39:11 AM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Then the UAE and all the countries listed would not have been the birth place of the computer... Their religion helps the brains to flee to the USA, France, UK...

By the way are you a muslim and do you know the ins and outs of sharia law?
I am still waiting for you to ask, openly, how the muslims in this thread feel about taking orders from an openly gay man, even if this gay man was about to save their nation and ultimately help win a gigantic war...

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

Not OP, but if I recall correctly, the UAE has a de facto moratorium on using the death penalty to deal with these cases. I mean, you can do to the craigslist for the country and you'll see a lot of gay people openly seeking homosexual relations, with their contact details and everything. Do you think they would do that if there was a real threat to their life of doing that? Dubai has a bit of a reputation for having a very... active gay scene.

I think muslims aren't allowed to hate gay men. They can hate the act of having homosexual relations, but if someone says that they have homosexual desires but there is no proof that they acted on them, then they cannot be blamed since they having a desire is not a crime. While some scholars have said that homosexual convicted of having same-sex intercourse should be punished as adulterers, but that is not a general rule that can be applied in every circumstance, in every place, in every time. The Shari'ah is not a rigid set of laws, stagnant, not changing. They must be adapted.

But IINAL, so yeah.

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

An entire religion can never be denounced as hateful, regardless of how many people practicing the religion seem hateful.
Saying that Islam is a hateful religion because of terrorist groups is like saying Christianity is a white supremacist because of the KKK.

Quote from: BADecker on July 09, 2015, 09:31:01 AM

Quote from: BADecker on July 09, 2015, 09:31:01 AM

*snip*

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

Now you're trying to tell us that there aren't any true Muslims here ^^.

Cheesy

And really? These broad sweeping generalizations are just insane. Sure, some Muslims are hateful, but so are some Jews, some Christians and some of every religion.
I'd say this thread is more hateful than any Muslim I've ever known.

There probably isn't any hate in this thread. There might be hate in those who interpret the info in this thread as hate.

Not all Muslims are hateful. The point isn't that they are. The point is that the sincere, knowledgeable Muslim, the one who truly knows all his religious writings from reading them over and over again, does one of two things. He either becomes numb to some of the writings, or else he becomes so mixed up that he: a) quits being a Muslim; b) tries to make excuses for the violent parts of the writings; c) becomes violent; d) becomes so frustrated with his religion that he tends to become hateful of it and any non-Muslim because he is trying to fulfill all the Islamic writings, which are extremely contradictory at times.

People understand more or less naturally that we all need peace to live together on this planet. Even violent, war-like people live peacefully with others of their kind... at least to some extent. Most Muslims overlook the violence directives in their religion. Some of them don't. As with any people, a few are actually hateful.

The reason why Islam is hateful is, nobody can uphold Islamic law completely so that they will make it to Heaven. Because of this, even though Islamic law is not alive so that it can hate emotionally, anything that sends people to Hell is hateful because it hates those it destroys.

True Christians are the ones that believe in Jesus-salvation. Such people receive Heaven based on the perfection of Jesus, which is offered to all people in gift form. Why is it offered in gift form? Because nobody, not even Christians, can obey the law enough to make it to Heaven. So, God offers it in gift form to all who believe in the salvation Jesus provides.

There are few Muslims who can be both Muslim and Christian. Thus, Islam prohibits the Muslims from accepting Jesus as Savior so that they can go to Heaven.

The hereafter is the important part of any great religion.

jambola2

legendary

Activity: 1120

Merit: 1038

An entire religion can never be denounced as hateful, regardless of how many people practicing the religion seem hateful.
Saying that Islam is a hateful religion because of terrorist groups is like saying Christianity is a white supremacist because of the KKK.

*snip*

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

Now you're trying to tell us that there aren't any true Muslims here ^^.

Cheesy

And really? These broad sweeping generalizations are just insane. Sure, some Muslims are hateful, but so are some Jews, some Christians and some of every religion.
I'd say this thread is more hateful than any Muslim I've ever known.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: harlenadler on July 08, 2015, 11:53:07 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

Quote from: BADecker on July 09, 2015, 09:31:01 AM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Then the UAE and all the countries listed would not have been the birth place of the computer... Their religion helps the brains to flee to the USA, France, UK...

By the way are you a muslim and do you know the ins and outs of sharia law?
I am still waiting for you to ask, openly, how the muslims in this thread feel about taking orders from an openly gay man, even if this gay man was about to save their nation and ultimately help win a gigantic war...

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

This is perhaps said better than the way I phrased it. That was why I emphasized that the movie got it wrong in portraying Turing as a closet homosexual. He was the complete opposite.

I believe it is a certainty that "he could not have done his work in an Islamic country" and that of course has tremendous consequences.

However, perhaps our friends could prove the opposite. Can they point to an openly gay scientist doing work of such proportions in the Muslim world?

I am not saying "being nice to them." That's not the point at all.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: harlenadler on July 08, 2015, 11:53:07 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Then the UAE and all the countries listed would not have been the birth place of the computer... Their religion helps the brains to flee to the USA, France, UK...

By the way are you a muslim and do you know the ins and outs of sharia law?
I am still waiting for you to ask, openly, how the muslims in this thread feel about taking orders from an openly gay man, even if this gay man was about to save their nation and ultimately help win a gigantic war...

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

Now you're trying to tell us that there aren't any true Muslims here ^^.

Cheesy

It is as stated. Nothing less. Nothing more.

Until a clear answer, Alan Turing is like the Schrödinger's cat stuck inside a box with "Sharia Law" written on it.

I have little hope people will get that joke...

BADecker

legendary

Activity: 3906

Merit: 1373

Quote from: harlenadler on July 08, 2015, 11:53:07 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

Quote from: harlenadler on July 08, 2015, 11:53:07 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Then the UAE and all the countries listed would not have been the birth place of the computer... Their religion helps the brains to flee to the USA, France, UK...

By the way are you a muslim and do you know the ins and outs of sharia law?
I am still waiting for you to ask, openly, how the muslims in this thread feel about taking orders from an openly gay man, even if this gay man was about to save their nation and ultimately help win a gigantic war...

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

Now you're trying to tell us that there aren't any true Muslims here ^^.

Cheesy

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on July 08, 2015, 04:38:01 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Then the UAE and all the countries listed would not have been the birth place of the computer... Their religion helps the brains to flee to the USA, France, UK...

By the way are you a muslim and do you know the ins and outs of sharia law?
I am still waiting for you to ask, openly, how the muslims in this thread feel about taking orders from an openly gay man, even if this gay man was about to save their nation and ultimately help win a gigantic war...

Ask away... Everyone is friendly here

harlenadler

sr. member

Activity: 430

Merit: 250

Agent of Chaos

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

You are being ignorant of the probability of being charged and actually sentenced to the crime. While the punishment is harsh as a deterrent, you need to have 4 religous, sane and righteous men with good conduct to testify that they explicitly saw with their own eyes two people of the same sex having intercourse. Now where are you going to find that? You're going to have 4 of these good men peeking into people's bedrooms or what? It's almost impossible to convict someone, unless they confess themselves. They cannot be forced into confessing anything, and they will have to testify against themselves four times - each time, the judge will tell them to SAY NO because if they say they didn't do it and it cannot be proven, they cannot be punished. If they are drunk or insane then they cannot confess against themselves. Alan Turing simply would not have been convicted if he was under Islamic Rule, unlike British rule where he was forced to confess.

Moreover, there is no exact punishment for homosexuality in Islam. The are currently mroe than 50 Muslim majority countries with varying degrees of sharia law. Of those, the only countries which have a prescribed death penalty for homosexuality are:
Mauritania
Somaliland (part of Somalia)
Saudi Arabia
Yemen
Iran

The United Arab Emirates also has, legally, a death penalty for acts of homosexuality. However, most cases are dealt with via fines, prison sentences, or expulsion from the country. I have not been able to find any cases of a death sentence having been dispensed by the courts in the United Arab Emirates.

Spendulus

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1386

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

It's total bullshit.

Country A. Homosexual behavior is illegal and results in jail if prosecuted.
Country B. Homosexual behavior is illegal and you are killed.

Go ahead, claim these are morally and ethically equivalent.

Wilikon

legendary

Activity: 1176

Merit: 1001

minds.com/Wilikon

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

Quote from: Spendulus on June 30, 2015, 01:34:44 PM

I haven't seen the movie, so I wouldn't know how accurate or not it is. I didn't miss your point, I disputed it directly. Your point is, as you just said, "the interest of a culture in encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from, instead of harshly suppressing it" as you seek to differentiate it from Muslim cultures which you believe would harshly suppress an individual such as Turing. Your point is Turing was appreciated greatly for his work, and my rebuttal was he obviously wasn't, as evidenced by how harshly the great and brilliant war hero was suppressed after the war when he was prosecuted for who he was and chemically castrated. These actions do not show a "culture encouraging brilliant work from whomever it may come from" because the caveat was "unless you're gay, in which case you will be suppressed."

Maybe before making broad sweeping generalizations of this sort, you might want to look at say, 100 people who knew him? What is "a culture?"
It's a lot more than a couple cops who made a case up against the man.

You did not dispute my point one bit in condemning English culture of that time, from the modern point of view.

My point remains. If the Islamics had then ruled Britian, he would not have done his work, and you would likely not have a computer today.

Interchange "culture" with "society" and see if it helps your understanding any. Your point remains discredited. British society was not morally superior because they actually suppressed him slightly less harshly than an Islamic one theoretically might have. The British government didn't prosecute him until the war was over, so there's every reason to believe an Islamic government would have similarly used him for his talents in order to aid a war effort, and then persecuted him afterwards like the Brits did.

You and spendulus are not muslims. I am not a muslim.

A simple idea: why don't you ask directly that question to the muslims in this thread. Find out if this man would have been accepted, as openly gay, in a society based on sharia law. Why not let the people with the necessary experience answer? Could be yes. Could be no.

Ask away.

jaysabi

legendary

Activity: 2044

Merit: 1115

★777Coin.com★ Fun BTC Casino!