Which is accepted by 'the Left'.The claim that upsets some folks on the left is that there is something baked into certain expressions of Islam that places it at odds with secular Western values, and that this complicates integration.
Im not sure that follows.Please tear this idea to bits, but I think if you could show that sexual assault rose by 20% in a year and the increase in perpetrators happened to be the same number of non immigrants with the 20% increase being the sizable increase in immigrant offenders then you would be able to make a claim that the immigration has lead to higher sexual assault.
When was the last honor killing in Australia? How many of them happen exactly? And isnt the criminal justice system already equipped to deal with such things?If cultures are the same and people are the same, then why shouldn't we be afraid of things like honour killings?
With the common denominator between the two and the likely cause being 'poverty' and not 'being brown skinned'.Indigenous and immigrant women are not only overly represented per capita in violent crime or abuse statistics, but also far less likely to report it, on the basis of cultural barriers alone.
Again, I didn't say that.You think anyone on the Greens support FGM, child marriages, entrenched sexism and homophobia of conservative religions or terror attacks, or the fundamentalist ideology behind them?
Of course there's a distinction. Who claims otherwise?The left simply state there is a distinction to be made between the overwhelming number of Muslims (your Bachar Houlis and Adam Saads) who are law abiding people who have immigrated into Australia more or less seamlessly, and your radicalised Daesh member racing off to Syria to fight (who compromise a tiny proportion of Muslims).
They're not. They're specific criticisms of the doctrines and their expression. The claim that "it tars all Muslims" is simply the preferred red herring to shut down those criticisms. It's Ben Affleck v Sam Harris all over again.All too often these 'criticisms of certain expressions of Islam' are tarring all Muslims with the same brush (usually backed by calls to persecute them specifically), and that's the stuff that 'the left' rail against.
That wasn't my question.Are 'honor killings' an an issue in the West we really need to worry about or are we jumping at shadows again?
Again, not my question. And I'm not sure what point you think this wiki link makes?
Poverty is a factor in all violence and abuse, but if you were to take away all of the cases where it was a factor, you'll get a much clearer picture of cultural attitudes.With the common denominator between the two and the likely cause being 'poverty' and not 'being brown skinned'.
And again, I disagree with that.Again, I didn't say that.
I said there is a reflexive and ideological backlash against critiques that diagnose certain Islamic doctrines as a specific and particular part of the problem.
I dont have statistics at hand, but I would say a resounding yes to that first question - the overwhelming number of honor killings are carried out by men.Are honour killings carried out by "men" generally? Or is it a phenomenon located disproportionately within a particular subset?
If you exclude the people who would suggest that cultural incongruities evaporate when people move country, then no, nothing to worry about.
Why do you keep suggesting this is my argument? Where have I suggested people support Islamic State? Is this a deliberate mischaracterisation?And again, I disagree with that.
Provide me with an example of any mainstream 'leftist' support of FGM, Daesh, radicalization, Salafi Islam or anything else of that nature.
This has nothing to do with my argument. You are arguing against RW racism/xenophobia when that's not the position I'm presenting. My position is not about "demonising all Muslims" so you're arguing against a position that has nothing to do with me.The issue is people on the 'right' all too often demonize all muslims (usually because right wing people are xenophobic, or outright racist) which is what the 'left' take issue with. The 'right' then seem to take havin those views criticized and labeled as the xenophobia it is, as the 'left' supporting all aspects of Islam (including the above) which is not that case at all.
See the Affleck/Harris exchange.The phenomenon your asserting happens, does not in fact happen. Its a perception, not the reality.
I'm not sure what point this makes. You reassert an obvious distinction that no sane person disputes. That's not my argument.I cop it too with people accusing me of 'supporting Islam' when the reality is (if you go through my posts) I've been highly critical of Salafi Islam (and other aspects of the religion) while also drawing the distinction between Muslims generally and the small core of *******s that go off to fight in Syria or blow themselves up at children's concerts.
Yes, they are carried out by men but limiting it to men generically is a deliberate elision of the facts.I dont have statistics at hand, but I would say a resounding yes to that first question - the overwhelming number of honor killings are carried out by men.
Culture and religion overlap. Treating them as mutually exclusive is absurd.And no, it is not disproportionately within a particular subset (i.e Islam). They're not religious in nature, they're cultural (Indonesia and Malaysia for example doesnt have them, where the Pashtun people in the hills of Afghanistan and Pakistan and the surrounds have a lot of them).
This is the kind of obscurantism I'm talking about.In fact if you were to round up a list of all perpetrators of honor killings, you would find all different religions, ethnicities, cultures and so forth engaging in the practice of honor killing a woman.
I bet you the perpetrators are nearly all male though. Gender would be the strongest indicator, over any other factor.
So you're saying we should ban Pashtun immigration due to the high rates of Honor killings there?If you exclude the people who would suggest that cultural incongruities evaporate when people move country, then no, nothing to worry about.
You know what would be even more accurate?It's more accurate statement than 'They are carried out by Muslims'.
I'm actually saying that the risk to our society isn't from people who come from different cultures bringing their different values with them here, it's from people here already who campaign for the position that there is no difference in the cultures and nothing needs to be done to mitigate those values so they can better adjust to our way of life and what we value.So you're saying we should ban Pashtun immigration due to the high rates of Honor killings there?
Why not simply ban male immigration? That's excludes 99 percent of rapists, honor killings, sexual assaults, mass shooters and so forth right there.
If you acknowledge a difference then you open the discussion to which is better.some folks refuse to acknowledge the role of culture/religion at all