[ SECRET POST #4923 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #4923 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.


01.



__________________________________________________



02.
[Legend of the White Snake]


__________________________________________________


03.
[Komi Can't Communicate]


__________________________________________________



04.
[The Elm-Chanted Forest]


__________________________________________________



05.
(Lucifer, Supernatural)


__________________________________________________



06.
[Wheel of Time]


__________________________________________________



07.
[Queer Eye]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Criminal Minds]






















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 49 secrets from Secret Submission Post #705.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

True. Perhaps my issue is with fundamentalism.

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

I agree that fundamentalism is very bad!

I think people talking about Islam tend to have two problems - one, people tend to critique Islam in very broad ways - "The teachings of Islam are fundamentally inconsistent with Western liberalism" - that are simply wrong as stated. Two, there are people who dislike Islam and Muslims across the board out of pure religious and cultural bigotry, and from a liberal point of view it is just as important to oppose that kind of bigotry as it is to oppose religious fundamentalism, and it's important to draw a bright line between critiques of fundamentalist Islam and critiques of Muslims and Islam in general.

That's how it seems to me.

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

people tend to critique Islam in very broad ways - "The teachings of Islam are fundamentally inconsistent with Western liberalism" - that are simply wrong as stated.

NAYRT - That depends on whether one is talking about the teachings as stated in the core religious text, or the teachings as taught by followers of the religion. If one is talking about the former, then it's not wrong, it's fact. The teachings of Islam, as taught by the core religious text, are fundamentally inconsistent with Western liberalism. The same can be said of the teachings of Christianity.

However, if one is talking about how the religion is taught verbally, and through supplemental materials, then it isn't really possible to say conclusively what the teachings of a religion are or aren't, because each individual will be taught it slightly differently (or in some cases very differently).

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

One, I think that, even if you want to grant primacy to the religious texts, religious texts still require interpretation. I don't agree with the assumption that there's one clear obvious unproblematic interpretation of any religious text.

Two, I don't think that you should grant primacy to the religious texts. I think that the actual practice of the religion is far more important and meaningful and definitive. The religion only exists in any practical meaningful sense because individual people in a society believe in it and interpret it. On its own, a religious scripture is only a set of words.

SA

[(Anonymous)]

SA - and for instance, in Christianity, the idea that scripture is the key authority in determining legitimate Christianity is an idea that not all Christians agree with. It's a huge bone of contention between different sects on a very practical level. Sola Scripture is absolutely not a universal Christian belief.

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

I agree with your second point. Your first point isn't wrong, religious texts do allow for, and sometimes require, interpretation. However, both the bible and the quran both have many passages that espouse teachings and values that are overtly, unambiguously, "fundamentally inconsistent with Western liberalism." (Having read the majority of both of them, front to back, I would know.) Just because the entire text is not a cut-and-dried meaning packet, doesn't mean you can reasonably argue it is not quite clearly and demonstrably inconsistent with Western liberalism in certain places.

Re: Controversial Opinions (Non-Fandom)

[(Anonymous)]

I accept that what you say is true by any reasonable, commonsense, everyday, straightforward reading of the texts in question. It is true for all secular intents and purposes.