Jump to content

Is Being Anti Islam Racist?


sikhstudent99
 Share

Recommended Posts

Nope not at all. However the liberals of society will call you out on it and label you a racist (even though Islam goes against a lot of there stuff too). By the time these left wing loonies figure out they made a mistake it'll be too late. We as sikhs should just sit back and watch it all play out, keep your ties strong in punjab as when everything does hit the fan we can always move back. This is what the Jews are doing in countries like France

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont listen to the far left they will label anything as racist.

Bottom line is you cant be race-ist against a religion. Religion is a religion its ideology its belief and can be changed, people can convert.

Race is a race something you cant change, your born into it you have no choice to change your skin colour or racial ethnic group.

So no being anti-islam is not racist it can be called religionist or bigoted. And Islam teaches its followers to be religionist against non-muslims they are 1.6 billion in number they are majority in many area's they have no right to shout racist or religionist against anyone because they are the oppressor they are the abuser in a position of power against other religious minorities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2

Islam is a religion not a race

Many bad ideas in islam as well like muhammad marrying aisha when she was 9

if people attack bad ideas in islam how would that make them a racist

Islam isn't a race. Being Anti-Islamic is just you not wanting Sharia Law which any sane person would want.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Further more I would say its unjust to attack muslims just for being muslims.

The biggest victims of Islam are muslims themselves. The countless dead muslims in recent wars are from the hands of other criminal muslim jihadi's who have judged those who oppose them to have become aspostes and religiously justified to be killed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Muslims and multiculturalism don't work, they have two worlds the world of the believer and world of non believer, for multiculturalism to work you have to exclude them.

Yup it seems that way from all the muslim countries we can see in the world today very few or none that embrace multiculturalism or multi-religious setup where the other religions are given equality. Islamic authorities assert themselves very arrogantly and clearly that islam is the dominant religion and to try and convert muslims to other faiths wont be tolerated however non-muslims are fair game for abuse, haraessment, attacks, murders, rapes, discrimination or conversions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Islam was just a religion in terms of praying and believing in the oneness of the creator no one has an issue.

However Islam is a political ideology guised as a religion and that it is where the issue lies.

The type of political ideology that it is espouses is expansionist and totalitarian. I think that is the problem.

Who wants live under Sharia law. Why does any muslim want to live under Sharia law let alone a Kafir.

It has a political system that has a "them" and "us" attitude where you have Dar-Ul-Harb and Dar-Ul-Islam.

It's premise begins aggressively to people that are not muslim. When they run out of non-Muslims, the proponents of this political system turns on itself.

People do not want to live under that system, people run from it. Except that some of the people who ran from the system want to replicate that system in their new host societies (why do you want to do that?)

This system is parasitic because it infects the host society where people run from it only to spread to the next place.

People instinctively understand this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Islam was just a religion in terms of praying and believing in the oneness of the creator no one has an issue.

However Islam is a political ideology guised as a religion and that it is where the issue lies.

The type of political ideology that it is espouses is expansionist and totalitarian. I think that is the problem.

Who wants live under Sharia law. Why does any muslim want to live under Sharia law let alone a Kafir.

It has a political system that has a "them" and "us" attitude where you have Dar-Ul-Harb and Dar-Ul-Islam.

It's premise begins aggressively to people that are not muslim. When they run out of non-Muslims, the proponents of this political system turns on itself.

People do not want to live under that system, people run from it. Except that some of the people who ran from the system want to replicate that system in their new host societies (why do you want to do that?)

This system is parasitic because it infects the host society where people run from it only to spread to the next place.

People instinctively understand this.

Thats a really good analysis, If only more people in power analysed the true nature of islam's political setup and fought tooth and nail against it just as much they fought against the nazi's ideology.

Islam is a trojan horse first it came into the lands as something strange but peaceful, then it started to groom the weak (ie vulnerable loveless girls and low iQ men and stockholm syndrome women). Then once its population had grown enough they started to demand undeserved special privileges and rights. Once they were granted and they had almost 40% population over a nation their mentally insane criminal members started to violently attack the peaceful unsuspecting non-muslim host community. The host community fought back but were held back by the liberalists and far left trying to aid the islamists unwittingly. The islamists used extreme violence and destroy the government and install their own fascist totalitarian islamist leaders and spread out their black shirt troops in every town and city in the land enforcing their sharia mullahbad dictates. And hey presto the once playful peaceful joyful progressive non-muslim nation has been transformed to a despotic islamic hellhole with limited rights for women and non-muslim communities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I was searching igurbani.com which gives correct pronunciation of Gurbani. I can’t remember all of it at once. I guess it relies on more practice, like more Sehaj Paths. The meaning becomes clearer. I have noticed slight variants in it. This could be because it’s written in old Punjabi.  
    • Veer Manpreet Singh, a lay preacher, claims that -Sikhs aren't supposed to worship Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We are only supposed to worship God as is written in Guru Granth Sahib ji. -We only "revere" Guru Granth Sahib ji.     He says a lot of other things in this video, some are good refutations of Hindu superstitions, but the reformers often go too far. Anyways, what he is saying about not worshipping Guru Granth Sahib ji is totally wrong. The reason is Guru Granth Sahib ji is Guru. Guru is Satguru. Satguru is God. We worship God. Therefore, we also worship Satguru (Guru Granth Sahib ji).   There are innumerable verses in Gurbani equating God and Guru. ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਡੁਬਦਾ ਲਏ ਤਰਾਇ ॥੨॥ The Guru is the Supreme Lord and the Transcendent Master. The Guru floats (saves) the drowning one. p49   ਗੁਰੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਏਕੋ ਜਾਣੁ ॥ Know the Guru and God as One. p864   ਗੁਰ ਨਾਲਿ ਤੁਲਿ ਨ ਲਗਈ ਖੋਜਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡੁ ॥ There is no one at par with the Guru. I have searched and seen the whole universe. p49 (If the Guru is the greatest in the whole universe, shouldn't we worship the Guru?)   I'd like to ask Manpreet Singh what is worship? Any reasonable definition would include obeisance, remembrance, and praise. Those are exactly the same things Gurbani says to do regarding Guru! Remembrance and obeisance: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਅਪਨਾ ਸਦ ਸਦਾ ਸਮ੍ਹਾਰੇ ॥ Ever, ever, I think of the True Guru, ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਕੇਸ ਸੰਗਿ ਝਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ and the Guru's feet I brush with my head's hair. p387   Praise: ਗੁਰੁ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਪਰਮੇਸਰੁ ਆਪਿ ॥ The Guru himself is the transcendent Lord and the supreme master. ਆਠ ਪਹਰ ਨਾਨਕ ਗੁਰ ਜਾਪਿ ॥੪॥੧੬॥੬੭॥ Throughout the eight watches of the day, O Nanak meditate thou on the Guru. p387   In fact, Gurbani says the way to find God is to worship (puja) of Guru: ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਕੇ ਚਰਨ ਧੋਇ ਧੋਇ ਪੂਜਹੁ ਇਨ ਬਿਧਿ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਲਹੁ ਰੇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Washing and bathing the True Guru's feet, worship thou them. In this way thou shall obtain my Lord Master. Pause. p1118   Could it be any clearer that we are to worship Guru ji?
    • Bro, reciting a shorter Chaupai Sahib is hardly "anti-Dasam". It's fine to argue that the longer Chaupai is more traditional, but the short one isn't anti-Dasam. That's like claiming shorter Rehras is anti-Guru Granth Sahib ji just because there are fewer selections from Guru Granth Sahib. It might not be traditional, but it's not anti-Guru Granth Sahib. I prefer the longer versions, but let's not exaggerate. Every tradition has a slightly different Rehras version. Nanaksar vs Taksal vs Nihangs and so on. The basic template for Rehras is at the beginning of Guru Granth Sahib ji. Later, Chaupai Sahib was added and Anand Sahib always follows as the end of a process. Then some sangats added more saloks to start Rehras and others were added at the end. Some additional selections from Dasam Bani were also added, but it wasn't the same ones for every sangat. The important thing is to not hate on each other for these variations.
    • Umm, so you're upset that this jatha did Chaupai the same way it's being done at Harimandar Sahib for 100 years? Shouldn't you be upset at the manager of Darbar Sahib? I'm not saying that Sikhs who are aware of certain issues shouldn't do the longer Chaupai, but there are only so many battles you can fight. Instead of calling some jatha traitors because they're doing the (for better or worse) "standard" Chauapai published by the SGPC, it would be better to change things from the central point. You can't fault the average Sikh for picking up the average Gutka and doing paath.
    • It's the same here in Toronto. Alot of the gudwaras here are political orientated and get tons of funding from the government-probably want them stay hush hush with all the BS that has been happening with India.  These guys are skewing gurbani. A complaint was sent to a ragi singh a couple of days ago in regards to a hukamnama. 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use