#cultural muslims as equivalent to cultural christian

[thevagueambition]

the things people readily believe about other groups is so unhinged

lots of people in this country actually think cultural muslims aren't a thing

I've met a good number of cultural muslims so I can't fathom thinking that but ig the people who believe they don't exist are people who have never actually spoken to a muslim

[fairuzfan]

you didn't actually answer my question , Temple Mount is the most ancient and holiest site for Jewish people -- the Dome of the Rock & Al-Aqsa Mosque were built hundreds of years later on behalf of the Umayyad dynasty's conquest. you mentioned in your response a massacre that happened centuries later, which does not relate to the fact that Jews cannot pray at this site (their utmost holiest site before even the existence of Christians or Muslims). how is "temple denial" something that I made up when you can research it right now and see what it is and that it exists? I ask because this seems to be actually a blind spot for many non-Jewish people simply because it doesn't affect them. I'm not intending to be argumentative and I am sorry if my English is bad in getting across

I'm sorry for being argumentative but a lot of the time, whenever Palestinians are asked about temple mount, there's an implication that Palestinians are colonizers and don't deserve to be on the land. Israelis, if they could, would completely ban Muslims from AlAqsa despite it being the third holiest site in Islam.

AlAqsa is probably the most important national symbol of Palestinians, often thought to be the last straw for Palestinian heritage. So much of our culture has been robbed from us, and (primarily muslims) believe that the demolition of AlAqsa, which is, as Mohammed ElKurd puts it, is one of the last places in all of Palestine where being Palestinian is not criminalized would be a fundamental loss we would never recover from, equivalent to losing our Balad.

I bring up the Ibrahimi Mosque Massacre because there are no restrictions for extremist settlers legally — they operate as an arm of the state and in some cases are encouraged to committ these acts. The "Apartheid Law" basically enshrined that settlements are a national value for Israel. This means that there is no safe haven for Palestinians legally. They're in constant danger of getting kicked out of their home or getting arrested for existing. I cannot emphasize enough how Palestinian freedom is so restricted with the explicit intent of pushing them out of the land.

Temple denial as a concept (after looking it up) seeks to paint Palestinians in a fundamentally bigoted and violent light. Palestinians are not allowing Jews in AlAqsa not because they hate Jews, but because that opens the way for settlers to become violent around AlAqsa, which a lot of the time is already happening. I suggest reading "Why Do Palestinians Burn Jewish Holy Sites? The Fraught History of Joseph's Tomb" (sorry the link is not linking, but you can look it up on the palestine institute webpage). It discusses the use of history as a colonial tool. Here's an excerpt:

It is one of many shrines across historic Palestine – now split into Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza – that has been re-invented as exclusively Jewish, despite a long history of shared worship among Jews, Christians, Muslims, and Samaritans that goes back centuries. And the reason it has been attacked has almost nothing to do with religion, and much to do with how the Israeli military and settlement movements have used religion as a way to expand their control over Palestinian land and holy places.

And a second excerpt describing the political use of religion:

But the claims of biblical archaeologists had a strong role in how the Zionist movement would come to understand and conceive of the landscape.6 As European Jews migrated to Palestine in the first half of the twentieth century, they drew upon biblical archeology's claims. They adopted archeologists' claims that Palestinian holy sites were directly linked to ancient biblical figures. In many cases, they focused on occupying those sites in order to legitimize the colonial endeavor by giving it a sense of deeper history. In many cases, this would mean evicting the Palestinians who actually frequented these holy sites.

And what Palestinians are afraid of:

In 1975, the Israeli military banned Palestinians – that is, the Samaritans, Muslims, and Christians living around the site – from visiting, a ban that has remained in place until this day. [...] Unsurprisingly, the ban has ignited intense anger over the years. This is true particularly given that frequent visits by Jewish settlers to the shrine are accompanied by hundreds of Israeli soldiers, who enter the area and run atop the rooftops of local Palestinians to “secure” the tomb. As a result, Joseph's Tomb has increasingly become associated with the Israeli military and settlement movement in the eyes of Palestinians. Its presence has become an excuse for frequent military incursions that provoke clashes and lead to arrests and many injuries in the neighborhood. Some fear that Israelis will attempt to take over the shrine to build an Israeli settlement around it. This fear is not unfounded, given the fact that Israeli settlers have done exactly that all across the West Bank in places they believe are connected in some way to Jewish biblical history. The notoriously violent Jewish settlements in Hebron, for example, were built there due to the location of the Tomb of the Patriarchs in that southern West Bank town. Following the initial years of settlement, settlers even managed to convince Israeli authorities to physically divide the shrine – which is holy to local Palestinians – and turn the whole area into a heavily-militarized complex. Other shrines have become excuses for the Israeli military to build army bases inside Palestinian towns, like Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem – which is surrounded by twenty-foot high concrete walls on three sides to block Palestinian access. The village of Nabi Samwel near Jerusalem, meanwhile, was demolished in its entirety to provide Jewish settlers access to the tomb at its heart.

I'm not denying the temple mount is there. I'm just saying that history has been manipulated to erase centuries worth of cultural heritage through scholarship and Palestinians are protective of their most important symbol of resistance and life. Even you saying "Islam and Christianity came after Judiasm" is a dogwhistle for me, because a lot of the time extremists say that to completely erase AlAqsa as an important site to Muslims and intending to deny the site as a shared worshipping site that is quite important to Muslims. Just because Islam came after Judiasm, does that mean it's not legitimate as a religion itself? Islamically, Islam is a continuation of Judiasm, so we don't deny judiasm is important to AlQuds. We just are so concerned with losing our national symbol that we're so protective over it.

Now I bring up the massacre at ibrahimi mosque because, like mentioned in the excerpt above, Palestinians are afraid something like that will happen again. There's no protections for Palestinians, and most of the time they're denied from praying in AlAqsa themselves by Israeli authorities. Israeli settlers themselves come in and disrespect AlAqsa, and as I mentioned, extremists plan on demolishing AlAqsa to build a Third Temple. The Massacre at the Mosque paved way to the "Jews Only" streets I mentioned, including the militarization and basically a complete upheaval of normal life for Palestinians. I suggest looking into how terrible the situation in AlKhalil is, and that arised directly from the massacre.

You cannot separate this issue from the colonial implications of the last safe haven in all of Palestine being open to Israelis. Now when Palestine is free, I doubt there would be restrictions. But right now, there are and to pretend Israelis don't pose a threat to Palestinians fundamentally, would be erasure of the colonization of Palestine.

I'm sorry if that sounds harsh, but even if AlAqsa was built hundreds of years after, it doesn't change the fact that RIGHT NOW Israelis have privilege that Palestinians do not. As soon as that privilege is no longer there, then we can talk about allowing Jews there. But until then, Palestinians are constantly in danger of settler violence and to take away a space (which, Ibrahimi Mosque was one of those sites before Palestinians were massacred) is frankly, an insult and a denial that Palestinians themselves are colonized.

I suggest looking at the links I provided earlier for more in depth analysis. I'm going to reiterate: the only reason it's illegal is because Palestine is colonized and this is our last safe haven that we even aren't completely allowed from entering ourselves.

Most Palestinians are quite heated about this topic. It genuinely is considered one of our last national symbols (so not just religious but also political and cultural), which means that having that taken away (which extremist settlers plan on demolishing it completely, and if they're allowed in, then there are no restrictions on their behavior) would be tantamount to losing our balad, or nation. I've heard Israelis call AlAqsa terrible names over the years and some fully intend on demolishing the site. Even within Israeli politics, it is a genuine goal for some people, including Ben Gvir, so most believe that opening the door for settlers (who are the ones who want the destruction of AlAqsa) would be equivalent to giving it up. You can't ignore that when talking about AlAqsa and the laws surrounding it. The primary reason for this protectiveness is political and cultural.

[script-a-world]

Submitted via Google Form:

How can a world have no major religions but a vast number of small ones. Like no religion accounts for more than 1% of the entire population except maybe atheist for maybe 5% of the population? But what does that say about the distribution of culture/countries?

Tex: Major religions are often major because they are state-backed - i.e., they have lots of money at their disposal, so they become economically and thus culturally relevant. Religion answers, approximately, two major questions: 1) Are we alone in X or Y manner? and 2) I’m scared of X thing that I have difficulty understanding, what is Y solution?

For a place like Earth, the planet that we know the most about, there are no planet-wide confirmations about the physical existence of any deity in particular (as in, shows up in a grocery and says hello to you in an entirely unambiguous manner that all onlookers can agree upon). This means that religions on Earth are predicated on the idea that belief - and, thus, willpower - makes the deity real. Or at least “proves” it. Your mileage may vary.

Because of this, the real-world religions that you can observe and study will have many, many commonalities to the two general questions I stated above. The first question usually contains subjects such as sentience, and the emotional frills of that. The second question usually contains subjects such as death and the process of dying.

In order to have many distinct religions, you would need a lot of unanswered questions for various societies to answer, a severe lack of contact and communication between groups of societies, and most importantly a lack of (or lack of need of) money. The more travel there is, the more people of different backgrounds will talk to each other, and the more ideas will be confronted, shared, and discussed. Trade would correspondingly be low, because of the lack of travel.

Utuabzu: There’s a couple things to consider here. Firstly, how are we defining religion? This isn’t a trick question, it’s a genuine issue. The Abrahamic concept of religion doesn’t really carry over well to other spiritual traditions. Most other belief systems are more local and action-focused (orthoprax, concerned with what one does, rather than what one believes), and often lack any mandatory set of beliefs, or standardised mythology. Religions like Chinese Folk Religion, Shintō, Hinduism*, etc. can have wildly varying pantheons and myths depending on where you are and who you ask. So depending on your definition every tiny village could have its own religion, because it has its own version of the cultural mythos and its own pantheon including some distinctive local gods and dropping some more common cultural ones.

Universal (applicable to everyone regardless of origin or location), proselytising (actively attempting to convert people) religions are rare. There’s only actually a few of them. Most notably, Christianity and Islam. They are both also orthodox religions (concerned with believing the correct things), which means they have a standard mythology and theology (or several competing standards that have historically attempted to resolve their differences via murder). A third, very notable difference they have with most belief systems is that they are exclusive, you can’t (or at least you’re not supposed to) combine them with other belief systems. Most non-Abrahamic belief systems are more or less fine with syncretism (combining belief systems), most clearly seen with the way Buddhism** is practiced concurrently with folk religions across Asia.

So, in answer to the actual question, your best bet here is to just not have an equivalent to Christianity or Islam. I suggest reading up on non-Abrahamic and pre-Christian/Muslim religions and religious practices, as that should give you an idea of what such a world might look like. I’d expect it to be colourful and diverse, with cities filled with temples and shrines to an ever-expanding array of deities and hosting various festivals much of the year. Many people would likely layer a philosophy like Daoism or Stoicism over their day-to-day religious practice, and it would be common and expected for people to show respect to or make  offerings to local deities when traveling. Religion would be a thing you do, not what you believe.

*Hinduism is less a religion and more a family of closely related religions and spiritual traditions that all originate on the Indian subcontinent. Which is why the Indian government considers Jains and Buddhists to be Hindu.

**Buddhism can be described as a religion or as a philosophy, depending on who you ask, what the context is, and whether Mercury is in Gatorade. Western definitions don’t really apply cleanly to non-Western contexts.

[abyssalaquarist00]

I Know dd is very much not 1 to 1 with the real world but do you think Alhazred has any mixed feelings/criticisms of dd!islam? Assuming that is the religion he was raised in?

i think i answered this partially here but sure, what the hell let's expand on it.

note: if i talk about something from the real world in context of alhazred, just assume i'm talking about the dd equivalent. i've always seen the light = christianity, i havent thought much about what judaism or islam would be called

first, here are some considerations:

he is a scholar. you don't become one if you don't have questions or criticisms. this is the most important part of his character.

any one person's relation to religion is tied to a few factors such as; household; community; locale. religion has also historically been enforced by government, and influenced by leaders who are influenced by politics.

islam, like its Abrahamic cousins, has different denominations therefore different interpretations.

cultural and religious practices are influenced by each other

Al-Hazred is based off of Abdul Al-Hazred, the HP Lovecraft character who authors the necronomicon (or "kitab al-azif"). the source character lived during the islamic golden age, and originally from yemen

im just a guy, i don't have a degree in this, i am not in school, i am not a scholar, i am merely a self-professed student of life. take every single thing i give you with a grain of salt and find a variety of sources that you might initially agree OR disagree with. just be open.

hope the below answers your question! i think this is everything. i wanted to make sure i'm covering all my bases. i'm happy to answer more, also :-)

my interpretation of alhazred is that he is an andalusian arab, who was brought up in a sufi household. regardless of religion, like many of us (i hope), he probably went through phases of religion and religiosity.

being raised sufi, he wouldnt have had a problem with mysticism as, say, someone raised strictly sunni would have. in fact, because he's from al-andalus in this context, this would be normal to him. i think it would be cool if he was from an interfaith household like me.

he would have been educated along side women, as the prophet advocated for. he would not have felt shame in liking men, and probably would have loved to read homosexual arabic poetry (see also: my doodles :-) ). he would have had open discussions with people of different faiths and probably engaged in discourse himself considering he went on to become a professor (indicated by one of his barks).

however, like all things, nothing is ever perfect.

because i believe al-hazred is fundamentally a good person, he would be critical of hadiths and views regarding difference in faith, apostasy / conversion, slavery, violence and misogyny. though to the last point, it should be noted that both men and women are subjected to modesty customs as well as everything else in the qu'ran.

he would not be the type of person to judge someone for their religion, but i do think he would judge someones religiosity (intensity of belief), because he doesn't believe in blindly following a doctrine. he is one to scrutinize, criticize, and raise questions about things- probably much to the annoyance of his family and teachers. he takes any text he comes across with a grain of salt, but with an open mind as well.

the biggest thing that i can see him struggling with is reconciling the islam that he was raised with to his current spiritual and religious practices- because that's where the mixed feelings likely settle. there is a general consensus among most islamic sects that interacting with djinn is forbidden because they can trick you and pretend to be muslim- but humans are capable of such actions anyway, so i never really understood the logic behind this. regardless, it's still a widely held belief, he was probably shaking in his boots when he first interacted with eldritch entities and he still probably is a little scared- he just handles it very well and he has to otherwise the entity he sealed within him would be unleashed.

this itself would be the biggest point of contention about religion and his current practice, and i believe i made mention of that in the original post above. he's not sure if what he did was the right choice, and he's likely fighting between justifying his actions vs regretting them

i can see alhazred, like myself, having to face microagressions or misconceptions of islam. as ive said in my original post, he's muslim when he has to defend the faith but he may or may not be on any other day. i think he drinks alcohol and does drugs but he draws the line at eating pork. he mightve tried pork once and felt guilty about it then never ate it again. is this very specific event based on my own experience? who's to say.

all this being said, we should be critical of our upbringings regardless of religiosity. i myself believe that our religion should fit the way we want to live our lives, and i recommend looking up the history of the word and concept. religion can be profound and guiding, but it is ultimately a tool that can be used in anyway.

extra notes:

dd al-andalus = a fantasy al-andalus that persisted into the 18th/19th centuries, where i imagine DD takes place. real world al-andalus largely followed sufi islam, and was much closer in history to when prophet mohammed (pbuh) was still alive

my mom is catholic and my dad is muslim. though my dad wasn't in the picture, my mom was raising mixed race children from an interfaith marriage in their father's country, so we got to choose our religion largely. she had a problem when i went atheist for a bit, but she didn't like, force me to believe in God or pray. i came back to God on my own accord, and even then it's not necessarily a concrete belief in such an entity but the faith that one exists despite the uncertainty.

[papirouge]

"which is is worse"

I really wanna ask OP what Christian or Muslim country is currently getting "passes" in bombing and mass deporting hundreds of thousands people in the span of few years🤔Do I need to remind them that a MILLION people killed in Irak based on suspicions of mass destruction weapons that turned out to not even exist? do they call that a "pass" too?

The atrocities committed by Israel have been documented for MONTHS and hardly any country asked them any accountability. And those who did been criminally demonized (South Africa) and called ally of islamists. Still a "pass"?

I also wanna ask OP what Christian or Muslim equivalent there's to a Jewish state that gives prerogatives based on RACE (FYI unlike Judaism, Islam and Christianity are both multi ethnic religion that transcended race)?

I want OP to tell me what they define as a "Christian religious state" because last time I checked, it didn't really exist. Only the Vatican checks out. I think the USA is seen as a country with the strongest Christian influence, but the majority of western countries have a Christian culture - they are not Christian theocracies.

Unlike Israel, most European countries didn't build themselves over a religious book. I'm french, our first Christian king (Clovis) was baptized in the 5th century. But before that, he was already battling with other pagans leaders to build the territory that became France. Even after WWI & WWII countries came & went and frontiers changed regardless of religion. It was only my motivated by politics, money and a lil bit of tribalism (Balkans).

If anything, such messages betray the embarrassment of pro Israel shills to address any criticism without pointing fingers towards other countries or religion. As if Christianism and Islam weren't the ones that already had the bigger share of anti religious sentiment....

Let's get real, it's nearly impossible to criticize Judaism without being accused of antisemitism. Religious Jews would get a nervous breakdown if they had to bear an ounce of the criticism Christians or Muslims get over their religion everyday. If anything, Israel has got MANY passes so far. People like OP are just getting shook bc this special treatment is now getting dimmer by the day and act like victims. They are not - they're just being removed from their intouchable status. And it hurts.

[katerinaaqu]

How do u feel about shipping in Greek mythology or how can one do it right or without disregarding the original sources ?

That is a very good question and thanks for stating it. I am a bit divided on that part. The second part of the question you make is the easiest to answer; if you do not wish to disregard the original sources the safest way is just to adress the couples that appear in the original sources and leave the rest for the realm of imagination hahaha

I mean logically speaking if we look only for source material then we just do source material and we do not "ship" others from other parts that are not mentioned in the sources (and ironically the sources are already wild enough with a variety). So if the objective is "not to derrange from the source" then the short answer is; just follow the source or interpret the source.

Now for the first part of your question (sorry if it is long!);

Like I said I am a bit divided. On one hand it is a great way to express creativity to imagine the protagonists of greek mythos in situations not mentioned in their myths and create scenarios in one's head. On one hand one uses the excuse of "the ancients did it too" kind of thing and up to one point it is a right hypothesis given how many ancient writers, each for their own reasons, created stories that do not necessarily correspond to mythical counterparts (and if they do, we have lost them so we cannot confirm) but on the other hand one must be very much aware that in antiquity they meant something different than what it means today.

Ancient writers created stories based on their personal beliefs and religion or tradition (kinda similar to how many christian traditions have been created by christians or dunno shinto traditions by shinto believers etc.) so to equate someone's pleasure with antiquity and its meaning seems too outstretched. Also it seems like treating the ancient religion like a "fandom" and that is an interestingly complicated matter. On one hand it is a creative way for people to come in contact with the past. On the other hand though it would be equivalent let's say in a post-christian era, people start...shipping biblical people or people mentioned in muslim tradition etc. that do not have fully documented historical credibility and claim it is "shipping". For the ancient greeks their mythical characters were their religion, their ancestry and their legendary past. It was their reasoning of moving around the Mediterannean and their expansion of culture; it was their own reasoning for their very existence up to one point.

Therefore although I do like to see people explore the possibilities (sometimes their ideas are very well based or well-supported with arguments as well almost entering the sphere of interpretation rather than just "fan shipping") but I cannot say I am being ecstatic with this obsession over them. Especially nowadays that for some reason we started shipping literally every character that happens to be in the same frame and narrative as someone else (let's say people involved in the Trojan War or the Odyssey). It is as if two characters are not allowed to exist in the same frame anymore for people unless they are somehow romantically involved

It is as if two characters no longer can have chemistry without someone casually thinking they must be making out in a dark corner. True some scholiasts of ancient times (particularly late roman and early medieval times ones) kinda opened the path for this by speaking on some "pairings" that do not always correspond to ancient sources to our knowledge but I thnk nowadays is being blasted out of proportion and again it feels as if just because these stories are now to the sphere of "fairy tale" for nowadays people with different set of beliefs, that means it is automatically free game to do whatever with them, ignoring or reducing the importance they had to the people in the past

So as far as I am concerned I am happy to explore the pairs of greek mythology (or any mythology in general) even through the lenses of "modern dialog" or funny situations or stuff like that but I usually stick to the pairs of the actual ancient sources or things that scholiasts mention that have some sort of correspondance to ancient sources. Which is why you will see me writing my own fanfictions and retellings even adding random dialogs or stuff like that but by n large I will not "ship" characters that do not exist one way or another in the ancient sources as a couple together.

Sorry for my endless blabbering! I hope this answers your question.

[mitchfynde]

sorry, i follow spot-the-antisemitism and saw your.. thread.. thing

and i just

can you please explain. cuz i'm SO confused. how you ACTUALLY feel about religion. because you've said your beliefs as an atheist are analogous to christians believing other religions are incorrect, it's just that yours extend to *all* religions. but you also say you *hate* religion. that's not the same. do you understand why that's not the same?? you can believe that people who believe in a god are, like, factually incorrect or whatever WITHOUT hating their religion. that's like. the foundation of my philosophy on religion.

like people are not mad that you're an atheist. people would not be mad if u said u think people who believe in god are incorrect. people are mad bc u say u HATE RELIGION.

antisemitism is bias against jews is bias against judaism. judaism is a religion. therefore hating religion = hating judaism = hating jews. it's literally that simple. there is no "separation of religion from culture" that can occur there. hating judaism equals hating jews. it is equivalent. like i don't know what else to say here.

the concept of religion being faith-based is literally an outlier from the norm - christianity and islam are so huge that it SEEMS like the most common experience, whereas when you actually take each individual religion and look at what they view as "being religious" those two (2) are damn near the *only ones* that base it purely on You Believe That Our Holy Texts Are True. like. most religions don't do that. & i'm sorry but that doesn't mean you get to disqualify them from being religions, because they are, literally, religions. they're the ones who decide that. not you.

i'm an atheist ex-christian myself. i KNOW it breaks your brain to learn this. it was inconceivable to me when i first learned about it. but it is the lived experience of nearly every religious person that isn't Christian or Muslim. which means that i just gotta deal with that. And I did. And I'm better for it. Do you know how freeing it is to identify with Christianity, as an atheist steeped in Christian culture and identity, and not feel like i'm betraying my religious belief in... nothing??? like?? it's so nice. it literally has lowered my blood pressure.

I'll admit, I don't have very high hopes of this getting through to you. Reading through your blog, it seems like you've already written off the entire experience as bigotry against yourself and you might honestly just delete this. But it's important to me that I at least try, because you seem like someone who's frustrated that people just aren't getting it, which makes me feel like maybe there's a way to break a communication wall and make everything make sense.

may the dust you are made of live well.

I believe religion itself is a problem. I don't care if the religion in question claims not to require faith or any adherence to a holy book. At that point, you're either an atheist to me or some third thing that I don't understand. If your religion doesn't require anything of you whatsoever, am I part of your religion?

That doesn't make sense to me and I think you guys are downplaying the whole "our religion doesn't require any adherence whatsoever" thing. What the hell is your religion in that case? You don't believe in anything? You're just an atheist with a different culture. And that's fine!

You being part of Christian culture doesn't surprise me at all, because I'm the same. I celebrate every single Christian holiday. I am not betraying my beliefs whatsoever, I'm literally just having fun with my family. If that's what you're saying Judaism is, I'd imagine a great amount of jews will likely disagree, but fine? That's not a religion to me and I don't see why me saying that needs to be offensive. That means I don't hate the religion in question, clearly.

TLDR I probably don't understand your point or maybe you don't have one. Regardless, I'm allowed to hate all religion. I don't at all care if it makes me antisemitic. If your identity is 100% tied to a religion, your group will be bigoted towards me which is happening right fucking now with my damn inbox.

[madamemachikonew]

It's sad that you've chosen to bring politics into your blog. Innocent people in Israel and Palestine are both being affected by the actions of terror groups, so why are saying "Free Palestine" and ignoring the suffering of millions of Israeli Jews, Muslims, Christians, Druze, etc?

I didn't bring it into my blog though. Somebody sent unsolicited fake propaganda to me. I simply responded to that. Your ask once again brings the politics into my space and expressly seeks commentary, under the protective veil of anonymity.

As a half-Palestinian (based overseas) with branches of family on both sides of the border, I don't owe you or anyone else any explanation for not wanting my family to be ethnically cleansed by genocidaires, their culture and history erased, and having what precious little remains of their land stolen from under them to hand over to extremist settlers who literally want them dead (irrespective of whether they are Muslim, Christian or Druze) because of a destructive ideology.

And so you ask me 'why are you saying "Free Palestine" [...]?'

Asking for Palestinian civilians not to be murdered in cold blood or forcibly displaced does not equate advocating violence against other people or ignoring their suffering. Expressing objections to the actions of a government or apartheid ideology does not equate hostility or indifference towards ordinary civilians living under that government or support for terror groups.

So you are extrapolating and drawing a false equivalence because I didn't include an exhaustive list of every group you wanted in a freaking hashtag; classic 'I like pancakes' 'So you hate waffles?' fallacy. Your ask is akin to replying 'All lives matter' to a BLM post.

But it remains an incontrovertible fact that at the present time, Palestinians of all religions are being massacred and having buildings flattened at a wholly disproportionate rate to other civilians in the immediate region, in flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. The military machine is being funded by some of the world's biggest superpowers and civilians have nowhere to flee or access to resources. It's like medieval siege warfare but on a national scale. There is also a massive disparity in the quality of life for civilians in Palestine compared to those in Israel due to long-standing obstructive practices concerning access to basic amenities, border control and import control. For many years it has been for all intents and purposes an open prison. "Free Palestine" encompasses allowing them to have basic living standards and human rights on a par with their neighbours at a very minimum.

I say a very minimum because I am well aware of how many ethnicities and religions are treated as second class citizens in Israel by its apartheid regime, including some of its own Jews (eg. branches of Judaism that don't support or recognise the current State as politically or theologically valid). If you want to see Israel's track record for treating its own Jews of Arab or African ethnicity, look up how naturalised Israeli-Ethiopian Jews regularly suffer racial discrimination and the frankly stomach-churning Yemenite Children Affair.

The apartheid has been going on for generations and needs to stop. And I am so very tired of having to justify asking for my family to be recognised as human beings without having some sort of accusation thrown at me.

This is the last post on this matter.

Anon asks will be closed for the foreseeable.

[judaismandsuch]

On...This Nonsense

So, I saw this graph in a group I am a part of, and it is so increadibly wrong that I need to rant about it:

K, this is dumb for .... a lot of reasons. I am sure Muslims and Christians can see a load of issues that I can't, but that aint my focus.

I'm just going to talk about the Jewish religions, the flow, and use Christian and Muslim religions as comparisons.

First of all, the term of the parent religion: "Judaism". The term comes from "Judean" or basically members of the tribe of Judah.

The first definite use of it as a general term for Hebrews is in the Scroll of Esther where it calls Mordechai "a member of the tribe of Benyamin, a Jew" (paraphrased for clarity). That takes place around 480-350 BCE (scholars argue about which Emperor is the one mentioned).

(the term is used elsewhere/earlier, but usually a refrence to a member of the tribe of Judah, or else in a way that could go either way).

Now the reason I mention that, is because:

"Northern Tribal" would never have used the term, as they are from the ten lost tribes, and had a separate kingdom (Israel) VS Binyamin and Judah who had the southern kingdom (Judea).

Samaritans consider themselves to be descendants of the tribe of Manasheh and Ephraim, so wouldn't use the term either.

So the top religion should really be Bnei Ysrael, or Hebrew, or Isrealite.

Next: what the fuck is "Northern Tribal"? The split b/w the ten tribes and the 2 was political, not religious. They remained the same religion until they stopped existing/were lost/ the Samaritan split happened.

I even googled "Northern Tribal Judaism" (and variations) and couldn't find jack shit. It really shouldn't be on there.

Now, when/how Samaritanism and Judaism split is both a theological and historical debate. (to the point that talmudically there were issues with drawing lines between the 2). Hell, I have hear people use the term "Samaritan Jew" before. But tbh, it is innacurate, and insulting to both religions imo.

But either way the first split should be: Judaism-Samaritanism

On the same level in the chart it has Saducee, Pharisee, Eseen, and Christianity.

Which is bonkers. There were difference between the three groups, but they were not on the level of being schisms or seperate religions like christianity.

If you wanted to argue that they are, then Christianity would be descended from one of them (or all three). Because there wasn't a monolith religion for all 4 of them to come from. The split was there when Jesus was born.

So After Judaism you either have "Christianity" Or you have "Pharisee" "Saducee" "Essene" and then a line below you get christianity.

Next Line: "Karaite" "Orthodox" "Sephardic"

That is the most bat shit thing I have seen in my life.

First of all: "Sephardic" isn't a religious movement or theology. It is a culture and set of traditions. Putting it in a flowchart as its own heading, the same way Christianity and Islam do is insane.

Secondly, even if you do so, the others in the split should be: "Ashkenazi" "Temani" "Mizrachi" and a couple of others. not "Karraite" and "Orthdox" Next, while Karraite does deserve it's own spot (I can do a dive into the theology of it later) It Should be as a descendent of Pharisee with the other branch being Rabbinic.

Next: "Orthodox" with descendents of "reform" "conservative" etc.?

No! The term "Orthodox" exists as a counter to those! And only (until very recently) in Ashkenazi Judaism!

Now maybe the reason that they divided Sphardic it's own heading was to indicate that they don't have sects like the Ashkenazi do, but still, wtf?

And Splitting Hasidic that way? like it is equivalant to any of the splits in Christianity or Islam is batshit.

So really after "Rabbinic Judaism" you should get: "Ashkenazi Sectarianism" and "Not that"

And put all that shit under Ashkenazi Sectarianism.

Anyway, this graph sucks, Maybe I'll improve it later.

[widarswrath]

I follow some blogs that since Oct. 7th have come out in support of the Israeli genocide. However that is always implicit.

Specifically with @frustratedasatruar I have noticed that they regularly reblog posts that take actions from pro palestinian groups, which at times are not strategically well thought out, and instead of ever actually engaging with the political demands, focus on how these actions do not strategically hit the target they want to hit.

I would like to point out, to both parties involved, that a group participating in the protests against the genocide of the palestinian people blocking a performance of Fidler on the Roof is in line with Israeli state propaganda. If Israel represents and speaks for all jews world wide, if Israel is equivalent to the jewish people it makes sense to attack jewish culture and jewish performances. It is not in line with an internationalist analysis but anti-jewish hate.

I will also point out that taking issue with that action, only ever focussing on the problematic parts of a very broad movement and at the same time taking no issue with thousands of dead civilians only because they are not the right race is racism. Deeply rooted in white supremacy. And this is not hyperbolic, the tumblr user in question has literally equated calling for a humanitarian ceacefire with advocacy for killing jews for political purposes. That was ~today~, August 10th 2024.

As a Polytheist I believe that everyone should have the right to worship whatever god(s) and in whatever way they like as long as it does not inhibit the freedom of others. As a society we should encourage and help people to find community in that. I also believe that people have the right to live in peace and dignity. The palestinian christians, muslims, atheists or, yes, polytheists in Gaza are mostly refugees from the rest of palestine. Homes forcefully taken from them, many with dead families. When you are targeted as a group, when your rights are stripped away for who you are you must act as a group and you must do so with all it takes. Be it for example as a queer person, a woman, a religious minority or as a palestinian.

That is why I repost pro palestinian content on this blog.

@frustratedasatruar What do you think the palestinian people deserve? What does your utopia look like? How do you believe we should get there? I genuinely hope I get an answer from you. Because otherwise I really liked your blog. Since october it is almost exclusively pro-Israeli propaganda.

[thatdebaterguy]

Some history

I had a feeling someone would mention this, so I had something prepared.

First off, that's an inflated figure.

Secondly, Canaanite really just means people descendent from the Levant area, and more people from Lebanon have ancestral heritage with Canaanites, who intermixed with various cultures. Back when they were still a civilisation, the Canaanite people were predominantly Jewish, it was the main faith in the area, seconded by Christianity. The wave of Islam started sometime around the 8th century under the first few invasions of the various Muslim nations around, predominantly Egypt. The thing is, the more Jewish Canaanites intermixed more with Europeans, Greeks who had settled Anatolia, generally people across the Northern Mediterranean and had European ancestry, but these people often moved to Europe due to the generally higher acceptance of Jews (for a while in some places) and the higher living standards and opportunities, and they mainly favoured Orthodox countries, with Catholic Poland being a key exception. The Palestinian Canaanites intermixed with the other Levantine based cultures or descendants, like Iranians, Lebanese people, Egyptians and Mesopotamians. Since it was the Egyptians and Arabs who conquered the land and it was ruled under Islam for over a thousand years, it was more favourable for the Palestinians to stay there. They continued to intermix with Egyptians, Syrians, and Bedouin people, who shared even more in common with the Canaanites than the Palestinians. The simple thing is, while many more Jews share heritage with Europe, they can pretty much all be traced back to Canaan, as can the Palestinians. The Muslims invaded, the Jews migrated, people intermixed. However, the culture of modern Palestinians was altered to be much more intertwined with the Muslim faith, which was spread via missionaries, similar to how Christian missionaries operated in European colonies.

In the end it's a whole cultural mess of heritage, but each of them lay claim to the land, since their ancestors on both sides originated from these Levantine lands, but the Jews got more European and the Palestinians got more Muslim, meaning while Palestinians share a lot in common with Canaanites still, the Canaanites who had been living in the regions both sides inhabit now, have practically no modern equivalent, since the Palestinians mixed with other Levantine cultures, Egyptians, Iranians, etc, which makes defining ancestral homeland tricky, since if you say it's all Canaanite descendants, then the Lebanese have a better claim than anyone, but The Canaanites who'd been local to places like Jerusalem have no modern comparison, which leaves you with the two main modern variations of the Canaanites who had lived in these lands; the Palestinians and Israelis. Even though a fair amount of the Jewish population in Israel had emigrated from Europe, it was still Canaanite Jews who'd mixed with those Europeans, and legal immigration to a country offering a home to those of your faith is still a very fair way to enter a country where your people historically have lived and even in modern and recent history have lived. Me as a Brit who's 25% Irish could apply for an Irish passport and live in areas once held by English settlers hundreds of years ago, but are rightfully Irish now, so it's fair if Jewish people legally immigrate to historically Jewish lands where many of the Israeli people have lived their entire lives and who's families have lived there far longer. Tel Aviv was built by Jews, Gaza was built by Palestinians. Barely any Israelis want to own Gaza, a scary amount of Palestine supporters want to either burn down or occupy Tel Aviv for Palestine. Let the two exist, they've both been there, just get Hamas out the picture and they can go about their lives.

[fairuzfan]

i apologize if youve answered this question before, im having trouble finding a definitive answer online. do you know what phrase should be used when honoring a deceased person who was muslim? i know that “rest in peace” is primarily used in christian contexts, and that for judaism the english equivalent is “may their memory be a blessing” but i am curious if there is a similar phrase in islam, or a way to more respectfully honor the deceased and their religion and culture.

you can use any sort of phrase, really. we say "allah yerhamhum" in arabic for anyone who passed, which means "may God grant them Mercy."

[lightdancer1]

In point of fact:

We know that there are plenty of people who are never allowed to be innocent civilians even when their spokespeople are genocidal Fedayeen gangs that bellow for the annihilation of a people and a religion worldwide, or culturally specific equivalent.

Very few of the people doing this performative cosplay nationalism for a culture they do not understand nor desire to understand bother to care a damn about the Muslims of Yemen, Syria, the two Sudans, the Rohingya, or the Uighurs of Turkestan. They do not care about the Christians of Ukraine, Armenia, or Ethiopia.

What, precisely, makes a child slain in Gaza or Jenin worth more than the children of Aleppo or the Sudans? Why are some civilians the ones that get worldwide protests against their murders while others, like Ukrainians in particular, get rallies calling for the people seeking to exterminate every last one of them to be given the chance?

If Gazan children are the only ones you give a fuck about you don't care about Palestinians, nor the children slain by those bombs. You never did, you never will. What does motivate you is something else. And we have seen with the Bosnia and Kosovo Wars that there are people to whom the greatest crime is not to perpetrate butchery like Milosevic's jackals did but to stop the butchers. For these people there is no Hell sufficient to deliver them what they deserve in human imagination.

[beardedmrbean]

Oh sorry didn’t know you have a special tag for me now. Of course ac mirage is glorified and gaming form of Baghdad. But what the gaming does as while we play in a golden age, the character we plays as those we fight for suffering from the corruption and wickedness of the time as no era is perfect.

Well you lived through it, but I think a lot of modern historian have guilt over the reactions towards Arabs after the Iraq invasion and 9/11. So they double down hard on Muslim “achievements” to show they are not savages

But it lead to them infantilizing brown people and demonizing the west.

Which we got women king because black activists hatred towards white people. I wonder how many native Africans are going to treat black Americans like me like a plague after that movie?

But why I pointed out mirage is that, audiences want non white civilizations to be shown as PEOPLE not the equivalent of fictional young adult novels noble savages take on them. Show the good, show the bad, show the humanity

Also I think the main issues with Islam stuff is because the left will call out Christians crimes against people. While forcing a Hindu to be side by side with a Muslim. Obviously varies, but I learn about the Kashmir Hindu genocide that happened on January 19th, 1990

It disturbing that such a religious genocide happened only about 10 years before my birth.

You gave yourself that tag, sort of at least, called yourself that and it made me laugh so I decided to run with it.

Well you lived through it, but I think a lot of modern historian have guilt over the reactions towards Arabs after the Iraq invasion and 9/11. So they double down hard on Muslim “achievements” to show they are not savages

Bush 1's Iraq war didn't really do much in the way with public opinion, up till 9/11 the Muslim community was a pretty solid republican bloc

Then they moved left, political party wise culturally they're still pretty solid red they just know the DNC will bend over and take it from them in the name of diversity points.

Case in point, imagine what would have happened if the city council that banned all but government flags on government buildings had been made up of white Christians.

They're be riots, and you will be hard pressed convince me otherwise.

Which we got women king because black activists hatred towards white people. I wonder how many native Africans are going to treat black Americans like me like a plague after that movie?

Can't find the video but at one point there was a gifset of it on here where the person was asking black Africans, probably in South Africa, if they taught about American slavery in their schools.

Their answer was a good one and the response on here to the gifs was exactly what you would expect from the perpetually offended, self absorbed, and self important people who would comment on this kind of thing.

'The whole world isn't America' they have their own history to teach and SA wasn't involved in the transatlantic slave trade anyhow, not that I'm aware of at least.

The response on here can be summed up in a single reaction image.

I'm seeing stuff with a bunch of African countries acknowledging their role and apologizing including Benin which contains the territory of the former Dahomey empire.

Not shockingly at all they're also still unironically seeking reparations, which I'm sorry no refunds on the merchandise you sold us (to put it crassly)

Depictions we're likely going to have to deal with, which I'm ok with that to a point, it's a romanticized picture of the people, time, and place.

We imagine knights on horseback charging into battle full armor on then going to do battle on foot when their loyal steed is killed.

We don't think about the fact that they couldn't take that stuff off to go to the bathroom so they just shit their armor and did battle with poopy feet, among many other nasty gross things.

So to A point I think fictionalizing things for entertainment isn't so bad, just so long as they don't go too far with it, people have different lines for that kind of thing too.

As for that last bit, posted this a couple days back.

Here's a highlight for you

Some took notice when this centuries-old religious conflict flared in 1989, as Sudan's jihad slaughtered 2.5 million Christians and enslaved perhaps 200,000 more. It ended only in 2005, when the U.S. helped broker a peace deal; in 2011.

I haven't verified those numbers, but it's Newsweek I feel like someone probably did.

Also these guys,

made the mistake of kidnapping a bunch of girls, if they'd just kept kidnapping boys to brainwash into becoming child soldiers nobody would have cared,

example

but wait no they're talking about the boys right there!!!!!!!

Yes well

10+ times as many boys per year and now they're mentioning finally

Sorry this took a while, I had a bunch of other stuff going while I was putting it together.

[paglinawan]

Economic Implications of the Israel and Palestine

Another conflict has broken out between israel and palestine at 6:30 a.m. on the morning of 7th october, while most of the israel is were sleeping soundly in their homes suddenly, the air raid sirens began blaring.Thousands of rockets were fired at israeli cities.The estimate of israel is that 2,200 rockets we're fired at israel. Thousands of people were killed and injured in israel because of these attacks. Hundred died and jose age this surprise attack is the biggest in the last few decades,Exactly 50 years ago and october 1973 egypt and syria had lunched as similar surprise attack on israel.After that a war broke out known as the yom kippur war. From the ground see in their the boundary wall on the israel Gaza order was broken down by a bulldozer. Israel military said at 10:00 am(07:00 GMT) the Palestine fighters penetrated at least three military installations around the frontier. An israeli tank was captured.The israeli soldier were captured and held hostage by the hamas group. Many innocent civilians have been killed here, many are being held as hostages and israel has declared a state of war and response.

•CONFLICT -The only Jewish country in the world is Israel, which only gained official recognition in 1948. However, a lot of individuals link Israel to the current war with Palestine. a bloody conflict over territory, power, and resources. We need to go back a few thousand years to understand why. Strong theological and cultural ties between Jews and Muslims to the area date back nearly 4,000 years to Abraham, who is regarded as the founder of two religions. In accordance with the Old Testament, God instructed Abraham and his people to dwell in a location roughly equivalent to modern-day Israel, known as Canaan.-The Israelite monarchy was created by King Saul in the year 1,000 BCE. It was maintained by King David and his son Solomon, who also built the first Jewish temple in Jerusalem. The Jewish people's claim to the country of Israel included this historical inheritance. Various peoples, including the Persians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Egyptians, and other nations that dubbed the region Palestine, would continue to conquer and dominate the land. It would eventually be the location of numerous places revered by Christians, Muslims, and Jews alike. Jews were compelled to depart the area throughout these transitions, which led to a dispora, or dispersion of people from their homeland.

•WHAT IS GAZA?The Gaza Strip, which some people have referred to as "the world's largest open-air prison," is a small area of land situated between Egypt and Israel. One of the densestly populated areas on earth, the 140 square mile enclave is home to more over 2 million Palestinians.

•WHAT IS HAMAS AND WHO THEY ARE?Hamas, formally known as the Islamic Resistance Movement, is a political and military Sunni Islamist group in charge of the Palestinian territories' Gaza Strip. Its headquarters are in Gaza City, but it also has a presence in the West Bank, which is under the leadership of its secular foe Fatah. Aiming to "free Palestinian prisoners, stop Israeli aggression on al-Aqsa Mosque, and break the siege on Gaza," according to Hamas, a militant organization that has ruled the densely populated Gaza Strip since 2006.

•WHO HAS THE LEADER OF HAMAS?In 1962, Haniyeh was born in the Gaza Strip's Al-Shati refugee camp. In 1987, after completing his undergraduate studies at the Islamic University of Gaza, where he had joined Hamas, he received his degree in Arabic literature. He rose through the ranks of Hamas after being selected to lead an office in 1997.

•PALESTINE It is thought that a large portion of the local Palestinian people in the Nablus region is derived from Samaritans who embraced Islam. It is unclear if Islamization of Palestine occurred before or after the Crusader era.ISRAEL Israel is the first Jewish state to exist in more than 2,000 years. After the long period of exile that followed the fall of the Herodian monarchy in the first century ce, it stands for the Jews' return to their ancestral home. It continues to be the principal destination for significant Jewish immigration.

•WHO ARE THE SUPPORTER OF ISRAEL? American support for Israel is strong and growing as a result of the recent attack on Israel by the Palestinian group Hamas, which has sparked an open conflict in the Middle East.

[a-s-fischer]

isn’t equating Lilith a figure also existing in Islam and Christian mythologies and also culturally-Christian pop culture globally as akin to W**d*g* a specific entity among Algonquin speaking peoples idk exceedingly racist and insensitive? Please don’t make racist false equivalencies.

Lilith is not present in Muslim mythology, and she is not present in Christian mythology except in so far as she has been appropriated into Christianity, through the Christian appropriation of Kabbalah, which is also not fucking theirs. Gentiles need to keep their hands the fuck off Kabbalah.

There is a really nasty habit in Western society that comes from traditional Christian supercessionism, that says that everything that is Jewish also belongs to Christianity, and Christians. This is fucking bullshit and it is both obnoxious and very harmful. And because Christianity is part of the dominant culture, that people assimilate to either by choice or by force, if it's Christian then it's not cultural appropriation to use it. So Lilith gets seen as something that is fucking Christian and fucking open for use, but she's not. She's Jewish. She's part of a small minority religion that Christianity has been shitting on for 2,000 fucking years.

She belongs to a small minority ethno-religious community that people have been murdering over our unwillingness to assimilate, that Christians and Muslims specifically for various historical and religious reasons have been trying to murder, or forcibly assimilate, for millennia. She is a woman and baby murdering demon from a small religious minority that have seen a lot of our women and children murdered, by the very people you claim own her.

Yeah, that's pretty fucking equivalent actually. Hands off and fuck you.