The Instigator
Ennui2778
Pro (for)
Losing
41 Points
The Contender
Mangani
Con (against)
Winning
47 Points

Radical Islam and the Middle East is the Paragon of Hypocrisy

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/27/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,576 times Debate No: 2233
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (20)

 

Ennui2778

Pro

It seems that there is little that the West can do that does not draw the ire of loud-mouthed pious critics half a world away in the Middle East. These radicals never fail to find something wrong with everything in our culture, whether it's our plays, our comics or even the movie 300. The truly sad part of this is that this is not limited to Al-Jazeera and other such harbingers of hate within their region. The liberal media has jumped onto the apologist's bandwagon, claiming that its our fault that a whole peninsula hasn't progressed beyond the 8th century.

As part of their constant bombardment, (figurative and literal) of our way of life, fundamentalist Muslims say they put a higher value on family values and reverence for the past than crass modern Americans and Europeans do. But that is hardly true. For example, if a woman in my hometown, Buffalo called the police to complain that her husband was hitting her, they'd be at her house faster than the SPCA dropped Michael Vick from the pet adoption program. Now if a woman in Iran claimed that her husband were hitting her, chances are the answer would be "and...?"

Even some radical Muslims here in America preach for the literal interpretation the Koran as law. However, if they get caught trying to "spread their word" in a manner outside the law, such as with those implicated in the London airplane scare a few summers ago, they hire sophisticated, expensive, secular Western attorneys to sue over conditions in Guantanamo. In a real case, a lawyer filed suit on the behalf of an inmate at Gitmo on an eighth amendment violation. The suit complained that, and I quote "Inmate was provided with deflated balls for use in recreational activities." Somehow I'm able to sleep at night. This is a real case, trust me, I couldn't make this stuff up if I tried. (1)

Of course, its not just these supposedly devout oil lords who embezzle on a deific scale and seem to be able to treat their beefs with us like a salad bar (pick and choose the infidel you persecute, at your convenience of course.) who are lambasting our "crassness." We also have the mujahideen or "holy warriors" taking potshots at us. Once more, literal and figurative.

Call me impatient, but I'm getting pretty sick of listening to Osama bin Laden, in tape after tape, after tape, condemn the "disruptive" (I'm running out of synonyms for immoral) culture of the West? Well, something tells me that its not the divine will of Allah making all these tapes and then putting the videos on the YouTube. I'll let al-Zawahiri tell me how he expects to get his videos out into the world without our secular, Western technology.

Most people know that Islam as a religion that forbids mind-altering substances. In fact one of Ayman al-Zawahiri's beefs with us is our use of alcohol and drugs. Sure, and I know al-Qaeda didn't get any money selling heroin in Southeast Asia...

In July, certain individuals within the Qatar royal family "outraged. " that its princesses had been seated (In first class, with the "unlimited drinks" option) next to male passengers who weren't related to them. A gross assault on the Qatari sense of decency?? Not quite. The whole entourage had just spent the whole day, and countless (American) dollars at an all day shopping spree in Milan, Italy. The angry members of Qatar's royal house may claim outrage at something as simple as gender equality, but they seem to have no problem with the "immoral" West when it comes to splurging money taken from their own country's treasuries on the trip. And something tells me these "delicate, religious" Muslim women weren't shopping for ten-thousand dollar burkas! (1)

Believe it or not, the United States is not hated in numerous other places, such as sub-Saharan Africa or even Eastern Europe, where it has had a military presence or adopted controversial foreign policies. The reception President Bush got in Albania is complete proof of this, even if someone did steal his watch. They put him on postage stamps and named three streets after him.

The Persian Gulf stands as an antithesis to us, their peculiar, misplaced furor at the U.S. culture in the radical Islamic world arises because our culture, when viewed on DVD, satellite television and the internet, is judged to be incorrect in the ideal world of 7th-century Islam — and impossible for conflicted Muslims to enjoy fully, or at all in the 21st. If they are angry with us with our politics in the region, that's a completely different argument, but radical Muslims make the mistake of putting them in the same category.

So what are we to do? For starters, we can quit the politically correct "Oprah talk" in the West about "reformation" needed in the Middle East, and the endless habit in the Middle East of blaming others for wounds that radical Islam inflicted on itself. And you know what? It's not our fault either, yes, some of us may disagree with the war in the Middle East, but we are not responsible for a whole region spending centuries in the Stone Age.

Instead, right now we should hold the Muslim world to the same standards of tolerance that we demand of ourselves — we need to stop apologizing for an insensitive, and extremely funny, South Park episode, and there was ABSOLUTELY no justification for the fatwa on Salman Rushdie for The Satanic Verses. There is a quid pro quo at work here. The Middle East will eventually grow up and accept, like the rest of the world, that there are social and cultural costs and consequences for any who wish to embrace the benefits of modern living and prosperity. Once they realize this, they will no longer be shunted as an oil-rich backwater, but welcomed back into the community of nations.

(1)US Detainee "Mentally Tortured"." BBC News. 15 May 2005. 14 Sep 2007 <http://news.bbc.co.uk...;.
(2)http://socrates.berkeley.edu...
(3)Hanson, Victor Davis. "Flying Imams." Tribune 07/06/2007
Mangani

Con

Mangani forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 1
Ennui2778

Pro

Ennui2778 forfeited this round.
Mangani

Con

I don't know what the comments are about, but I didn't post my portion of the debate because I had second thoughts about indulging a bigotted nature with contrary comments just to have the result be votes by bigots in your favor, and votes by people who agree with me in my favor. There is a deep seeded problem with bigotry in this country, and your premise is more a result of that than fact. I will post what I had so far, but I will not continue unless you rebutt. Thank you.

"To begin I will dispell any rumors, misinformation, propaganda, and otherwise biased and opinionated assertions you have made. I am making these arguments not from the point of view of a Muslim, but from that of an interested party in this discussion as I have observed in your statements obvious fallacies, and that is why I accepted this challenge.

Your opening statement asserts "radical Islam and the Middle East is THE paragon of hypocrisy". To make my arguments clear I want to establish my understanding of this statement.

"The paragon" is not just a perfect example, rather in this statement you are asserting it is THE perfect example. I intend to argue that neither radical Islam nor the Middle East are THE perfect example of hypocrisy even if it can be considered A perfect example.

"Radical Islam and the Middle East" are not one and the same, though your opening statements and other statements throughout your argument attempt to assert that they in fact are. My arguments will also serve to dispell this myth.

I will argue that many of your points are rooted in myth and bigotry, rather than reality. You cannot bundle "radical Islam" with an entire region, nor can you attribute all of your examples and assertions to the sources you claim they originate or were perpetrated by. For example...

"Even some radical Muslims here in America preach for the literal interpretation the Koran as law."

-Which "radical Muslims here in America"? What literal interpretation of the Qur'an as law? Islamotheocratic nations like Iran follow Sharia as law, not the "literal interpretation" of the Qur'an. Sharia is not universally codified and is based on the Qur'an, hadith, ijma, qiyas and centuries of debate, interpretion and precedent. As a counterargument to yours, I would point out that radical Christians in American are in effect imposing their beliefs on Americans as a whole on a daily basis. Radical Christians, or "the religious right" as we like to call them here, are the most powerful political bloc in recent political history, and if it was up to them the US would be a Christotheocracy. Here we call it "Dominionism", and they even base it on the bible- Gen. 1:26. To some people, the "Moral Majority" of Jerry Falwell was considered a "passive" form of terrorism or Al-Qaeda without suicide bombers, and Pat Robertson's bid for President the equivalent of Abdullah Azzam (hypothetically speaking) running for President of Afghanistan.

Some Christians are moving to South Carolina in an attempt to raise their numbers to a majority and secede from the US. http://worldnetdaily.com...

www.christianexodus.org

An article in Rolling Stone magazine reported this about Sam Brownback, R-Kansas:

Sam Brownback tells a story about a chaplain who challenged a group of senators to reconsider their conception of democracy. "How many constituents do you have?" the chaplain asked. The senators answered: 4 million, 9 million, 12 million. "May I suggest," the chaplain replied, "that you have only one constituent?"

Brownback pauses. That moment, he declares, changed his life. "This" -- being senator, running for president, waving the flag of a Christian nation -- "is about serving one constituent." He raises a hand and points above him.

That, my friend, is all American hypocrisy at it's finest.

"Of course, its not just these supposedly devout oil lords who embezzle on a deific scale and seem to be able to treat their beefs with us like a salad bar (pick and choose the infidel you persecute, at your convenience of course.) who are lambasting our "crassness."

-What oil lords? The "radical muslims" you speak of and the oil barons are not one and the same. As a matter of fact the US claims animosity with the "radical muslims", and is allies with the "oil lords". If they are one and the same, then you have only proven hypocrisy on the part of the Americans.

"We also have the mujahideen or "holy warriors" taking potshots at us."

-The actual transliteration of mujahideen is "someone who struggles", not "holy warriors".

"Sure, and I know al-Qaeda didn't get any money selling heroin in Southeast Asia..."

-As a matter of fact the Taliban had outlawed the growth, sale, posession, and distribution of opium poppies in mid 2001 (some conspiracy theorists even point to this as the real reason why the US invaded Afghanistan and didn't make an effort to catch Osama bin Laden, though this is not the premise of my argument). http://opioids.com... , http://query.nytimes.com..., http://www.poppies.org...

Al Qaeda didn't need nor benefit from the presence of opium poppies in Afghanistan until AFTER the US invasion. http://www.zeenews.com... , http://abcnews.go.com...

I'm not saying the US shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan, but their efforts have had a couterproductive effect on the original mission, and to the people of Afghanistan.

"In July, certain individuals within the Qatar royal family..."

-First of all Qatar is a US ally. The standard of living of Qataris is very comparable with that of citizens of any western state, and the country is very wealthy."

That is all I had so far, but I think I made some good points. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by SexyLatina 8 years ago
SexyLatina
I'm getting all KINDS of cool points for making fun of you, racist.

Now Mangani, do I sound like a bigotted, grudgin', mean old curmudgeon? Nah, I'm not mad at you for commenting on my debate and getting it deleted, I'm mad at you for the same thing I'm mad at everyone else for: Being stupid!

Fine! We shall have a martial challenge...TO THE DEATH!
Posted by Kierkegaard 8 years ago
Kierkegaard
Yeah, uh...sexylatina kinda has a point, here.

You're a total jerkface for putting all of your points in your last speech, when your opponent couldn't respond. There's technically no debating that actually went on, here, because of you.

If anything, YOU should be the one to re-challenge him because of what you did.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
SexyLatina (or perverted little boy who persues them),

Unfortunately it doesn't matter how you feel about the methodology of what happend here. If he has a problem with the outcome of the debate, he can rechallenge me on the same topic. Noone is getting any "cool points" for "winning" a debate on debate.org, and you definitely are not getting any by following me with your bigotted ignorance from debate to debate. You are crying about the outcome of this debate because of my comments to you in another. Release your frustrations by either challenging me to a debate of our own, responding to my comments in the other debate, or by doing something to yourself at home... not by nitpicking at my debates.
Posted by SexyLatina 9 years ago
SexyLatina
No-one should vote for mangani in this debate. Regardless of his reasoning, he brought up all his arguments in the LAST SPEECH. This means that the Instigator had no chance at all to respond to them, and it was abusive of mangani to expect votes because of this. He, without a doubt, LOSES this debate because he posted no arguments during the time when he should have. I don't care if Ennui conceded in the comments section, he needn't have, he won.
Posted by thinkingduck 9 years ago
thinkingduck
Hmm this talk about radical Christians imposing beliefs would make a good debate premise; it is all too often a useless tangent from of the real dangers at hand.

Also, too bad this wasn't a full debate. I wish people could make better commitments and also, not talk about how the votes will be skewed by bias.
Posted by Mangani 9 years ago
Mangani
By the way, I understand Persian's problem with the movie 300. I expressed a similar complain after watching what I thought was a GREAT movie, but the mistakes they made were pretty offensive.

A great king- Xerxes- was portraid as some kind of gay monster. His army was portraid as having demonic soldiers, etc. Xerxes was in fact a great Persian king, and one who Alexander the Great tried to emulate. If you don't understand how this could offend Persians than that is because of your own bigotry as I have already pointed out.
Posted by Ennui2778 9 years ago
Ennui2778
Regrettably, circumstances unforseen will prevent me from continuing into future rounds. I concede this debate and will be absent from the site for an extended period of time, I thank you for your consideration and ardently apologize for this absence. I do hope that we will be able to debate some time in the future when I am not thus occupied.

Once more, I apologize, and great job with your debate
Posted by Ennui2778 9 years ago
Ennui2778
I don't see an argument, but the machine is telling me that the debate is always being updated. As of now (3:35 PM 1/27) am I missing something, is there a problem with browser?
Posted by Ennui2778 9 years ago
Ennui2778
Note: The full title of this debate is "The Claims of Radical Islam in the Middle East Are the Paragon of Hypocrisy."
20 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by BellumQuodPacis 7 years ago
BellumQuodPacis
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by EinShtoin 7 years ago
EinShtoin
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by NYCDiesel 7 years ago
NYCDiesel
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Xer 7 years ago
Xer
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by TxsRngr 7 years ago
TxsRngr
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Mangani 8 years ago
Mangani
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by debatist 8 years ago
debatist
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by scorpionclone 8 years ago
scorpionclone
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
Ennui2778ManganiTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30