The Instigator
sdavio
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Mingodalia
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The left supports far right extremist Islamic views

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
sdavio
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/19/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,177 times Debate No: 111142
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)

 

Mingodalia

Pro

I accept. Fire away.
Debate Round No. 1
sdavio

Con

My opponent's burden of proof will be to demonstrate that the left supports right wing Islamic extremism.

First, let's define the left. In general, leftist philosophy is seen as supporting equality over hierarchies. Left wing perspectives usually support multiculturalism, egalitarianism, economic support for the underprivileged, and so on. Most generally, leftism denotes concern for the disadvantaged. Also, leftism is generally secular, and supports military non-intervention.

Now, let's define Islamism. One of the main features of Islam is that, unlike other religions which centre around a particular codified text and set of written laws, Islam is known as a broad set of texts, with no single doctrine but, especially under the more fundamentalist interpretations known as Islamism, comprising a complete 'way of life.' Islamism (also known as 'political Islam' or 'radical Islam') is described by Heywood (Political Ideologies, 1992) as a set of ideas revolving around the construction of an 'Islamic state' based on the sharia, the divine Islamic law. The notion of jihad, controversially translated as 'holy war', on extreme interpretations can signify a global violent struggle for Islamic principles. These right wing interpretations stand in contradiction to attempts to make more moderate or progressive interpretations of the meaning of Islam (known as 'progressive Islam' or 'liberal Islam').

On the face of it, where Islamism denotes extremist and right wing interpretations, Islamism and leftism would seem to stand in stark opposition to one another. A leftist goal regarding Islam would be to support the more left wing interpretations of the Quran, and attempting to subdue the more extremist elements. It would also argue that we should refrain from military interventions which would antagonise Muslim-majority countries and further enflame feelings of hostility and conflict. Further, leftism would support multicultural secularism, tolerance, and less rigid interpretations of religious doctrine. These ideas would be completely opposed to the conservative, nationalist religious fundamentalism of the extreme right wing versions of Islamism.
Mingodalia

Pro

--DEFINING CHARACTERISTICS OF THE FAR RIGHT--

"Far-right politics are politics further on the right of the left-right spectrum than the standard political right, particularly in terms of more extreme nationalist, and nativist ideologies, as well as authoritarian tendencies.

The term is often associated with Nazism, neo-Nazism, fascism, neo-fascism and other ideologies or organizations that feature extreme nationalist, chauvinist, xenophobic, or racist views."

--ELEMENTS THAT DEFINE HATE SPEECH--

A)Making a distinction between your own identity group and those outside of its Moral code based on whatever the distinction is.
B)Devaluation or dehumanization of other groups and the personal superiority of one's own group.
C)The advocating of different standards of treatment based on identity group membership
D)A call to violence against members of other groups


--THE QURAN--

You are the best nation produced as an example for mankind. You enjoin what is right and forbid what is wrong and believe in Allah . If only the People of the Scripture had believed, it would have been better for them. Among them are believers, but most of them are defiantly disobedient. (Quran 3:110)


Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah ; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. (Quran 48:29)


Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - fight]until they give the jizyah (penalty tax for being nonMuslim) willingly while they are humbled. (Quran 9:29)


Those who disbelieve from among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein. They are the worst of creatures. (98:6)

Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieve. (8:55)

7:176 compares unbelievers to panting dogs because they are idiots and of no value.

7:179 says unbelievers are like cattle.

23:55 says unbelievers are assistants of Satan.

5:60 claims that Allah transformed Jews of the into apes and swine This is confirmed by verses 7:166 and 2:65 as well.

A hadith (Bukhari 54:524) says that Muhammad believed rats to be "mutated Jews" (also confirmed by Sahih Muslim 7135 and 7136).

Verses 46:29-35 even say that unbelieving men are worse than the demons who believe in Muhammad.

The Quran says that hostility and hate will exist between Muslims and infidels forever until the infidels believe in Allah alone. (Quran 60:4)

--EX MUSLIM QUOTES--

Although the word Jihad standing by itself means “struggle,” what Westerners need to focus on when reading the Hadith regarding Mohammed’s Jihad is similar to the focus needed when reading Mein Kampf (My Struggle) by Adolph Hitler.

-Walid Shoebat, "God's War on Terror"

To this very day, Muslims do not view peace treaties in the same way that most people understand a “peace-treaty.” To the Muslim mind, treaties are not binding agreements, but rather opportunities to grow stronger or buy time or to appear peaceful while preparing for war. But make no mistake, making peace treaties with the infidels simply for the sake of peace is never the ultimate goal. The only goal of Islam is victory over the whole world.

-Walid Shoebat

Many well-meaning Dutch people have told me in all earnestness that nothing in Islamic culture incites abuse of women, that this is just a terrible misunderstanding. Men all over the world beat their women, I am constantly informed. In reality, these Westerners are the ones who misunderstand Islam. The Quaran mandates these punishments. It gives a legitimate basis for abuse, so that the perpetrators feel no shame and are not hounded by their conscience of their community. I wanted my art exhibit to make it difficult for people to look away from this problem. I wanted secular, non-Muslim people to stop kidding themselves that "Islam is peace and tolerance.

-Ayaan Hirsi Ali, "Infidel"

Multiculturalism should not mean that we tolerate another culture’s intolerance. If we do in fact support diversity, women’s rights, and gay rights, then we cannot in good conscience give Islam a free pass on the grounds of multicultural sensitivity.

-Ayaan Hirsi Ali, "Heretic"

The veil deliberately marks women as private and restricted property, nonpersons. The veil sets women apart from men and apart from the world; it restrains them, confines them, grooms them for docility. A mind can be cramped just as a body may be, and a Muslim veil blinkers both your vision and your destiny. It is the mark of a kind of apartheid, not the domination of a race but of a sex.

-Ayaan Hirsi Ali, "Nomad"

--NAZISM--

A)Ruled by totalitarian means
Islam? Sharia Law. Check

B)Anti-semitism
Islam? Quran. Check.

C)Supremacist eschatology
Quran. Check.

D)Anti-feminism
Quran and visible culture. Check.

E)Anti-gay
Quran and the Sharia. Check.

--LOUIS FARRAKHAN--

The Jews don't like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that's a good name. Hitler was a very good man.
-Louis Farrakhan

White people are potential humans - they haven't evolved yet.
-Louis Farrakhan

They call them terrorists, I call them freedom fighters.
-Louis Farrakhan

-

And interestingly enough, many prominent Democrats have not condemned him. But...they have been spotted with him.

Maxine Waters & Farrakhan pics-




Obama & Farrakhan pic-



Keith Ellison has ties to Farrakhan-


The Obama picture of his meeting with Farrakhan in 2005 was kept buried until 2018.


Juan Williams refused to condemn Farrakhan, and then stated he could excuse him because of Trump. Of course he didn't denounce Farrakhan pre-Trump, & Farrakhan has made anti-semitic remarks since before I was born.


The Liberal media refuses to denounce Farrakhan. Why? If "Hitler is a good man" is okay, what isn't?


--LINDA SARSOUR--

The left has also endorsed, backed and supported Linda Sarsour. Linda Sarsour is a Muslim and the leader of the "Women's March". Ironically, Sarsour wants Sharia Law in America.




-----

--REFERENCES--

Quran and Hadith






"Why the Left won't condemn Farrakhan"

Debate Round No. 2
sdavio

Con

Much of my opponent's response consists of unflattering depictions of Islam. However, for this to satisfy the burden of proof, it must also be shown that the left supports this version of Islam.

Pro cites Louis Farrakhan, stating that he is condemned by many Democrats, but that "they have been spotted with him." To prove that Farrakhan represents extreme right wing Islamism, Pro provides a variety of surprising and perhaps inflammatory quotes. The first is that "Hitler was a very good man." This is perhaps evidence that Farrakhan is crazy, but it also introduces doubt that he represents any form of coherent Islamist ideology. The next quote says, "White people are potential humans - they haven't evolved yet." This quote directly contradicts the implication of the previous quote. If Farrakhan was sympathetic to the white supremacist views of Hitler, why would he say that whites are less developed than other races? Then, he says, "They call them terrorists, I call them freedom fighters." This quote means nothing other than that Farrakhan disagrees with the claim that someone is a terrorist. From what is provided here, I must conclude that either the quotes have been taken out of context, or Farrakhan is a crazy person that various Democrats have been spotted with. At most, this would seem to indicate corruption in the Democratic Party, but it doesn't tell us anything about left wing ideology at the broader level.

Next is Linda Sarsour, who Pro claims is a Women's March leader who "wants Sharia Law in America." As I stated in my first argument, Islam is a broad set of ideas with no single doctrine, and as such there is no single definition of terms like Sharia Law. I mentioned the existence of 'progressive Islam,' which proposes more progressive or liberal interpretations of Islam's ideas. This would seem to be what Sarsour is doing with the term 'Sharia Law,' since if she is supporting the Women's March she must not support the more fundamentalist, conservative interpretations of Islamism.

These examples indicate the complexity of the problems of interpreting Islam, but Pro has not yet indicated how these relate to the broader ideas of the left.
Mingodalia

Pro


(Con:)
"However, for this to satisfy the burden of proof, it must also be shown that the left supports this version of Islam."

If there were picks of Trump hugging David Duke (head of Kkk), the left would call it support and be outraged.

-----

(Con:)
"This is perhaps evidence that Farrakhan is crazy, but it also introduces doubt that he represents any form of coherent Islamist ideology."

Actually, much of what Farrakhan says comes directly from the Quran. Calling Jews apes and pigs is actually quoting the Quran verbatem.

And the fact that ISIS alone has had over 250,000 Muslims fight for them proves that it isn't just some fringe theology or fringe group.

Quran 5:60 claims that Allah made Jews into apes and swine This is confirmed by verses 7:166 and 2:65 as well.

https://quran.com...

-----

(Con:)
"If Farrakhan was sympathetic to the white supremacist views of Hitler"

He supports his anti-semitic nationalist views. Adolf Hitler was also known for praising Islam and allying with the Islamic Grand Mufti during WW2.

HITLER QUOTE 1-

"You see, it's been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn't we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion [Islam] too would have been more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"

HITLER QUOTE 2-

"I can imagine people being enthusiastic about the paradise of Mohammed, but as for the insipid paradise of the Christians! In your lifetime, you used to hear the music of Richard Wagner. After your death, it will be nothing but hallelujahs, the waving of palms, children of an age for the feeding bottle, and hoary old men. The man of the isles pays homage to the forces of nature. But Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery. A n***** with his taboos is crushingly superior to the human being who seriously believes in transubstantiation."

HITLER QUOTE 2-

"Had Charles Martel not been victorious at Poitiers -already, you see, the world had already fallen into the hands of the Jews, so gutless a thing Christianity! -then we should in all probability have been converted to Mohammedanism [Islam], that cult which glorifies the heroism and which opens up the seventh Heaven to the bold warrior alone. Then the Germanic races would have conquered the world. Christianity alone prevented them from doing so."
-Adolf Hitler

https://wikiislam.net...

https://www.wsj.com...

-----

(Con:)
"This would seem to be what Sarsour is doing with the term 'Sharia Law,' since if she is supporting the Women's March she must not support the more fundamentalist, conservative interpretations of Islamism."

Damning pictures of Sarsour and/or the Women's March-

Pic 1-

http://truthfeed.com...

Pic 2-

https://prod.wp.cdn.aws.wfu.edu...

Pic 3-

https://pbs.twimg.com...

-----

(Con:)
"but Pro has not yet indicated how these relate to the broader ideas of the left."

It relates because the left is highly supportive of minorities and multiculturism, both traits that Islam posesses.

This can be demonstrated in that Barack Obama(one of the most popular liberal Presidents in history, even called the 2nd Coming in leftist articles) was very pro Islam. He also attended an anti-American church pre-Presidency, which he late denounced. He had meetings with many Muslim institutions as well like CAIR and The Muslim Brotherhood.

-----

(Con:)
"Much of my opponent's response consists of unflattering depictions of Islam."

Much of my response is me quoting and referencing the Quran.

-----

(Con:)
"Islam is a broad set of ideas with no single doctrine."

Rebuttal-
"A Muslim is someone who follows or practices Islam, a monotheisticAbrahamic religion. Muslims consider theQuran, their holy book, to be the verbatim word of God as revealed to the Islamic prophet and messenger Muhammad."

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

-----

(Con:)

"Pro has not yet indicated how these relate to the broader ideas of the left."

HEADLINES

"Democrats launch a full-scale opposition push against Trump’s executive order" (Speaking of travel ban from Muslim countries)

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

"Muslims in Congress, Democrats blast new Trump travel ban: 'Muslim Ban 2.0'"

https://www.cnn.com...

QUOTES-

"They have been reminded that the history of immigration in this country has a dark underbelly; they need specific assurances that their citizenship really means something, that America has learned the right lessons from the Japanese internments during World War II, and that I will stand with them (Muslims) should the political winds shift in an ugly direction."
-Barack Obama

65,915,795 people voted for Obama in 2012.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

69,498,516 people voted for Obama in 2008.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 3
sdavio

Con

There seem to be a lot of things being run together here; Islam with the Quran, Islam in general with its most fundamentalist interpretations, and the left's general support for minorities and the needy with support for all the beliefs and actions of people associated with those groups. As Pro points out, this is a similar tactic that the Right often complains about when the Left does it, when specific extreme or crazy examples are used to discredit anyone within a broad range of thought.

Even granting, for the sake of argument, that Linda Sarsour and Farrakhan were total left-wing supporters who also supported nationalist Islamist views, this would not discredit the left as a broader system of thought. Specific nationalist views can often be allied with broader philosophical ideas for political purposes. For example during the Vietnam War, Ho Chi Minh combined Marxism with Vietnamese nationalism while attempting to fight against imperialist attempts from the French and the US. This doesn't mean that Leftist philosophy more broadly is particularly sympathetic with or even wholly compatible with Vietnamese philosophy or nationalism. To point to Ho Chi Minh and say that Left wing thought is particularly Vietnamese, or coincides with a support for Vietnam in every case, would be misleading since it doesn't indicate the broader views of Leftists. Another example would be Jews. Of course Leftists would oppose Hitler and sympathise with Jews as a persecuted minority; however, many Leftists (such as Noam Chomsky) would also criticise Israel as an extremely nationalist State in its actions against Palestine. In the same way, Right wing politicians might use the philosophy of Nietzsche and broader right wing ideas to support their particular nationalism, of Germany or whatever.

Pro also seems to use any association with Islam as damning evidence, e.g. with Obama and the other examples, which ignores the distinction I pointed out between the various interpretations of Islam, ranging from highly right wing, fundamentalist versions, to progressive and spiritual interpretations. The mere fact that someone associated with Islam, and even at some point in their life sympathised with intolerant or fundamentalist ideas within it, does not mean they are all bad; the most inspiring example of this possibility of transformation is Malcolm X, who started out as a pretty radical Islamist but changed his views over the course of his life.

"If there were picks of Trump hugging David Duke (head of Kkk), the left would call it support and be outraged."

If there were genuine reason to think that Trump was sympathetic to the philosophy of David Duke, yes I don't think he should or would be accepted as president of the US. But nothing presented his has been even close to analogous to that. For one thing, Islam is a broad religion and not a specific hateful philosophy like the KKK.

"Actually, much of what Farrakhan says comes directly from the Quran. Calling Jews apes and pigs is actually quoting the Quran verbatem."

"He supports his anti-semitic nationalist views. Adolf Hitler was also known for praising Islam and allying with the Islamic Grand Mufti during WW2."

This shows if anything, that a certain kind of intolerant radicalism and nationalism transcends the point where applying the labels Left or Right really means anything. If we are reduced to blaming the Left even for the evils of the Right then the terms have been spread too thin.

"Damning pictures of Sarsour and/or the Women's March-"

I would admit that Sarsour comes off as deaf to the possible violent connotations these symbols can hold. But to take everything associated with Islam in its most negative connotation, and to project terroristic intentions only the entire Left, is not justified by what is shown in these pictures.

"It relates because the left is highly supportive of minorities and multiculturism, both traits that Islam posesses."

Of course, since Islam is a less powerful religion in the world than Christianity, empathy toward peaceful believers of Islam would come under the general support of multiculturalism and minorities.

""Democrats launch a full-scale opposition push against Trump"s executive order" (Speaking of travel ban from Muslim countries)"

Criticising the muslim ban doesn't equate to supporting terrorism.
Mingodalia

Pro


(Con:)

"Of course, since Islam is a less powerful religion in the world than Christianity, empathy toward peaceful believers of Islam would come under the general support of multiculturalism and minorities."

There were 1.8 billion Muslims in the world as of 2015, roughly 24% of the global population


World Map of Islam-


(Con:)

"Even granting, for the sake of argument, that Linda Sarsour and Farrakhan were total left-wing supporters who also supported nationalist Islamist views, this would not discredit the left as a broader system of thought."

1)They are left wing supporters. Farrakhan endorsed Obama for President, and Sarsour literally was the Chairman of the Women's March.

Sarsour has stated that members of her family have been arrested for supporting Hamas. Sarsour has even met with operatives of Hamas.

The Obama whitehouse called Sarsour "A champion for change".




Obama with Farrakhan picture-


When Farrakhan supported Obama and called him "The Messiah"-



2)I have no burden of proof in this debate to "discredit the left as a broader system of thought". This same claim could be semantically made about Nazism, like "There are moderate or Liberal forms of Nazism", but common sense tells us what Nazism was about.

(Con:)

"Specific nationalist views can often be allied with broader philosophical ideas for political purposes."

And is what the left is doing with Islam, which is my burden of proof.

(Con:)

"which ignores the distinction I pointed out between the various interpretations of Islam."

Con is not an expert on Islam, nor a Muslim, so let's find people who are.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan

12th President of Turkey from 2014

-"These descriptions are very ugly, it is offensive and an insult to our religion. There is no moderate or immoderate Islam. Islam is Islam and that’s it."


-"Everyone should unconditionally accept that Israel is an indispensable element of the Middle Eastern mosaic."

As quoted in Erdogan: "Democracy in the Middle East, PluralIism in Europe: Turkish View", The Turkish Weekly(October 12, 2004)

*

Muammar al-Gaddafi

Former leader of Libya-

-"Nations whose nationalism is destroyed are subject to ruin."

-"There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe - without swords, without guns, without conquests. The 50 million Muslims of Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades."


*

Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Former Muslim Author-

-"Wishful thinking about the peaceful tolerance of Islam cannot interpret away this reality: hands are still cut off, women still stoned and enslaved, just as the Prophet Muhammad decided centuries ago."

-"The veil deliberately marks women as private and restricted property, nonpersons. The veil sets women apart from men and apart from the world; it restrains them, confines them, grooms them for docility. A mind can be cramped just as a body may be, and a Muslim veil blinkers both your vision and your destiny. It is the mark of a kind of apartheid, not the domination of a race but of a sex."

-"...Bin Laden's quotes from the Quaran resonated in my brain: "When you meet the unbelievers, strike them in the neck." "If you do not go out and fight, God will punish you severely and put others in your place." "Wherever you find the polytheists, kill them, seize them, besiege them, ambush them." "You who believe, do not take the Jews and Christians as friends; they are allies only to each other. Anyone who takes them as an ally becomes one of them."

-"Islam is built on sexual inequality and on the surrender of individual responsibility and choice. This is not just ugly; it is monstrous."


Walid Shoebat, Former Muslim Author-

-"What the West does not understand about Islamism is that Jihad is very systematic. It has stages. If Muslims have the upper hand, then Jihad is waged by force. If Muslims do not have the upper hand, then Jihad is waged through financial and political means. Since Muslims do not have the upper hand in America or Europe, they talk about peace in front of you while supporting Hamas and Hezbollah in the back room. The whole idea of Islam being a peaceful religion emanates from that silent stage of Jihad."

-"To this very day, Muslims do not view peace treaties in the same way that most people understand a “peace-treaty.” To the Muslim mind, treaties are not binding agreements, but rather opportunities to grow stronger or buy time or to appear peaceful while preparing for war. But make no mistake, making peace treaties with the infidels simply for the sake of peace is never the ultimate goal. The only goal of Islam is victory over the whole world."

-"Although the word Jihad standing by itself means “struggle,” what Westerners need to focus on when reading the Hadith regarding Mohammed’s Jihad is similar to the focus needed when reading Mein Kampf, by Adolph Hitler."


-----

-HEADLINE-

"January’s Women’s March brought out more than a million people — and many more also protested during the month"


-DOES THE LEFT SUPPORT ISLAM? THE PICTURES SAY IT ALL-

1)


2)


3)


4)


5)


6)


7)


8)


9)


10)


11)


12)


Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Wizofoz// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: As pointed out by pro, cons argument consisted of picking various traits of liberal thinking and labelling them " the left" , various quotes and passages and labelling them "islam" and tried to make the association that these were "Right wing: Con effectively showed these were all very broad and general terms. Pro then used tenuous logic to try and link the left with this right eimg islam. One argument noted was that " the left support minorities and multiculturalism which are both features of islam: This is on loudly illogical- just because a group supports another group with a particular characteristic doesn't mean it supports all groups with this characteristic. Con showed the disconnect between pros various evidences, for instance showing that someone being pictured in the vicinity of someone else does not mean they support their ideology. Pro did not make her case, con refuted effectivlry

[*Reason non-removal*] The voter effectively explains his decision with specifics from each side in the debate.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Wizofoz// Mod action: Removed<

6 points to Con (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Far to broad and imprecise a topic to be shown true without extraordinary evidence. To prevail, Pro would have had to show WHAT the left is, that Islamic views are far right, and that whatever the "left" is, they generally support it. None of this was ahieved. Con wins.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) The voter does not explain conduct or sources. (2) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter places the burden of proof on Pro, and while he explains why that burden consists of, he does not explain why Pro carries that burden or how Pro"s arguments fell short. The voter still has to specifically assess Pro"s arguments.
************************************************************************
Posted by Mingodalia 3 years ago
Mingodalia
Good match!
Posted by sdavio 3 years ago
sdavio
Thanks for the debate Mingo! Well done
Posted by Wizofoz 3 years ago
Wizofoz
Ming, could you PLEASE use a larger font.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Wizofoz 3 years ago
Wizofoz
sdavioMingodaliaTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: As pointed out by pro, cons argument consisted of picking various traits of liberal thinking and labelling them " the left" , various quotes and passages and labelling them "islam" and tried to make the association that these were "Right wing: Con effectively showed these were all very broad and general terms. Pro then used tenuous logic to try and link the left with this right eimg islam. One argument noted was that " the left support minorities and multiculturalism which are both features of islam: This is on loudly illogical- just because a group supports another group with a particular characteristic doesn't mean it supports all groups with this characteristic. Con showed the disconnect between pros various evidences, for instance showing that someone being pictured in the vicinity of someone else does not mean they support their ideology. Pro did not make her case, con refuted effectivlry

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.