Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums
jacee

Far-right tricked into wearing t-shirts that say 'St George was Syrian'

Recommended Posts

An anti-hate group said it wanted to educate nationalists about the heritage of England's patron saint

Far-right protesters were tricked into wearing t-shirts reading "St George was Syrian #DefendDiversity" this weekend.

https://www.joe.co.uk/politics/far-right-prank-st-george-228846

:o Well that'll give 'em pause for thought. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, except St George was a Roman born in Greek Cappadocia...not Syria.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

Well, except St George was a Roman born in Greek Cappadocia...not Syria.

St George had Syrian, Greek, Turkish and Israeli heritage

https://www.indy100.com/article/st-georges-day-syrian-video-t-shirt-far-right-tell-mama-stunt-video-8883816?amp

Apparently his mother was Syrian (Christian), and His birthplace was then in Syria (??). His claim to fame was refusing to denounce his Christianity, so he was beheaded. 

I think it just shows that today's far right are naive about how multicultural history really is. Lol 

 

Edited by jacee
Add link

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, jacee said:

St George had Syrian, Greek, Turkish and Israeli heritage

Apparently his mother was Syrian (Christian), and His birthplace was then in Syria. His claim to fame was refusing to denounce his Christianity, so he was beheaded. 

I think it just shows that today's far right are naive about how multicultural history really is. Lol 

 

 

Saint George (Greek: Γεώργιος, Geṓrgios; Latin: Georgius; d. 23 April 303[4]) was a soldier of Cappadocian Greek origins, member of the Praetorian Guard for Roman emperor Diocletian who was sentenced to death for refusing to recant his Christian faith. He became one of the most veneratedsaints and megalo-martyrs in Christianity, and he was especially venerated as a military saint since the Crusades.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

Saint George (Greek: Γεώργιος, Geṓrgios; Latin: Georgius; d. 23 April 303[4]) was a soldier of Cappadocian Greek origins, member of the Praetorian Guard for Roman emperor Diocletian who was sentenced to death for refusing to recant his Christian faith. He became one of the most veneratedsaints and megalo-martyrs in Christianity, and he was especially venerated as a military saint since the Crusades.

when his father died, George's mother returned to her native Palestine, taking George with her.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/saints/george_1.shtml

I saw another reference to his mother returning to "Syria Palestine", but I can't find it again. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OftenWrong said:

I see Mohammed was born C. 570. So Islam, Muslims did not even exist yet.

 

Yes...Islamic appropriation of St George like everything else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jacee said:

when his father died, George's mother returned to her native Palestine, taking George with her.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/christianity/saints/george_1.shtml

I saw another reference to his mother returning to "Syria Palestine", but I can't find it again. 

 

 

My point stands.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

My point stands.

Not really.

Point being, white supremacists are probably extremely surprised that their beloved 'Aryan' St George flag represents someone who never set foot in England and is of Greek/Palestinian heritage.

Because they're idiots, of course. Lol 

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jacee said:

Not really.

Point being, white supremacists are probably extremely surprised that their beloved 'Aryan' St George flag represents someone who never set foot in England and is of Greek/Palestinian heritage.

Because they're idiots, of course. Lol 

 

You can rewrite history anyway you choose. It doesn't make it correct. The Arabs had not even left the Arabian peninsula in any great numbers in the 4th century. Nor had your religion of Islam been invented by the warlord Muhammad...still centuries from being born. It is technically impossible for St George to be an Arab Palestinian. 

But, you're on team Islam...so no doubt you'll believe what certain iconoclasts say on the matter.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, DogOnPorch said:

 

You can rewrite history anyway you choose. It doesn't make it correct. The Arabs had not even left the Arabian peninsula in any great numbers in the 4th century. Nor had your religion of Islam been invented by the warlord Muhammad...still centuries from being born. It is technically impossible for St George to be an Arab Palestinian. 

But, you're on team Islam...so no doubt you'll believe what certain iconoclasts say on the matter.

All religions are stupid.

And your off topic trolling is too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jacee said:

All religions are stupid.

And your off topic trolling is too.

 

 

I accept your unconditional surrender. 

Ulysses%20S.%20Grant.jpg?itok=pNyxNTXD

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, jacee said:

All religions are stupid. 

Don't tell that to people who can 'prove' Muslims are sub-human because of something from the Mufti in 1300.  (btw those same people will talk about how Muslims don't share "our" values, meaning same-sex marriage which is less than 20 years old)

Don't even try - these people hate Muslims and think they're subhuman, and will use logic after the fact to prove it... mostly to themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Don't tell that to people who can 'prove' Muslims are sub-human because of something from the Mufti in 1300.  (btw those same people will talk about how Muslims don't share "our" values, meaning same-sex marriage which is less than 20 years old)

Don't even try - these people hate Muslims and think they're subhuman, and will use logic after the fact to prove it... mostly to themselves.

Ya, ignoring. Lol 

I remember all of those 'Canadian values' struggles - Charter of Rights, women's lib, abortion, equal pay, racial equality, affirmative action, same-sex benefits, same sex marriage ... The Conservatives fought hard against every one.

Now they're the great guardians of those 'Canadian values' ... because ... Islam? :lol:

But there's a much more virulent hatred of Muslims out there too ... infesting every discussion. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, jacee said:

Now they're the great guardians of those 'Canadian values' ... because ... Islam? :lol:

I... guess... 

I do believe they may have been smelling their farts for so long they can't recognize a rose.  Are people really so into installing a Christian theocracy as they seem to think ?

42 minutes ago, jacee said:

But there's a much more virulent hatred of Muslims out there too ... infesting every discussion. 

I miss the days when they just denied climate change...

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jacee said:

Ya, ignoring. Lol 

I remember all of those 'Canadian values' struggles - Charter of Rights, women's lib, abortion, equal pay, racial equality, affirmative action, same-sex benefits, same sex marriage ... The Conservatives fought hard against every one.

Now they're the great guardians of those 'Canadian values' ... because ... Islam? :lol:

But there's a much more virulent hatred of Muslims out there too ... infesting every discussion. 

 

 

47 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

I... guess... 

I do believe they may have been smelling their farts for so long they can't recognize a rose.  Are people really so into installing a Christian theocracy as they seem to think ?

I miss the days when they just denied climate change...

It's always the same problem on these sites.  Those of us who bring attention to the barbaric insanity of laws based on religion, to the primitive subjugation of women, to the brutality of such things as the death penalty for blasphemy or homosexuality, or similar punishment for adultery are somehow thought of as hating Muslims.  We are thought of such by people who have the capability to turn a blind eye to such things, just because they are perpetrated by Muslims. 

In fact, if they were perpetrated by Republican Christians in the US deep south, their anger would be so incandescent that one would be able to see them from space. (That's racism folks.  Like it or not.)

So I ask you, given that the Muslims I described above are the only ones I don't like, what do you think of them?

I wonder if we all feel exactly the same way about Muslims.  And if we don't, why not?  Which bits that I don't like are you in favour of? <--If you answer just one question, please make it that one.

I genuinely would like to know what is wrong with my contempt for behaviour I described.  I assume you both feel the same way I do.  How come you think I'm wrong?

And was that reasonable enough to warrant being censored?

 

Edited by bcsapper
Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction - Blaise Pascal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

 

It's always the same problem on these sites.  Those of us who bring attention to the barbaric insanity of laws based on religion, to the primitive subjugation of women, to the brutality of such things as the death penalty for blasphemy or homosexuality, or similar punishment for adultery are somehow thought of as hating Muslims.  We are thought of such by people who have the capability to turn a blind eye to such things, just because they are perpetrated by Muslims. 

In fact, if they were perpetrated by Republican Christians in the US deep south, their anger would be so incandescent that one would be able to see them from space. (That's racism folks.  Like it or not.)

So I ask you, given that the Muslims I described above are the only ones I don't like, what do you think of them?

I wonder if we all feel exactly the same way about Muslims.  And if we don't, why not?  Which bits that I don't like are you in favour of? <--If you answer just one question, please make it that one.

I genuinely would like to know what is wrong with my contempt for behaviour I described.  I assume you both feel the same way I do.  How come you think I'm wrong?

And was that reasonable enough to warrant being censored?

 

I support the right of Muslims to live in Canada within our laws, including their Constitutional rights of freedom to practice their religion without discrimination, and without people inciting and promoting hatred against them as a group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, jacee said:

I support the right of Muslims to live in Canada within our laws, including their Constitutional rights of freedom to practice their religion without discrimination, and without people inciting and promoting hatred against them as a group.

Of course, same as anyone.  Do you support the right of people like me to find fault with the ones who are at fault?

What do you think of the idea of the death penalty for blasphemy, for instance?  Hate crime?  What about those who say that some kind of punishment for blasphemy is warranted?  Hate speech?

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Islam actually commands its believers to follow the law of the land in Dar-al-Harb as long as they're not breaking the Sharia at the same time...ie sinning. Keeping in mind that Islam also prescribes that the believer fight the unbeliever until all religion is for Allah.

O you who have believed, fulfill [all] contracts. Lawful for you are the animals of grazing livestock except for that which is recited to you [in this Qur'an] - hunting not being permitted while you are in the state of ihram. Indeed, Allah ordains what He intends.

https://quran.com/5/

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

Of course, same as anyone.  Do you support the right of people like me to find fault with the ones who are at fault?

Not if you're blaming all Muslims in Canada for the actions of some extremists somewhere else. 

 

2 hours ago, bcsapper said:

What do you think of the idea of the death penalty for blasphemy, for instance?  Hate crime?  What about those who say that some kind of punishment for blasphemy is warranted?  Hate speech?

We don't have those laws in Canada.

Some religions excommunicate or uninvite people.

That's not a legal matter. 

Edited by jacee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bcsapper said:

What do you think of the idea of the death penalty for blasphemy, for instance?  Hate crime? 

What part of "live within the laws of Canada" is hard for you to understand?   "Death penalty for blasphemy" would be breaking the law of the land, and so of course - no matter how much a Muslim might hate blasphemers, I would expect them to go to jail for killing someone for that.  Generally speaking, religious belief isn't something I'm particularly impressed with - whether a Muslim's notion that blasphemers should be killed, or a Christian's notion that the death penalty for women who have abortions is a good idea.  Religious people are all too willing to judge and condemn others; as long as that judgement and condemnation remains in their head, I don't care.

Quote

Hate crime? 

If it's a crime, it should be punished.  Doesn't matter if it's some redneck pulling the hijab off a Muslim woman, or a Muslim teen spray-painting anti-Jew graffiti on a synagogue.  

Quote

What about those who say that some kind of punishment for blasphemy is warranted? 

As for "punishment for blasphemy", it's not so uncommon among "Christian" countries, either.   Among those that have legal sanctions for blasphemy are the Philippines, South Africa and Russia.   Poland has legal sanctions against offending the religious feelings by publicly insulting a religious object or place, though they don't refer to it as anti-blasphemy laws.   In 2014, the Netherlands abolished their blasphemy laws - which the Christian political party objected to as a 'painful loss of moral character and a symptom of a spiritual crisis".  

(I personally prefer Romania's law which says that " "cults, religious associations and religious groups ... must not infringe upon ... fundamental human rights and liberties".)

Quote

Hate speech?

I don't care if people criticize religion or insult God.  I care when people engender hate, fear or dehumanize others.    I can criticize the leaders of Islam for saying that it's "required" that women cover, when it can clearly be argued that it's not a requirement. 

But if I criticize the *women* who do cover as being either 1. extremist; 2. oppressed;  or 3. "insulting Canadians", then I've crossed the line from criticizing the religion to dehumanizing someone by not allowing them agency - by limiting her motivations to what I think they are.   If I then decide that based on the three motivations I've allowed her that I should have the right to dictate what she wears, then I've gone from simply being hateful to being oppressive.  And, for the more extreme among us, it becomes acceptable to assault a woman, verbally or physically, because we disapprove of what she's wearing.

 

Quote

 Do you support the right of people like me to find fault with the ones who are at fault?

I could ask you the same - do you support the right of people like me to find fault with the ones who are at fault?   

Edited by dialamah
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jacee said:

Not if you're blaming all Muslims in Canada for the actions of some extremists somewhere else. 

I don't!  How come that is the default argument for someone who doesn't want to acknowledge that some criticism is justified?

We don't have those laws in Canada.

Not relevant.  I wasn't talking about Canada.

Some religions excommunicate or uninvite people.

Good.

That's not a legal matter.

Still, what do you think of the Muslims I don't like?  We all agree about the Muslim's I don't dislike.

Edited by bcsapper

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, dialamah said:

What part of "live within the laws of Canada" is hard for you to understand?   "Death penalty for blasphemy" would be breaking the law of the land, and so of course - no matter how much a Muslim might hate blasphemers, I would expect them to go to jail for killing someone for that.  Generally speaking, religious belief isn't something I'm particularly impressed with - whether a Muslim's notion that blasphemers should be killed, or a Christian's notion that the death penalty for women who have abortions is a good idea.  Religious people are all too willing to judge and condemn others; as long as that judgement and condemnation remains in their head, I don't care.

No part.  I don't care just about Canada.   I think it's a barbaric, primitive, disgusting aspect of a brutal religion wherever in the world it occurs, and people seem to object to that. 

If it's a crime, it should be punished.  Doesn't matter if it's some redneck pulling the hijab off a Muslim woman, or a Muslim teen spray-painting anti-Jew graffiti on a synagogue.  

Duh!

As for "punishment for blasphemy", it's not so uncommon among "Christian" countries, either.   Among those that have legal sanctions for blasphemy are the Philippines, South Africa and Russia.   Poland has legal sanctions against offending the religious feelings by publicly insulting a religious object or place, though they don't refer to it as anti-blasphemy laws.   In 2014, the Netherlands abolished their blasphemy laws - which the Christian political party objected to as a 'painful loss of moral character and a symptom of a spiritual crisis".  

It's okay for you talk about how awful they all are.  I would agree with you.  Islam is far worse of course.  I assume you would agree with me?

(I personally prefer Romania's law which says that " "cults, religious associations and religious groups ... must not infringe upon ... fundamental human rights and liberties".)

I like that too.  Like I said earlier, I would ban the call to prayer.  Disturbing the peace.  Church bells too, though.

 

45 minutes ago, dialamah said:

I don't care if people criticize religion or insult God.  I care when people engender hate, fear or dehumanize others.    I can criticize the leaders of Islam for saying that it's "required" that women cover, when it can clearly be argued that it's not a requirement. 

It's tough to criticize something so hateful, fearful, and dehumanizing as those aspects of Islam that I find hateful, fearful, and dehumanizing without portraying those who indulge in them as hateful, fearful, and inhuman.  It seems a small price to pay for my freedom to express my disgust at those aspects.  I'm sure you too are disgusted at them.  Perhaps you choose not to express it.

But if I criticize the *women* who do cover as being either 1. extremist; 2. oppressed;  or 3. "insulting Canadians", then I've crossed the line from criticizing the religion to dehumanizing someone by not allowing them agency - by limiting her motivations to what I think they are.   If I then decide that based on the three motivations I've allowed her that I should have the right to dictate what she wears, then I've gone from simply being hateful to being oppressive.  And, for the more extreme among us, it becomes acceptable to assault a woman, verbally or physically, because we disapprove of what she's wearing.

I can't imagine anyone who thinks a burka wearer is not oppressed.  But I do not support a ban, because I am pro choice, and I don't believe I get to question someone's choice.  It's the same with abortion.  It's the same with free speech.  I believe more women are assaulted for what they are wearing in Islam than outside it.  I think there are more women in jail for not wearing certain clothing in Islamic countries than there are women in jail for wearing them in non Islamic countries.

 

I could ask you the same - do you support the right of people like me to find fault with the ones who are at fault?   

Yes I do.  I support you in that.  I assume you don't have a problem with me saying what I say about Muslims, then, beings how I'm only saying it about the bad ones. 

Really, I just want to see where we all differ.  I bet we don't differ in our views, at all.  I bet we just differ in what we allow ourselves to say about our views.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bcsapper said:

I bet we don't differ in our views, at all.  I bet we just differ in what we allow ourselves to say about our views.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Keep in mind that 'following the law of the land' only applies to Muslims in positions of weakness. They are still expected to strive for Sharia as the 'law of the land'. And why not? It's the Law of Allah. Perfect in every way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

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

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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


×
×
  • Create New...