Anonymous wrote:Is it micro-aggressive or macro-aggressive to think that this is a load of indulgent, self-serving obsessive tosh?

Why are you looking for problems where there may not be any at all? Sometimes people just don't know any better and aren't being any kind of aggressive at all.

When I get dumb questions, I give kind answers. Education is always better than a PC shutdown of genuine inquiry.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
3. Pathology of Different Religious Groups: Statements and behaviors in which individuals equate certain religious practices or traditions as being abnormal, sinful, or deviant (e.g., telling someone that they are in the “wrong” religion).
4. Assumption of One's Own Religious Identity as the Norm: Comments or behaviors that convey people’s presumption that their religion is the standard and behaves accordingly (e.g., greeting someone “Merry Christmas” or saying “God bless you” after someone sneezes conveys one’s perception that everyone is Christian or believes in God).

Muslims are abundantly, stupefyingly guilty of #3. "Correct it with your hand, correct it with your word, and you can't do either, at the very least hate it in your heart."

#4 is BS. You feel micro-aggressed upon when someone tells you God bless you after you sneezed? For real?

Anonymous wrote:Many Muslim countries, not just KSA, are guilty of #3, marginalizing and often persecuting people of other faiths or no faith.

Anonymous wrote:Where does "Christian-evangelical-crusader-Islamophobe" fell into the micro aggression categories?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Getting back to the topic of this thread, here are six categories of religious micro aggression per
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jmmh/10381607.0006.203?rgn=main;view=fulltext

1. Endorsing Religious Stereotypes: statements or behaviors that communicate false, presumptuous, or incorrect perceptions of certain religious groups (e.g., stereotyping that a Muslim person is a terrorist or that a Jewish person is cheap).
2. Exoticization: instances where people view other religions as trendy or foreign (e.g., an individual who dresses in a certain religion’s garb or garments for fashion or pleasure).
3. Pathology of Different Religious Groups: Statements and behaviors in which individuals equate certain religious practices or traditions as being abnormal, sinful, or deviant (e.g., telling someone that they are in the “wrong” religion).
4. Assumption of One's Own Religious Identity as the Norm: Comments or behaviors that convey people’s presumption that their religion is the standard and behaves accordingly (e.g., greeting someone “Merry Christmas” or saying “God bless you” after someone sneezes conveys one’s perception that everyone is Christian or believes in God).
5. Assumption of Religious Homogeneity: Statements in which individuals assume that every believer of a religion practices the same customs or has the same beliefs as the entire group (e.g., assuming that all Muslim people wear head coverings).
6. Denial of Religious Prejudice: Incidents in which individuals claim that they are not religiously biased, even if their words or behaviors may indicate otherwise.

I think pretty much every human being is guilty of all of these things, in religious and many other cultural and social contexts.

For example, take item #4. Certainly when you and the other Muslim poster write "women are equal in Islam," the debate has been around whether everybody should understand that this means to Muslims that women are equally valued even if they don't have equal legal rights. I don't ever think you spelled out women's legal rights, instead you left it to a handful of other posters to clarify these for the 98% of readers who didn't know. Only after that did you clarify your idea of equal value. I think this was particularly unfortunate because you live in a western country, you know that 98% of your readers aren't familiar with the Muslim interpretation of "women's equality," yet you both continued to say this anyway.

Anonymous wrote:Thinking about this some more, I'm not sure it's fair to hold OP accountable for the behavior of all Muslims, or even for things in the Quran.

OP should be held accountable, however, for micro-aggressions of her own. For example, she makes micro-aggression #4 often, when she makes bald statements on things like women's equality or Jesus or women captives, where her initial premise is always that her DMV readers both understand and agree with her.

Anonymous wrote:
3. Pathology of Different Religious Groups: Statements and behaviors in which individuals equate certain religious practices or traditions as being abnormal, sinful, or deviant (e.g., telling someone that they are in the “wrong” religion).
4. Assumption of One's Own Religious Identity as the Norm: Comments or behaviors that convey people’s presumption that their religion is the standard and behaves accordingly (e.g., greeting someone “Merry Christmas” or saying “God bless you” after someone sneezes conveys one’s perception that everyone is Christian or believes in God).

Anonymous wrote:
Discrimination is a political and societal context. It has nothing to do with finer points of theology you're discussing.

There isn't especially much to debate here, you are correct. What is important to clarify - although you may not accept that here - is the true meaning behind "Muslims respect Jesus and Moses as prophets." What it really means is that "we think both Jesus and Moses were Muslims. We think they brought the same message as Muhammad but it got distorted along the way. That's why Muhammad was sent to deliver the message again, and this time God made sure to protect the message. Christians and Jews, we think your holy books have been distorted, only ours stands intact, and therefore only ours is the correct one. The way you interpret Jesus and Moses is erroneous. The way we interpret them is correct."

(There is actually extensive Islamic "scholarship" out there dedicated to cataloging and "proving" inaccuracies and discrepancies in both Testaments.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It feels to Jews and Christians as though Islam wants to co-opt their religions and present itself as the ultimate form of monotheism. They don't accept that, especially given the massive differences among the three religions, as PP pointed out. A good parallel is with the Bahais and their prophet: do you accept that this is the perfection of all monotheistic religions including Islam? I didn't think so.

I am not sure what the debate here is about. Muslims are not asking Jews and Christians to embrace Islam. Our holy book mentions many prophets from Adam to Noah to Moses to Jesus and finally, Muhammad. The religion asks us to respect all of them. The message sent from God through these messengers is one and the same. So Islam is not trying to take over any other faith. It was simply the same message brought by yet one more, and last, messenger of God. Islam also believes all good Christians and all good Jews will go to Heaven, so there is no necessity to convert to Islam if you are secure in your own faith. So why do you feel so threatened by islam?

As far as Bahai faith goes, our Islamic holy book clearly states there will be no messengers after Prophet Muhammad. That the Bahai faith believes there is is pointless and irrelevant to Muslims. Similarly, Jews and Christians are free to think Islam is irrelevant also. I don't think Muslims are asking Jews or Christians here to accept them. We simply don't want Muslims to be discriminated.

Anonymous wrote:Getting back to the topic of this thread, here are six categories of religious micro aggression per
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/j/jmmh/10381607.0006.203?rgn=main;view=fulltext

1. Endorsing Religious Stereotypes: statements or behaviors that communicate false, presumptuous, or incorrect perceptions of certain religious groups (e.g., stereotyping that a Muslim person is a terrorist or that a Jewish person is cheap).
2. Exoticization: instances where people view other religions as trendy or foreign (e.g., an individual who dresses in a certain religion’s garb or garments for fashion or pleasure).
3. Pathology of Different Religious Groups: Statements and behaviors in which individuals equate certain religious practices or traditions as being abnormal, sinful, or deviant (e.g., telling someone that they are in the “wrong” religion).
4. Assumption of One's Own Religious Identity as the Norm: Comments or behaviors that convey people’s presumption that their religion is the standard and behaves accordingly (e.g., greeting someone “Merry Christmas” or saying “God bless you” after someone sneezes conveys one’s perception that everyone is Christian or believes in God).
5. Assumption of Religious Homogeneity: Statements in which individuals assume that every believer of a religion practices the same customs or has the same beliefs as the entire group (e.g., assuming that all Muslim people wear head coverings).
6. Denial of Religious Prejudice: Incidents in which individuals claim that they are not religiously biased, even if their words or behaviors may indicate otherwise.