Posts by Scott Nguyen2

dustybear7 said:Scott Nguyen2!
Thanks for putting this out there!
Finally, someone actually being level-headed and keeping their cool enough to write something with some actual logic instead of just getting all worked up!

Aleikum Assalam
Thank God, and thanks to you too!
la hawla wala quwwata illa billahil aliyyil azim.

ps. I’m done posting on Reddit... seriously. I just wrote this to get my two cents in, even though I already said I was boycotting. Now I’m actually doing it🙂—I don't even want to type another word—until they sort out the mess going on with this site.

Look, let's just be straight about this—an interfaith marriage between a Muslim woman and a non-Muslim man? It’s completely invalid. Period. It's actually forbidden... I mean, if you look at the actual rules we follow, there's really no wiggle room here. It just isn't allowed.

Kids from an interfaith marriage like that? Honestly, they’re considered illegitimate—the word for them is bastards...

And let's not keep repeating ourselves, man—Dobrica... that soft-hearted moderator who seems to be just leaking all those Cosicka ideas and ideologies everywhere...

You know how my late grandma used to talk about stuff like this? Man, back in the day... she would have had some serious things to say about it.

Just a guess.

Look, kids from an interfaith marriage aren't "bastards" or anything like that—seriously, how can anyone even say something like that? Under the laws here in America, since we follow civil law, those kids are living in a legal marriage recognized by the state. Period. As Americans, we have a responsibility to respect the laws of the country we live in, and that includes the legal contracts we sign—including marriage licenses. If people don't want to play by those rules or simply refuse to follow them, then they've got a few options... I mean, one of them is Hijrah, which is basically just moving away. It all comes down to the distinction between Dar al-Harb—territory where Islamic law isn't the governing force—and Dar al-Islam, where Sharia principles are in effect. It’s pretty straightforward if you actually think about it...
Here's an example.
When the polytheists in Mecca finally embraced Islam—by God's will, of course—the Prophet didn't just go around demanding that people scrap their existing marriages (you know, like if one spouse converted and the other stayed behind...). It wasn't like that at all. Take the Prophet's daughter, Zaynab, for example... she was married to Abu al-Aas ibn al-Rabiah, and things were incredibly tense because he hadn't converted yet—she basically couldn't even be with him like that. But Muhammad didn't just step in and annul their marriage or force them apart. No way. Then, by God's will, Abu al-Aas eventually embraced Islam and they were able to reunite... everything worked out in the end.

Honestly, we’ve already covered a decent chunk of this topic in previous posts—specifically when people were airing their grievances earlier... so there isn't much left to say here.

Look, let’s be real here—under the laws of secular nations, including the US and everywhere else in America, you don't have the right to go around calling someone an adulterer just because they're in a civil marriage... regardless of what kind of union it is. It's just not how it works legally!
This is just one of the countless differences between Sharia and secular law... seriously, there are so many more if you actually stop to look.
Look, at the end of the day, we don't live in a country governed by Sharia—this is a secular American forum, for crying out loud! Calling someone an adulterer is actually a punishable offense here, though I guess you could argue that if you're looking at it through the lens of a Sharia-based system rather than a secular one... but even then—and this is a big "even then"—even in a hypothetical Sharia state, an individual doesn't just get to play judge and jury on their own. You can't just go around deciding who's guilty of adultery or, heaven forbid, deciding who gets kicked out of the faith... there's a whole process for that. In a theoretical Sharia-run country, those kinds of rulings would be handled by official religious authorities—you know, the Ulema—not just some random person on the internet...

Secondly, I’ve gotta call out Scott Nguyen2 for being so selective about how he jumps into this mess. He decided to weigh in on the complaints section, but then suddenly went quiet when it came to actually addressing the people who were—directly or indirectly—disrespecting and belittling others. Honestly, if you’re going to stick your neck out, you should at least try to put out some of the fire! Especially since he’s one of those highly respected, influential guys on the Reddit that everyone looks up to—someone with real knowledge that the rest of us actually trust. But instead, he took this totally one-sided approach, just piling on the Admins alongside everyone else for banning certain members, without even touching on *why* those people were banned in the first place. The person who truly got the short end of the stick here is sister Sunnah, who was hit with such heavy, nasty words—both straight up and implied—even after she spoke up... they practically threw Hell in her face. Yet, all those people? They escaped any criticism. Nobody wanted to judge or call out the ones who wrote that garbage; they just stood in solidarity with them because they were mad about the bans. The only person who actually stepped up on that thread was boldgull19, and she was the only one providing any real support to Sunnah amidst all that chaos.

ruggedwolf,
My decision to jump into the "Interfaith Marriage" thread wasn't some impulsive snap judgment. Look, rushing into sensitive topics like this—especially with that "haste makes waste" attitude—is exactly why you guys are fighting. You really should have consulted someone first, whether it’s actual authorities on the rules, scholarly books, or the official stance from the Islamic Community of America. There are two things to keep in mind here. First, you should be extremely careful when questioning someone’s faith. Second, while there are general guidelines for interfaith marriages, the specifics of every single individual case require different solutions. You can't just take specific instances on a forum and try to turn them into a universal rule. Because of how complicated this is, you have to approach these topics with caution, not just go charging in blindly.
You can't build any kind of Sharia-based evidence on a flimsy, subjective opinion like, "I've seen people in interfaith marriages looking happy." Sure, you can note that, but it's not a foundation for deriving a religious ruling. Speaking about interfaith marriages in such a complimentary way isn't right—it’s just as bad as claiming something forbidden is actually permitted. And anyone doing that (anyone who joyfully approves of, endorses, or encourages these marriages) can't claim to speak for Islam or justify it using Sharia.

For example, look at someone committing a sin, like drinking alcohol, but they still acknowledge that drinking is a sin. In the eyes of Sharia (specifically the Hanafi school), that person is a sinner, but they aren't an unbeliever because they aren't denying the prohibition. It’s a completely different story when someone speaks about alcohol in a positive light, using the argument that they've seen people drunk and happy. By approving of it like that, they aren't acting like alcohol is a sin. In fact, the more they praise it, the more their very Islam is called into question from a Sharia perspective, because they are clearly praising a sin. So, drinking alcohol while acknowledging it's a sin doesn't kick you out of Islam; however, if someone avoided alcohol but insisted it was "good" (permissible), they would effectively be removing themselves from Islam through that stance. To put it bluntly, declaring the forbidden to be permitted—and vice versa—is, strictly from a Sharia standpoint, YES, IT IS a massive sin that removes someone from the faith. Meanwhile, seeing alcohol as a sin even if you drink it doesn't make you an unbeliever; it just makes you a sinner. This applies to everything regarding what is allowed and what is forbidden. These are God's boundaries, and they stay that way regardless of whether people like them or not.

That’s the root of our disagreement. Your view wasn't quite what I described above—you see interfaith marriage as a sin, but not something that kicks a person out of the faith, and I completely agree with you there. But there is a huge difference between that and speaking about interfaith marriages in a glowing, positive way. Doing that is just as bad as encouraging sin by labeling an interfaith marriage as "happy." These are the fundamental principles, and there’s no middle ground here.

Regarding the situation with Sunnah—this is a super specific case. Personally, I wouldn't say a single word about her private life, so I'm staying out of it. Commenting on that would be a total invasion of privacy. (That’s actually why I hadn't chimed in yet, though Sunnah and I have already talked about this privately)

Now, FMN—who's taking a much harder line on this—argued that an interfaith marriage (where the woman is Muslim and married to a non-Muslim) actually takes a person out of the faith, and he laid out his arguments for it. I don't really agree with him, except when we're talking about treating an interfaith marriage like it's something to be praised (since we established earlier that allowing or praising something forbidden essentially pulls a person away from their faith). So, I guess I partially agree with FMN and partially don't, because—and we already touched on this—committing a sin (and according to Sharia, a Muslim woman being in a marriage with a non-Muslim is a sin) doesn't automatically kick you out of the faith, as long as the person is fully aware they're committing a sin.

Dervish eventually caught on to that (correcting himself), and because he realized that, he took a super strict stance alongside FMN. Some people on this Reddit were practically shouting, "Go ahead, jump into interfaith marriages! It's all good!" because... well, I've seen people in those kinds of marriages who look perfectly happy. But the younger crowd reading this forum—especially those living here in the States—really needs to understand the risks involved instead of just acting like it's something to celebrate.
Jack Wood43 said the exact same thing, etc.

The bottom line is that we don't bend Sharia to fit our lives; we bend our lives to fit Sharia.
_____

But honestly? I think once emotions started running high and things got rushed, the whole thing just went way too far. Our job is to educate people on the rules—to explain them—but we aren't obligated to go after someone personally. I feel like things got overdone here, all in the name of being "zealous" about upholding God's boundaries. Regardless, you shouldn't go after a person like that, especially not a Muslim woman. That's just not how a Muslim is supposed to act.

So, my "non-interference" wasn't me trying to play both sides, nor was it me letting anyone get insulted. It's just that during the heat of the debate, the official stance from the Islamic Community of America came out (which aligns with both my view and yours), so there wasn't really a need to keep rehashing it. If I thought jumping in would calm things down, I would've spoken up. Then again, sometimes—as weird as it sounds—you need a heated argument to really make people realize the gravity of an issue. But even then, you shouldn't end up insulting a sincere soul in the process. (I feel bad about that, but I guess it's too late now)

rowdyhawk10 said:1. I'm not ignoring the forum; you are. I am still posting here.

2. It should be perfectly clear to you (and to Dervish too) that users have every right to complain when they feel wronged by unfair moderation. After all, there is an entire subforum dedicated to this, right here: Complaints and Grievances isn't there?

3. Because of that, you didn't need to boycott the Religion section (which feels like a childish tantrum); you could have just kept posting while simultaneously putting pressure on the complaints section regarding my mistakes. Nobody ever stopped you from doing that.

4. Furthermore, the administration isn't blind to moderator injustice when it happens. They might be slow sometimes, but they do step in frequently to correct us moderators, and occasionally even replace us. So, this behavior seems to me like nothing more than the kind of tantrum you'd see in a preschool.

5. Looking at those four points, it’s pretty obvious—you guys have likely run out of ideas. The weight of responsibility has exhausted you. It's hard to endure having to tell someone they are a spiritual killer of their child, or a sinner, or a homosexual. Perhaps you were just intimidated by the proximity and brightness of success, now that people are actually starting to love Islam.

6. I don't find anyone's boycott joyful, and I actually feel bad about all this. But I imagine you and a few other lobbyists (like Jason) are certainly enjoying this and getting a bit carried away... otherwise, you wouldn't be doing this, and you would realize that Islam is more important than any single individual, even if the person in the moderator seat were Yazid himself. There have been those who dealt with him and still came out proud.

Therefore, Scott Nguyen2, you are only here for one reason—to lobby, as Bradley Davis33 put it in a gentler way—for a specific clique. And here is why:

7. YOU are boycotting the forum for a completely irrelevant reason because you aren't even complaining about anything where my moderation personally affected you! Have you ever been personally wronged here? Has my moderation ever caused you injustice? Of course not. If it has, tell me when and where (though you won't; you'll probably just moan about how "it hurts to see injustice toward the brothers, so you feel obligated...").

8. This is quite important: you are just like the others lobbying here. In fact, it’s becoming almost tragicomic. Just as you are lobbying for members of the "modern Salafi movement," like this little crony here , Dervish is complaining about the FMN forum users—then Kenneth Peterson5 complains about the Black-white group that likes to post in Sandjak cities—then boldgull19 complains about Dervish (my apologies to him, if he cares, for mentioning it). Yet none of them can point to a single instance where my moderation personally inflicted injustice upon them! How is that possible?

That's all I have to say, and I am definitely stepping out of this thread, unless one of the admins decides to step in. You all feel free to continue in unison... as far as I'm concerned, I'm done with this topic. I'm just sorry that Jack Wood43 hasn't joined in yet to tell me I'm a homosexual, just so the group feels complete.. 👋

Man, Dervish... he's become forgettable. Unlike you, Scott Nguyen2. I told him via DM not too long ago: Calm down, because a day will come when you'll make fools of yourselves because of what you're doing now. And then you'll wish for rowdyhawk10, even if he were rising from the mud.

It's obvious. You've been united by your own lack of direction rather than the malice of one man (anyone with eyes can look at points two, three, and four above). And as for those who want to sleep—let them sleep! Life certainly won't stay asleep forever. I'm heading out. You can either wake up, return to the forum, and move past this childishness, or just keep sleeping.

Man, Dervish... he's become forgettable. Unlike you, Scott Nguyen2. I told him via DM not too long ago: Calm down, because a day will come when you'll make fools of yourselves because of what you're doing now. And then you'll wish for rowdyhawk10, even if he were rising from the mud.

It's obvious. You've been united by your own lack of direction rather than the malice of one man (anyone with eyes can look at points two, three, and four above). And as for those who want to sleep—let them sleep! Life certainly won't stay asleep forever. I'm heading out. You can either wake up, return to the forum, and move past this childishness, or just keep sleeping.

p.s. - Look, I probably shouldn't even be bothering to comment on this... but for the sake of being totally blunt? That "Peace be upon you" you tacked onto the end of your post—right after that massive, hateful rant of yours—it honestly feels like hanging a Mona Lisa portrait over a toilet. It’s just gross. It reeks when it's packaged together with that kind of blatant disrespect like that...

Look, I’m not accepting your little "compliment" about me standing up for the sister following Sunnah. She doesn't need me—she has God. And God definitely loves her, unlike those who hurt her (unless they apologize to her personally and directly). A housewife would have the guts to say something, but as for Dervish... I’m not so sure.

That sense of unity you're talking about, Scott Nguyen2, is totally fake. I could step down as moderator tomorrow and you guys would be tearing each other apart over some trivial nonsense in two months anyway. You'll be fighting with someone who just likes poking people, or some other "member of the modern Salaf movement," lol. But, like Bradley Davis33 said, once that happens, there won't be any Shady left to defend your feelings from those fanatics. Just take it easy.

From my perspective—and specifically within the context of this thread—your "unity" is actually built on neurosis because I wouldn't let anyone insult anyone else; and because I wouldn't allow people to use the senseless arguments of dead men to mock the living! I'm talking about the guy who politically twisted Quranic Verse 4.141, which, according to the reasons for its publication, was referring to the polytheists in Mecca, not marriage. As for the FMN brothers and Dervish, they're basically just "lost Sufis" who love...

"praying for the dead at their graves," right, guys CB and Jason?! 🤣

Man, Dervish... he's become forgettable. Unlike you, Scott Nguyen2. I told him quite recently in a DM: "Everyone needs to calm down, because a day is coming when you'll all make fools of yourselves because of what you're doing now." And then you'll be begging for Shady, even if he were crawling out of the mud.

It's obvious. You've been united by your own lack of direction rather than by one man's malice (if you actually have eyes, look at points two, three, and four above). And if anyone wants to sleep—fine, sleep! Life certainly won't stay asleep forever. I'm heading out. Now, you can either wake up, come back to the forum, and grow out of this childishness, or you can just keep sleeping.

Man, you are absolutely out of your mind.
You said all sorts of things in my DMs, and you haven't fulfilled a single thing you promised—you lie, you twist things. Regarding our "disagreement," you're still wrong, so you just throw a bone into the middle (throwing a bone into the rift between Sufis and Wahhabis) instead of trying to reconcile people, you're just driving them into fights again (divide and conquer). You mention some "distant" past, claiming we're all somehow psychotic🙂, that some are even terrorists, yet you can't even bring up anything "positive." No matter what "we" do to you, you'll go digging for trash, and you know what they call people who dig through garbage. You forgot to mention that Dervish corrected himself; you forgot to mention that he's looking for the same things from you while you just act smug; you forgot to mention that CB apologized, and there's so much more I won't even bother talking about. Two soldiers are in a war, the war ends, and then Satan approaches one of them with the intent to divide them. He starts talking trash against his comrade. And this guy you're trying to tempt: that man saved my life, and here you are looking for ways to smear him. Once he shakes off Satan and tells his comrade everything, the man will just say, "It wasn't me who saved your life, it was God." (You didn't throw it when you threw it, God did).

Anyway, you haven't offered an apology to anyone, which is the worst part—and on top of everything, you still don't see that you need to.

There was once a man who never bathed, but he never noticed his own bad breath; instead, he blamed everyone else for smelling, whenever they dared to point out his own stench from not washing.

So that's it, Shady. Just so you know, you are the reason the Muslims on this forum are falling apart.

Look, at the end of the day... I’m actually glad you noticed that Scott Nguyen2 is finally stepping up and getting involved now—especially since he wouldn't say a single word fifteen days ago when everyone was throwing insults around. You hit the nail on the head with your question: where was he back then to call out the injustice and all the garbage being spewed by his "friends"? Where was he to criticize—even just symbolically—those people writing such nonsense? And then he goes and says he "doesn't want to get involved"... wow, you really caught onto that one! I actually told him in my last post: Simona figured out years ago how shady that kind of behavior is. It's the exact same thing here, and he even went out of his way to say, "Sunnah, don't give up." You totally spotted that too—he’s clearly just trying not to "offend" certain users, specifically the majority he's now desperately protesting against.

Man, there is just so much drama being stirred up here. It's all getting a bit too low-level. Once upon a time (since we're so obsessed with bringing up the past), I got carried away myself and mentioned the Sandook area in a bad light—and honestly, that’s the only thing I truly regret saying. At the end of the day, brothers are brothers, no matter what kind of person you turn out to be.
Look at us—mashallah—Salafis, Sufis, and followers of different schools all standing together in the same line. Isn't it wild how God works? Let that be an example for us. Isn't His name the Gatherer? My heart would be so full if I could just happily grab a coffee sometime—without all this second-guessing—with C&B, Koby, Bradley Davis33, Dervish, boldgull19, FMN Alem, Jack Wood43, Sunnah, the Charlatan, wearyhawk222, and the rest of you (forgive me if I missed anyone!), just to sit and have a real conversation🙂. There’s just too little time in this life to waste it on hatred and living in bitterness.

I can't really speak for "myself"—that feels ungrateful. I'd rather people criticize me than have someone praise me, because honestly, I'm pretty insignificant in the grand scheme of all this. I'm not forcing anyone to do anything, nor am I asking them to "defend" me or, heaven forbid, "follow" me... let alone anything more serious than that. May God allow it so that when we give, it's done so quietly that the left hand doesn't even know what the right hand is doing. Amen!

_____________________

Regarding your moderation duties, that’s been entrusted to you by His will. You are the one whom God gave the authority (the power on this Reddit) to grant rights to others. Those "others" are the ones seeking the justice that you are meant to provide, which is a right God gave to you in your role as a moderator. What is the point of having rights if they only serve those who already hold power? That makes no sense. If someone in power starts demanding their own "rights," just know they're getting caught up in worldly interests, and that "authority" becomes a test—or even a reason for their downfall. Why should a "ruler" demand rights from their subordinates? Doesn't he already have them? Aren't rights there specifically for the disempowered and the wronged? Like I said, generally speaking, rights are sought by those who lack them, and for God's sake, those who *do* have power are obligated to grant them in His name, because that power was given to them as a trust from Him—and isn't His name the Lord?
Anyway, it's tough on whoever gets power and refuses to pass it on to those searching for it. That person is nothing but a nuisance and a source of chaos, and they clearly don't know how to judge fairly.
But God is just, so He will recognize the good you do in your moderation. It is definitely a good thing that you stood up to defend the sisters, especially sister Sunnah🙂. God rewards abundantly🙂, and God will eventually remove everything that stands in the way of "justice" reaching those who seek it, even if none of us ever post on this forum again.

Anyway, I’m rambling a bit, but I see the good in all of this. To me, it's truly a blessing to be in the same line as the Salafis, the Sufis, and the various schools of thought (the Shia aren't on the forum right now, but they're always welcome).🙂 , Mashallah, we wouldn't have even gotten this far—God willing—if you hadn't gone and united us all with your absolutely twisted way of moderating. Mashallah, God works in mysterious ways...

Anyway, my boycott is still going strong, and honestly—take a look around (it's like "us" barely exists on Reddit anymore, at least not the old crew)—just look at what you've done to this place. This whole thing has turned into nothing but a sub-forum for Religion, and god knows what it’s turning into now. If you can't see that—and if God has truly blinded you to the reality of how things look—then I guess there's some kind of lesson in it, I suppose...

Peace be upon you

Look, (like the rest of this post) you’re just making an unargued claim—and yeah, I’ll add that—in that old-school way. If you had followed that up with a coherent argument, fine. But you didn't. First off, there is no such thing as a "Salaf movement," especially not a modern one. This is a terrorist movement that shouldn't be allowed to plant its roots here because it promotes values that are completely anti-civilization.

So, you're saying it's nothing more or less than a terrorist movement that can't be allowed to "take root" on the forum.
But your "proof" that this is a terrorist movement is based on... four posts. That's it.
In one of those posts, a Passerby claims that if someone isn't performing their obligations (not praying, not fasting, etc.), they shouldn't even be considered a Muslim. Now, people who adopt these kinds of interpretations of Islamic rules are usually the ones who argue that actions (worship) *are* the faith itself—and honestly, from a Hanafi perspective, you can totally debunk that view. It's a classic Fiqh topic! People have been debating this forever on forums without anyone being branded a terrorist. Just because a user is citing "strictness" doesn't mean they're dangerous. Sure, Muslims should be strict, but the methodology used by today's Salafis is questionable at best. This is all stuff meant for discussion, and I don't see any "terrorist threat" in what is essentially a standard Fiqh debate.
And don't even get me started on the 'Tawhid' topic. The people on this forum who try to defend the Salafis (like Black-White, aka ruggedstag7, or Kate Phillips40, etc.) have actually discredited that specific user and labeled him a 'takfiri' (which he is). So, basically, everyone you consider a "Wahhabi"—which is how you frame them, as nothing more than terrorists!—actually rejects the 'Tawhid' handle and criticizes him. Yet, you're punishing the very people who reject that handle just because they don't claim him as one...🙂...because they're also "Wahhabis" (or "terrorists," as you put it)
The other two posts are even more ridiculous to interpret as a "terrorist threat."

Is it because they are Muslims that they should be above the rules, Scott Nguyen2?

Oh, come on, rowdyhawk10, stop talking nonsense. Don't even try to hide behind these nasty insinuations. We aren't children. Tell me, when did I ever say or imply that Muslims on the Religion subforum should be exempt from the rules?

Wahhabis certainly aren't being persecuted because of personal dislike or ideological disagreement (that's the crudest insinuation you could make), but rather because they refuse to follow the forum rules. Once they learn how to engage in civilized debate and dialogue according to the rules—just like everyone else here—they'll be mature enough to participate in a forum like this. Until then, they can carry on their missions on pro-Islamic forums where they're used to behaving the way they act here.

Just a second ago, you said I was quoting:

We're talking about a terrorist movement here—something that can't be allowed to spread its roots on this platform because it promotes values that are completely anti-civilization.

And now you’re claiming nobody is persecuting them? Give me a break. Seriously. You're targeting them specifically because you're labeling them as nothing less than terrorists—look, there's a massive difference between being radical and being a terrorist—and then you turn around and say no one is allowed to "spread" terrorist roots on the forum, while simultaneously insisting YOU aren't persecuting anyone based on their religious views? Let's get one thing straight: anyone who breaks the forum rules should be disciplined based strictly on what they actually wrote. That’s one thing. But it is a whole other story when YOU decide to brand someone a terrorist based on your own baseless insinuations—which aren't even true—and then you commit your own kind of "terror" against them on the forum based on those false assumptions! Time and time again, just like in these posts above, you’ve basically "Photoshopped" something into existence that isn't even in their posts... I mean, the last time you handed ruggedstag7 red cards for "threats"...

That "terrorist" post by ruggedstag7 is this one:

http://forum.com/showthread.php?p=17545073&postcount=72

The sentence that triggered your red card was this:

ruggedstag7:
So, are you saying you're thanking God for the fact that His Sharia has been abolished here?

You literally provided the reason for the ban yourself.

rowdyhawk10 said:ruggedstag7,
just a reminder regarding the guidelines (click) and rule number 9:
9) It is STRICTLY forbidden to express anything that isn't permitted under the Law of the United States. This includes calls for violence, committing other criminal acts, discrimination, and similar things; glorifying violence, crimes, or criminal regimes;

This is the absolute peak of fabrication. To see how much of a stretch this is, you have to remember that before he even used the handle 'ruggedstag7,' he was a user on the Black-White board. He actually got a permanent ban before taking this name. You personally promised him via PM that you'd let him post under the name 'ruggedstag7' as long as he wasn't being insulting. In this specific post, he didn't insult anyone—it was just a statement, a bit sarcastic, though honestly, I might have said it to Damir just as bluntly, maybe even harder if I were talking to Josh—and yet, in this post, you claim to see "calls for violence or committing other criminal acts, discrimination, and similar things; glorifying violence, crimes, or criminal regimes"... basically, you're manufacturing a crime he never committed in that post and slapping him with a ban, even after you gave him your word in a private message that you wouldn't mess with him.
This whole move of yours is just too much, and frankly, it's why I'm boycotting the way the Religion sub-forum is moderated.

When you're talking about religion—or any kind of deep-seated belief system—emotions just go through the roof. It’s incredibly hard to stay objective, whether you're a believer or an atheist, and it’s even harder if you're a moderator... who basically feels forced to act as the ultimate moral compass on such a high-stakes subreddit. There's zero room for error here. Basically, none at all.
So, I really don't get why you're pushing for changes that won't happen through some big boycott. Honestly? It only changes through patience, being persistent, pointing out mistakes, or maybe just showing way more tolerance toward everyone—even those people who are being offensive. And honestly, it feels like nobody uses it anymore, but there's still the "ignore" button. That tool is perfect for cooling things down and just tuning out anyone who clearly isn't capable of—or interested in—having an actual, reasoned debate.

Look, I see now that words don't mean anything. Whether I write stuff or not, it doesn't matter—it’s all useless. The opinions of the users here (let's be real, even respected ones like Tyler Scott3 and the rest) aren't even taken seriously or considered. It's not just about us "wondering" about how the sub is organized; it's about the fact that if we want to be taken seriously, we should be treated that way. If that's not the case, then a boycott seems like a much more effective move to me.
I'm ending this whole dialogue with this post.

Best,

It’s such a total paradox that atheism is treated as a core topic on the Religion subreddit, especially since atheism is—by its very definition—the opposition to religion. It’s just a plain fact, really, and honestly, both believers and non-believers would have to agree that atheism stands in direct opposition to faith.
And yet, despite that, the Religion subreddit is easily the most "open" corner of this entire site... because they actually allow atheism to be given the same weight and attention as any other religion. It’s almost—hypothetically speaking—like they're putting it on the exact same level as religion (whatever that may be)... which, if you think about it, is a massive slap in the face to any atheist. To suggest that their "lack of belief" is somehow based on dogma too? It's ridiculous! By treating it this way, atheists end up insulting themselves—whether they realize it or not—because they’re essentially placing themselves on the same plane as the very dogma they’re so "passionate" about criticizing. They turn into the very thing they oppose.

Anyway, I'm just making an observation here, not calling for anyone to go out and kick the atheists out or anything like that. Just a thought that seems interesting (at least to me)... something that probably needs even more digging, like how Communism—which stems from atheism—evently morphs into this weird cult of personality where the "leader" (or the party) is seen as infallible... which is, at its core, basically just religious behavior.

Kenneth Peterson5 said:If you had just posted this (post #26), Scott Nguyen2, right after Black-white got his permanent ban, then it would actually carry some weight—but the way things are now, you’re basically just shouting into the void.
Plus, you’re out here complaining about systematic religious discrimination, yet you want to kick atheists out of the Religion sub-forum? It honestly makes me wonder if you even realize you're literally asking for the same kind of discrimination you hate—you're totally tripping over your own feet here.

I don't even know what else to tell you, other than it's a shame that your good intentions—I'm assuming they *are* good intentions—probably won't be taken the way you think they will.

Later,

Maybe this post *is* just a shot in the dark, and maybe nothing will come of it, but I was trying to resolve this "quietly." It didn't work, and frankly, I think it’s a loss for everyone involved.

And regarding atheism—yeah, sure, it’s totally paradoxical to have atheism "anchored" in a Religion sub-forum. But that actually speaks to the "freedom" of this sub-forum and the freedom of speech we have here, which I respect, even if it feels weird. However—and this is a big however—that doesn't give anyone a free pass, regardless of what they believe (whether they're a believer or not), to turn the Religion section into a place where they get a "blank check" for whatever they want to say—and that goes for everyone, even the moderators. Let me drive this point home: this kind of insulting behavior isn't actual debate or criticism; it’s rooted in a deep-seated hatred for anything that even smells like religion—be it a believer, a church, a mosque, a synagogue, the Pope, an imam, whatever.

I wrote this

Secondly, I am boycotting the general tendency of atheists to try—at any cost—to turn the Religion sub-forum into their own ideological stronghold. The proof is right there: there are fewer and fewer believers on the Religion forum (which should actually be serving them), and it's not because they lack "arguments," it's because the insults have gone way beyond any level of basic human decency. (Okay, there are exceptions, obviously).
Now, I'm not saying atheists should be "driven out" of the Religion sub-forum—no, absolutely not—I'm just saying something needs to be done about the culture of the conversation. Nobody came here to deal with someone else's frustrations.

First off, this whole thing about insults is—to put it mildly—a total exaggeration. Believers say way nastier things to atheists all the time, and by the way, those things rarely ever actually get sanctioned at all.

Believers from all sorts of different religious backgrounds tend to insult each other just as much, though that doesn't exactly excuse their behavior. (I mean, how many times have we seen "heated" insults flying specifically within Muslim groups? And honestly, there’s no bigger insult than questioning someone's faith or what they believe in.)
But look, there's a massive difference between an actual, reasoned critique and these posts fueled purely by hatred. Hatred is basically just a cycle of resentment—because deep down, the person who is angry is trying to take it out on the object of their anger, expecting that object to just sit there and take it... just like they had to endure it themselves. Letting go of that resentment is the only way to find peace for someone who can't stand the pressure anymore. The catch is, when someone tries to "release" that tension, they end up dumping it back onto the very thing they're mad at, expecting it to suffer just as they did.
In light of all that, everyone should really be given the chance to "let go" of that resentment, instead of some people being allowed to vent while others are denied that "right." That right can only be taken away by the "authorities" if they decide the "others" are willing to just absorb their anger. But if the other side refuses to be a punching bag, then the authorities (the mods) "block" the cycle—which ultimately brings everything full circle, no matter how much someone thinks they're getting "justice" on someone else.
The root cause of all this isn't a lack of logical debate (though you can only really have a real discussion with people who have already "cleared" themselves of this stuff... but that's a whole other topic entirely...). The root is this destructive emotion that just multiplies and grows stronger every single time someone is prevented from SEEKING justice, and it's threatening to tear the entire Religion sub-forum apart. (Because let's face it, there is no "justice" that can truly settle this kind of tension once it starts multiplying.)

And this applies to absolutely anyone on the forum, regardless of whether they are religious or not. What's "unfair" here is that moderation is being used as a tool to release resentment through anger—specifically by the moderator rowdyhawk10, who is taking his frustration out on everyone he deems (based on their religion) responsible for his own "suffering"—the kind of perceived injustice he felt in the past, like in that specific situation over on the Islam Forum. He viewed that "endurance" as an injustice, and now, through his mod position, he's been given the chance to "get even" by (in his mind) hitting back at everyone who "profits" from his struggles, just like they hit him... All the while, he fails to see that he's becoming exactly what he hates—maybe even more extreme than the people he's targeting. We're only pointing this out to him, for his own sake, to show him that he's turning into his own opposite, and that his position of power might cost him his "peace of mind" (because, you know, everything comes back around to those who act this way).

Anyway, I just hope he sees what I'm talking about, for his own good...

If my seniority on this Reddit—specifically on this sub—actually counts for anything, then I’m calling on it now. Not to hurt the feelings of the younger users, mind you, but just to make it clear: the constant bickering between users isn't why I'm walking away. People can focus on the secondary stuff if they want, and yeah, maybe staying silent is less "useful" than posting, but the drama among users isn't the reason I'm boycotting this place.

Let’s not mince words here. I am boycotting this because of the deliberate, systematic discrimination based on faith being carried out by the moderators—specifically rowdyhawk10. They are targeting members of the modern Salaf movement due to their religious beliefs and outlook... (people who don't agree call them Wahhabis—and I'm only mentioning that to identify a specific group, regardless of what label anyone wants to slap on them)

This has nothing to do with my personal chats with any particular user, whether they follow Salafism or not. It’s about the fact that there is a conscious, unfair effort to stifle their presence here—even though, honestly, I don't even agree with all their interpretations and views myself.

Secondly, I’m boycotting the general trend where atheists try to turn the Religion sub-forum into their own little ideological stronghold at any cost. The proof is right there: there are fewer and fewer believers left in the Religion section (which is supposed to serve them, by the way). And it’s not because they lack "arguments"—it's because the insults being thrown around go way beyond anything remotely decent or human. (Okay, there are exceptions, sure).
Now, look, I'm not saying we should kick the atheists out of the Religion sub. No. I'm saying something needs to be done about the culture of conversation here. Nobody comes here to act as a punching bag for someone else's frustrations. To show you how ridiculous this is, just try opening a thread in the 'Science' sub titled 'Evolution is a myth based on scientific evidence' (just as an example)... either the thread gets nuked immediately or it gets moved back to 'Religion,' making 'Religion' look like some kind of trash bin for those people. On the flip side, as a total paradox that proves my point, you have the 'Atheism' topic pinned right there in the Religion sub.

Everything I’m laying out here is happening systematically and intentionally to turn this sub into anything *but* what it's actually meant to be. Basically, the Religion sub is slowly sinking into the mud of the entire forum. And when you add the fact that Josh is trying to systematically "cleanse" the "Wahhabis" from that mud—who are believers, no matter how people perceive them, and therefore deserve the basic rights afforded to everyone in this sub—it turns out this isn't a sub "for religion" at all. It's a private playground for the moderators, using their power to push their own agendas. Whether that's an agenda of "modernization" (where religion is just a tool for their specific worldview), pushing pro-gay ideology, or pushing secularization under the guise of "human rights." These moderators judge a user's value solely based on whether they fit their worldview. If they do, they look the other way and let "insults" slide (just look at the complaint from Tyler Scott3). But if you don't fit their mold, they discriminate against you—banning you, etc.
This sub has never seen worse moderation than it is seeing right now.

Since the goal seems to be driving believers out of the space that should belong to them (I mean, the sub is called 'Religion,' not 'Ideology') while keeping the "moderates" around, I—as a "moderate"—feel for everyone who has been treated unfairly here. I’m sacrificing myself because every other way of handling this—negotiations, talking it out—has proven to be completely useless. That is why I am boycotting. Until things change, there is no point in posting. For things to change, the moderators need to admit they've messed up. That’s all I’m asking. I'm not calling for a revolution or trying to "topple the government," I'm just asking the "powers that be" to guarantee that people can write freely without having their religious feelings trampled on.

rowdyhawk10, man, props to you. Keep tearing it up while everyone else is busy hating. It’s like the wolves just swallowed Joseph whole.

_______

Whoever decides to follow those who have lost their way, he
will only end up hitting a dead end, losing his mind in the process.

Go out there and be fierce toward the non-believers,*
lay the very earth upon the hearts of your enemies.

Watch out for those who don't share your views—be sharp with them.
Don't act like a fox; be more like a lion.

If you act like a fox, lurking in the shadows, watch out that others don't
get let down by you,
because that’s a thorn in their side, and thorns are nothing but trouble.

Lull them to sleep with the rustling grass, because the wolves are hungry,
and those wolves are the enemies of Joseph. **

_____
Mesnevi, 123-127
...................................
* commentary on verse 48:29
** commentary on verse 12:13
_____

I'm done posting on Reddit for a while—joining everyone else in the boycott.

Later.🙂

Scott Nguyen2, thanks for clearing that up, but honestly, you aren't the only one pointing this out... people keep talking about this "passionate quest," or some "intense energy," or "persistence," or even "fanaticism"—but if you ask me, they're all totally missing the mark. It’s because they’re just reacting to the concept of FOLLY. See, the American word "FOLLY" carries a weight that our local terms just don't quite hit. In English, a highly educated, Ivy League type can still commit an act of pure FOLLY, whereas in other languages, that kind of word is usually reserved for someone who's just plain dim-witted—you know, the uneducated types. That difference in potential behind FOLLY is what provides the actual driving force... and that energy is what makes me want to go "this guy + half a guy," which might be a joke, but sometimes it's dead serious...

Look, I really didn't mean anything by it in a negative way. I remember being on an old message board back in the day, following these deep science debates where the FOLLY scientists were saying stuff almost identical to what the FOLLY philosophers say—it was all about the origins of life, whether everything came from matter and all that jazz.

Anyway, you've got a pretty massive "momentum" when it comes to the info you drop, and you tend to lean on analogies quite a bit, which is totally fine by me.

Just keep doing your thing!

Scott Nguyen2, what the hell is that supposed to mean? A guy and a half?

A guy and a half...🙂
Total nonsense.

You were clearly caught up in the moment when you mistook ironbadger31’s PM for a book title—or whatever that was... just lost in thought, I guess.

See, I think anyone who gets "swept up" in something—and I don't mean that in a bad way, really—is basically obsessed. And honestly? I think that kind of obsession is the only way a person actually rises above their own mediocrity... the only way to truly become a "guy and a half."🙂

The people who don't get "swept up" usually just dismiss that drive as "fanaticism," but let's be real—most of them don't even grasp the conversation. Or maybe they're just too lazy to actually think for themselves, preferring to rely on those little nuggets of "instant wisdom" they keep in their pockets... just like our tiny little "Internet gods" who act like they have all the answers.

hollowpilot9, man, you're my kind of person...🙂

Man, Hrvoje, you are seriously exhausting... just a total pain in my neck. Honestly, what am I even supposed to do now that my entire sense of self is hanging by a thread based on your little assessment? I’m absolutely doomed—there’s no way I’m making it into the third round at this rate. Just great... unbelievable...
Like I said before—and I really mean this—all that crap you’re trying to pin on me? It’s gonna come right back to haunt you. Honestly... you reap what you sow, right? You’re judging me by those twisted standards, but eventually, you’re gonna have to stand before that same damn court yourself. Your own judgment is gonna be your undoing...
I thought you were trying to "broaden our horizons" with this post, but honestly? It smells like a total copy-paste job. And then there’s you—sitting there acting like you need to "categorize" everything... give me a break! Who do you think you are, some judge? A lawyer? A mediator? Seriously, if I ever needed a judge, I'd look somewhere else... definitely not here.🙂 ).

1. Do you honestly believe the entire Quran is the word of God received by Muhammad from God (including Sharia laws)?

First off—and this is huge—I make a massive distinction between the core Quranic message and the countless interpretations of Sharia law. Seriously, there are so many different schools of thought when it comes to interpreting that law... they aren't even the same thing!

The Quran is basically guidance sent to the Messenger of God, Muhammad, to confirm the truth of previous books. It recognizes all of God's former Messengers without making any distinctions between them, which leads people to perform good deeds as a way to prove their faith in God. Plus, it constantly asks people to actually *think*—to look at the signs of God in nature, in science, and everything else out there...
It literally "challenges" anyone who doubts that the Quran is God's word to try and produce a Book just like it (without calling upon God as a witness, obviously), or to find a single contradiction within its pages.

The Quran is a Message and a Guide for humanity so we don't lose our way—it was sent to Muhammad, it's been preserved, and it's just packed with wisdom.

So, yeah, stop comparing apples to oranges here. There are wildly different interpretations of the Quran versus Sharia law, and they are definitely not identical.

And if you're asking me about the rules laid out in the Quran regarding daily life? They're perfectly fine and clear, and they bring real good to the people who actually follow them.

Man, Hrvoje Vukčić Americanć, you really have some next-level subjective standards when it comes to judging people's character...
"The very court you judge by will be the one that judges you," right?
🙂

I don't have any "dogmas"—though, wait, would calling my own stance an "absolute" make it a dogma? Someone might wonder about that... but honestly, that's just playing word games... I just "feel" it deeply in my gut. When it comes to faith, it isn't just about what you believe—it’s about how you actually live your life. That’s my private business, my soul, and the people who actually know me get that. Here, we're just "discussing" certain themes.