- We don’t use references on talk pages (including the saloon), it leads to formatting issues. Christopher (talk) 21:27, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Because of your edits to and the wiki, Autopatrolled has been added to your user rights. This lets you bypass most of the abuse filters, bypass the CAPTCHA, and edit more frequently. If you have questions,
bleat ask away.
We hope you enjoy your newfound POWER — and these external tools:
- Google Scholar Button (Chrome, Firefox) searches your highlighted text in Google Scholar. Easily check academic citations!
- web.archive.org and archive.is can save permanent copies of webpages. Never lose a crank website or racist Tweet ever again! Plutocow (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
A simple request
Hey there! Please make sure you put the reference after the punctuation, not before. I notice you're consistently putting references before the punctuation, which is wrong. LongStylus (talk) 19:47, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
Because of your edits to and the wiki,
wizard Sysop has been added to your user rights. Feel free to let your newfound POWER course through your veins. Once the high wears off, see RationalWiki:Sysop guide for more information. If you have questions, bleat ask away. GeeJayK (talk) 16:22, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
I haven't gotten around to telling you this, but I did post a lengthy reply to your post back in September in Talk:Islamophobia Watch, several weeks after you made your post, so I figure my reply is easily missed (also ping doesn't work on my end due to a bug with custom signatures). I basically disagreed with the gist of your post, deeming it too simplistic and thus problematic. I disclose I sort of went devil's advocate here. I'm no fan of religion myself but if I feel something is inaccurate or too incomplete, I'll say it. --It's-a me, 🎄LeftyGreenMario!🎄(Mod) 03:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)
- There is a lot to talk about because it is such a broad statement, but I don't think it is unfair to say that you shouldn't ever consider Islam to be a force of evil. If we are looking at the whole throughout history, it's still not arguable that Islam is a force for good, or evil, depending on what you want out of the world. Maybe we can look at this from a modern perspective? I don't think Dawkins was really talking about historical Islam when he was saying those things, but rather in a modern context against specific things like evolution being put into schools, Islam (as well as Christianity) has stood in the way of societal progress and stunts its growth. And that even if Islam or Christianity did things in the past, they are not doing that right now to solve these particular problems.
- So we don't see policy makers of the Islamic faith looking back to their own past regarding science either and saying this is fine, evolution simply gets banned. That's not even characteristic of old Islam. It's like saying a liberal today is interchangeable with a liberal in 1800. Relative to the times, Islam could be seen as progressive, but is it like that today in Dawkin's context? And then we could talk about the absolute regressive nature of LGBT acceptance in Islamic countries, what 'good' a few hundred years ago justifies these people using their faith to abhorrently abuse people today? Doesn't that justify at least some name calling when it comes to evil?