|
...but to be fair Mohammed wasn't targeting a particular race with his slavery.
Take a minute to digest this comment of yours, and then answer me this question...
What's worse? Slavery or racism?
Besides, you're not being fair. He discriminated against people based on their religion. He enslaved non-Muslims, those who would not convert. I don't see why that's any better than pure racism.
I didn't know the left was a fan of Mohammed. Certainly not the educated left.
The left are quick to defend Islam from the "racists".
I don't expect Briish people alive today to be ashamed of those sins any more than I expect Muslims to.
Nor do I. But I do agree with removing statues of slave traders, preferably through legal channels. We shouldn't celebrate these people. That's not whitewashing history, it's just refusing to celebrate the darker chapters.
It's a bit different with Muslims though. Their entire belief system is built of the moral superiority of one person. It's not about being ashamed of what Mohammed did, it's being ashamed of personally considering this person to be the epitome of morality. Imagine if it emerged Jesus kept slaves, what impact would that have on Christianity?
I wouldn't pull down Churchill either; he was a product of his times and you'd have a hard time finding someone who wasn't racist back then tbf.
Pulling down Churchill statues would cause way too much division here and I'd expect things to kick off if it happened. I appreciate he has a shady past, but he defeated Hitler, of course we're going to celebrate him. I'm sure all sides agree that Hitler was a cunt, with the obvious exception of the far right, and it's not the far right that want to tear down statues of Churchill. Strange that, seeing as he's the opponent of their messiah, while the baying mobs of today just think he was racist.
|