Laura Loomer banned from Twitter after criticizing Ilhan Omar

Not a religion? How?

 

islam is a "deen" … a system of governance
DEFINITION of DIN. Din or deen is an Arabic word often mistranslated as “creed” or “religion”. “Din” is a word that features heavily in islam. Both mainstream and reformist muslim writers take the word ‘deen’ to mean an all-encompassing WAY OF LIFE carried out under the auspices of allah’s purpose as expressed in the Qur’an and hadiths. As one ‘progressive’ muslim writer puts it, far from being a private aspect of life discretely carried out in the mosque, “islam is Dīn, a complete way of life”.
The term Dīn gained popularity in Arabia and the Greater Middle East after the advent of islam. The term has Semitic cognates including the Hebrew “dīn” (דין), Aramaic dīnā (דִּינָא), Amharic dañä (ዳኘ) and Ugaritic dyn. It may be the root of the common Semitic word Madīnah (city), and of Midian, a geographical place and a people mentioned in the Bible and in the qur’an. ME-DIN-A is literally ‘the place of governance’ as the capital of the empire of Arabia.
The Hebrew term “דין”, transliterated as “dīn”, means either “law” or “judgment”. In the Kabbalah of Judaism, the term can, alongside “Gevurah” (cognate to the Arabic “Jabaarah”), refer to “power” and “judgment”. In ancient Israel, the term featured heavily in administrative and legal proceedings i.e. Bet Din, literally “the house of judgment,” the ancient building block of the Jewish legal system. Thus, Arabic Dīn does not simply mean “religion” or “faith”, but may in a broad sense refer to “governance”.
It has been said that the word Dīn appears in as many as 79 verses in the qur’an, but because there is no exact English translation of the term, its precise definition has been the subject of some misunderstanding and disagreement. Consequently, the term is often mistranslated in parts of the qur’an as “religion”. However, in the qur’an itself, the act of submission to God is always referred to as Dīn rather than as Madhhab (مذهب), which is the Arabic word for “religion”
In addition to the two broad usages referred to so far, of sovereignty on the one hand and submission on the other, others have noted that the term Dīn is also widely used in translations of the qur’an in a third sense. Most famously in its opening chapter, al-Fātiḥah, the term is translated in almost all English translations as “judgment”:
K.1.4. transliterated as “Maliki yawmi ad-Dīni,” and (usually) translated as “Master of the Day of Judgment”.

 

How do you know that Twitter "didn’t have that context when first reading it?"

So then there will likely be people at Twitter with a CONSERVATIVE subconscious bias?

 

It is still a recognised religion though isn't it?

 

Obviously the moderation process will be that if a tweet is flagged, be it by a user or some automated system, the content will be sent to a moderator to review. At that point, all they will have is that content without any wider context. They may have the opinion to investigate the poster in more detail (though it’d be questionable whether they should) but they won’t automatically have any information beyond the content and username (maybe) at the outset of the process.

Subconscious bias will be too complex and varied and shifting to be given such simplistic labels (I’d argue human beings are too complex and variable to be given such simplistic labels but that’s a wider point).

 

Mistakenly, yes...although many think of it just as an ideology, with a religious component....

 

Min. Farrakhan made a hate speech against, termites, therefore Twitter should not have banned him. He plainly said he's not an anti-Semite. Only wicked, evil people will try to turn that into something else.

No matter how much people try to delude to his intent and fleece his words, it still will not change how his statement is not anti-Jewish. Therefore it's very good that Twitter used an open-mind in his case.

 

It was based on religion to attack Ohmar.

 

Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong and... wrong.

Clearly, you haven't looked at all.

"Noting" an opinion that "freedoms extend into commerce and association" is ... noting an opinion. Nothing more.

Your inability to support your opinion, or support your contention with others' opinions, speaks loud and clear.

You can't.

 

If there was more than one subconscious bias at Twitter, then why is it only conservatives that are banned or suspended?

 

I very much doubt it is, there are just a handful of "conservatives" who make lots of noise about it (remember that 99% of Twitter users, including those who will get moderated or banned, aren't famous in any way). It could also be that those labelled as "conservative" have different behaviours on line which bring them in to conflict with the general rules more often or they're less adept at running that delicate like.

You're still working on your (biased ) perception of the actions of Twitter based on a limited view of the evidence. You've not even backed up the claim that only "conservatives" are banned or even that more "conservatives" are banned and even if you did, that wouldn't be evidence of an actively discriminatory policy by the company which remains the original unproven claim.

 

Why would they have different behaviours just because they are labelled as "conservatives?"

I'm not saying that there is PROOF, but there is CERTAINLY EVIDENCE!

 

No & etc.

Much looking, yes.

Still ignoring it I see...

Unwillingness, and indeed loud & clear, but methinks many are lending deaf ears to the message.

I have.

 

It's the other way around. They're labelled based on their behaviour. I doubt every user who gets that label (or ones like it), even those who apply it to themselves, actually hold the political opinions traditionally associated with it; there are all sorts of trolls and fakes out there after all. I’m certain that most of the people who do hold those political positions don’t get the label, because they either don’t engage in a lot of political discussion or do so in less direct and extreme ways.

Then maybe you should have opened with that rather than the hollow assertions of the OP. I guess it depends of whether your focus is to support the individuals you agree with or to ensure businesses behave correctly in general.

 

By acknowledging it predates Islam by centuries, it can not be that the religion influenced the culture.... since the culture was already there.

because it's a CULTURAL THING! lol
That's why Christians and Jews do it there too.

Dito for the Muslims.

 

The FGM thing is aimed at her ethnic background, not religion.

 

No you haven't.

Not a single shred of evidence supporting your opinion.

The glaring absence of which renders your opinions null and void.

 

Incorrect.

Mountains.

Completely ridiculous conclusion; monumentally absurd.

 

How do you know that?

 

The culture is already there, but how does this mean can it cannot be adopted by a religion?

Incorrect. FGM is mentioned in some Hadiths.

 

What "hollow assertions?"

 

Ah, still no evidence. Not even evidence of your evidence.

 

Because FGM has nothing to do with religion. The ancient Egyptians did it = it predates Islam!
And Christians and Jews do it too. It's a cultural thing that's done primarily by people from the same ethnic North-East-Africans.

 

It's not in the Quran, it's not in the Torah, it's not in the bible. All 3 religions do or did it, and even some other African tribal stuff do or did it too. Ergo,.. it's a cultural thing since it predates the main religions and is done by rival religions. You got a country like Egypt, where the constitution declares the Sharia law to be the main source of legislation. They banned FGM there.

If you know that, than you know it's says that it's not required. In fact, the Al-Azhar Supreme Council of Islamic Research ruled that it's not.
So I am correct.