http://forum09.faithfreedom.org/viewtop ... ct#p186250antineoETC wrote:Under the Islamic "caste system" dhimmies are permitted to keep their lives under Islamic rule as long as they pay their jizya and accept a range of discriminatory restrictions on what they can say and do. Why is this state of affairs ONCE ESTABLISHED worse than the abject subjugation experienced by low caste Hindus? That is what I am trying to get at.
It is said that population of sub-continent increased by some 50 million or so due to Islamic rule as the Abrahamic faiths supposedly value quantity of life more than quality.So with lesser population levels,the abject subjugation experienced is likely to be less as constraints of economic prosperity and distribution no longer demand such a subjugation.
They say that two wrongs do not set right something.So Islamic rule cannot be justified based on present day/past abject subjugation of low caste Hindus.If anyone says so then the logic of tu quo que stands justified.
And if the logic of tu quo que is justified then might be Hollywood should stop making films that show the defenders of Christendom as valiant defenders of their way of life.Afterall abject subjugation that the Christian masses are supposed to experience is the same regardless of who rules them be it is the Christian elite or the muslim elite,isn't it?