More Islamic Violence... Sigh

[GMan1976]

^^ The question at hand is, what do you think we should do about it? After repeated attempts to get you to add substantively to the discussion, I'm afraid I must conclude that you ARE, in fact, just like the Democrats. Condemning the status quo serves no purpose unless you offer something in its place.

.[/B]

Unfortunately, there's not much that can be done. My condemnation is not of the status quo of American "policy" so much as condemnation of the status quo about our (gen population) relaxed views towards what this religion teaches it's followers. I think that Islam should be lumped in the "cult" bracket and treated as such. However, the sheer quantity of it's members precludes it from that status. Would we treat "satanists" the same way (edit note: I believe in neither God nor Satan...I think science has proven enough over time to debunk faith-based philosophy).

Anyway, I don't offer any sort of solution that would work realistically. Honestly speaking, do I think that if the Islamic religion were to automatically disappear tomorrow and all of it's followers stricken with amnesia to their faith that this world would probably be a better place? Yes. But don't think that means I advocate genocide. That is ludicrous. As I said, no realistic solutions can fix this problem as it stands today....
but I don't have to sit back and make excuses for these people or their beliefs and I sure as hell don't have to respect them in my heart.

 

[GMan1976]

^^ You can cherry-pick scripture from ANY religion and show anything you want. I could do the same with the Bible, Talmud, or Vedas. ...Again, by your standard, if I presented an Old Testament verse which hinted at violence, it would follow that every Jew and Christian in the world was a violent extremist. That's clearly not the case - give it a rest.
[

Ok Brett... find me ONE passage in the Talmud or New Testament that SPECIFICALLY orders God's FOLLOWERS to commit violence. I'm no theologian, but I am guessing that you won't have too easy a time...

 

[Brett327]

^^ To demonstrate the the uselessness of this exercise of cherry-picking scripture, I'll instead list a single example of where peace is extolled as a virtue in Islam:

Suri 2-11
When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"

Now, using your logic, Muslims MUST obey this Suri because it is the literal word of God, thus there can never be violence from a Muslim because they obey every single word in scripture, right? Yes, it's ridiculous.

My point here is that scripture is full of conflicting and contradictory themes, so highlighting any single passage, then attempting to draw general conclusions about the entire body of work is a bit silly.

I think you confuse the idea of political correctness with my appreciation for how the world actually is. I hate both PC and extremism, wherever it lies. I'm just not blinded by a fundamental misunderstanding of the world, as you seem to be. Your vision of reality is not reflected in the millions of Muslims who go about their daily lives without giving so much as a thought to violence or hatred of the West. I can only conclude that you need to get out more.

Brett

 

[HighDimension]

Instead of a long, defensive rebuttal, let's hear your plan for world peace.

Brett

Take over the world?

 

[GMan1976]

^^ To demonstrate the the uselessness of this exercise of cherry-picking scripture, I'll instead list a single example of where peace is extolled as a virtue in Islam:

Suri 2-11
When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"

Now, using your logic, Muslims MUST obey this Suri because it is the literal word of God, thus there can never be violence from a Muslim because they obey every single word in scripture, right? Yes, it's ridiculous.

My point here is that scripture is full of conflicting and contradictory themes, so highlighting any single passage, then attempting to draw general conclusions about the entire body of work is a bit silly.
Brett

wrong again brett... you take that sura out of context.... read:

2:9 They think to beguile Allah and those who believe, and they beguile none save themselves; but they perceive not.
2:10 In their hearts is a disease, and Allah increaseth their disease. A painful doom is theirs because they lie. Allah has sickened their hearts. A painful doom is theirs because they lie.
2:11 And when it is said unto them: Make not mischief in the earth, they say: We are peacemakers only.
2:12 Are not they indeed the mischief-makers ? But they perceive not.

Your quote 2:11 is referring to those that are non-believers. I have read the
Koran cover to cover.... It is not as contradictory as you would like to believe. Nice try on that one.

 

[Stubby]

Suri 2-11
When it is said to them: "Make not mischief on the earth," they say: "Why, we only Want to make peace!"
Now, using your logic, Muslims MUST obey this Suri because it is the literal word of God, thus there can never be violence from a Muslim because they obey every single word in scripture, right? Yes, it's ridiculous.

You do make your point that cherry picking scripture is pointless, because you completely misrepresent the scripture that you have quoted. The "they" that is being referred to are the "non believers".

[2.8] And there are some people who say: We believe in Allah and the last day; and they are not at all believers.
[2.9] They desire to deceive Allah and those who believe, and they deceive only themselves and they do not perceive.
[2.10] There is a disease in their hearts, so Allah added to their disease and they shall have a painful chastisement because they lied.

Incidentally, I think it is 'Sura', not 'Suri'... looking at your reference in a greater context:

[2.11] And when it is said to them, Do not make mischief in the land, they say: We are but peace-makers.
[2.12] Now surely they themselves are the mischief makers, but they do not perceive.
[2.13] And when it is said to them: Believe as the people believe they say: Shall we believe as the fools believe? Now surely they themselves are the fools, but they do not know.

And later in the same Sura:
[2.190] And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight with you, and do not exceed the limits, surely Allah does not love those who exceed the limits.
[2.191] And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out, and persecution is severer than slaughter, and do not fight with them at the Sacred Mosque until they fight with you in it, but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers.
[2.192] But if they desist, then surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Now, while I think your theology is a bit flawed, I do agree that cherry picking scripture is not the way to understand religious belief. I think a greater discussion could be had at the benevolent / malevolent execution of any religious group or belief, but that conversation is probably too theological for this forum.

Is Islam a malevolent faith? While I do think an argument can be made to support that, it is obvious that there are many practitioners of Islam who do so peacefully. As a Christian, I actually admire the self discipline shown by many Moslems in the daily practice of their faith. The question then becomes, what makes some peaceful while others are incited to violence? and the next question is, why are the peaceful practitioners of Islam not more vocally condemning their violent brethren? This isn't an open condemnation of religious beliefs or of Islam in particular, it is a valid observation and concern, and goes toward what it sounds like we somewhat agree on.... the importance of hearts and minds....

 

[Stubby]

Your quote 2:11 is referring to those that are non-believers...

Darn! You beat me to it!

 

[Brett327]

wrong again brett... you take that sura out of context.... read:

Precisely my point.

Brett

 

[Stubby]

Precisely my point.

That's pretty weak. Is your broader position that GMan is misrepresenting Islam? Is it that you believe Islam (or any religion) cannot be understood because of the apparent subjective interpretation of it's followers? I assume that based on your professed mistrust of all organized religions that you are not actually defending Islam. Maybe you are just arguing for augments sake.

If you really want to get the conversation back on a secular track (or as you put it "add substantively to the discussion"), you promised a post pertaining to the resolve of the American people as it pertains to the broader war on terrorism.....

 

[Brett327]

That's pretty weak. Is your broader position that GMan is misrepresenting Islam? Is it that you believe Islam (or any religion) cannot be understood because of the apparent subjective interpretation of it's followers? I assume that based on your professed mistrust of all organized religions that you are not actually defending Islam. Maybe you are just arguing for augments sake.

If you really want to get the conversation back on a secular track (or as you put it "add substantively to the discussion"), you promised a post pertaining to the resolve of the American people as it pertains to the broader war on terrorism.....

My point is neither to defend Islam (as I personally don't care for it), nor to comment on the interpretation of its followers, but to demonstrate that anyone can pick a random passage of Scripture, then ascribe a meaning to it which serves their particular purposes. After all, that's what the fundamentalists do, why should we allow GMan to get away with the same thing? Bottom line, his approach has been done to death in certain political and journalistic circles to the point of becoming a hackneyed cliché. It is a poor substitute for a real argument and serves to highlight GMan's obvious misunderstandings. He chooses to radically oversimplify a very complex sociological issue: Islam=bad. While he's at it, he might as well equate Jews with being cheap and black people with laziness. It's an intellectually and morally bankrupt position to take.

GMan, you should probably go back to behaving like a Democrat (you know, the whining and complaining part), since you're obviously not equipped to defend your own point of view without resorting to histrionics or blanket prejudice.

Now, back to the Chief's previous point: WRT the American resolve vis a vis the Cold War, you make an interesting point about people's trust in government that I believe has merit. Nevertheless, that attitude changed in the 1960's - a full 30 years before the Cold War was won. It's true that our task would be much easier if our society had a 1950s mentality, but I think our government can and must do a better job selling what needs to be done so that even our politically divided nation will be more supportive. The post 9/11 world has been a completely different political landscape, but the current administration has done a dismal job of communicating its vision both to the American people through the press, as well as to the other branches of Government. All this fuss over the years about issues like torture/interrogation techniques, FISA/wiretapping, USA PATRIOT Act, has been a cancer on the administration and a very tangible impediment to our prosecution of the GWOT. While I can understand the desire to preserve the institutional powers of the executive branch in our pluralistic system, the defiant and unilateral mindset from the Whitehouse (real or perceived), has damaged our Government's ability to move forward on important issues and has unnecessarily politicized the GWOT. Whatever you might think of the Congress, it has to be in the loop and part of the process for a great many of these things. There are appropriate channels and committees where sensitive or covert matters can be addressed so that they don't become fodder for the NYT. I don't want this to become a book, so I'll end here, but will continue on should the discussion warrant it.

Brett

 

[zuggerat]

If we give them the moon do you think they'll all just leave? The Lunar Isamic Republic of Mohammad has a nice ring to it.

 

[scoober78]

Yeah....Gman...you should actually read these texts that you claim to know so much about. Here are some directly from the KJV of the Bible...a religion based on "love". The simple truth is that all of the worlds major religious texts sound like this...to argue otherwise, is to merely show your ignorance.

For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death: he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him.

And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, and utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
[3] Neither shalt thou make marriages with them; thy daughter thou shalt not give unto his son, nor his daughter shalt thou take unto thy son.
[4] For they will turn away thy son from following me, that they may serve other gods: so will the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and destroy thee suddenly.
[5] But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire.

And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.

And the man that lieth with his father's wife hath uncovered his father's nakedness: both of them shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.

A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.

Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people which are round about you;
[15] (For the LORD thy God is a jealous God among you) lest the anger of the LORD thy God be kindled against thee, and destroy thee from off the face of the earth.

Further, if you think that you can understand a religion simply by reading its texts, again, you are sorely mistaken. Reading the Bible, even from cover to cover, will tell you absolutely nothing about the differences between Catholics and Lutherans...or more extreme faiths such as Pentecostals etc...

Religion, at its heart is a human creation...when you understand the people, then you can get somewhere. Frankly, you are having trouble understanding the religion and the people.

 

[Cate]

This analogy is something of a stretch. While I would certainly concede that there are Christians who commit atrocious crimes "in the name of God", the number of Moslems who commit atrocious acts "in the name of Allah" vastly outnumber their Christian counterparts. That is something of a stereotypical statement, I understand. But do you really think it is not supported by statistical fact?

Gee, I dunno. Why don't you provide some, and we'll test your theory?

(If you don't believe WE (Jews, Christians, Hindus, etc) are the pagans, then I don't know what to tell you).

Actually, by definition, Jews and Christians aren't pagans; you're thinking "infidels." But I guess that's what you get looking for literal meaning in a questionable translation (which all of them, by definition, are) of a book written over a thousand years ago.

Hey, I bet I can do that!

[4.90] Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should have certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them.

Which would seem to indicate that Allah, may His bath towels always be soft and fluffy even when He forgets the fabric softener, doesn't give his followers permission to smite the unbelievers if said unbelievers aren't interested in fighting. Now there's a rule I'd love to see followed unquestioningly.

[4.93] And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it, and Allah will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement.

And that one would seem to indicate that Allah, may He never lack for two-for-one coupons when He goes to Quizno's, is very much against the intentional killing of Muslims by other Muslims in, say, roadside bombings, airplane hijackings, suicide bombings, and so on.

This is fun! Now let's look for isolated and contextless passages in other widely-accepted religious texts!

 

[Brett327]

Actually, by definition, Jews and Christians aren't pagans...

That's right. A more learned person than GMan would know that the term Pagans in the Koran refers to the Establishment religious persuasions of the Meccan civilization prior to God's revelation to Muhammad in 610 AD. Islam was a reaction to the idolatry prevalent in that culture and the institutions which derived political and financial gain in maintaining Mecca and the Ka'ba as the center of worship in the Arabian peninsula.

Allah, may His bath towels always be soft and fluffy...

Cate, I think I love you.

Brett

 

[thenuge]

I think many of you will agree that most of the hatred of the US and Western values are a result of ignorance and propaganda. The more effectively we can counter that, the better off we'll be.

Brett

By the reason you use, which I agree with- you would have to say that the mistrust of the Middle East and Middle Eastern "values" are a result of ignorance and propaganda as well. Our Gubment used it in the Cold War and make no mistake, they/we are using it now even though nobody ever seems to bring it up. Oh sh*t, was that classified?

I hate propaganda but if one of them has to prevail, I'd like to see ours do so.