Muslims and terrorists

[Redbar]

If one is careful to distinguish between people and ideas (Muslims vs. Islam), I think there's an awful lot that you can objectively criticize about the tenets of Islam, without comparing it to other religions or delving into racism (Islam is a set of ideas, not a race).

Muhammad was a murderer, a warlord, and a pedophile. [Muhammad said] “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah. Do not be deceitful with the spoils; do not be treacherous, nor mutilate nor kill children.” (Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 992). He consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only 9 years old! Though he was clearly a charismatic and great leader, I must question his position as role model.

Islam also does very little to prohibit murder. The only passage I have heard to this effect is Quran 5:32, which states: "“If anyone slays a person, it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people." This is, of course, ambiguous at best and conflicts with other passages of the book, such as Quran 8:60 "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into (the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies and others besides, whom ye may not know."

There are many other passages in the Quran which are relevant, but in the interest of brevity, I'll omit them here.

Even the practical history of Islam is littered with violence (I am aware that Christianity has a great deal of horrible events in its history. In keeping with my thesis of examining Islam independent of other religions, I will ignore Christianity). Mecca and Medina were functionally conquered at the point of a sword. This was the pattern of Islamic expansion until the Moorish armies were turned back by Charles Martel at the Battle of Tours in 732.

Islam even includes a sharply detailed philosophy of conquest, including developing the concepts of Dhimmis (conquered infidels under Islamic rule) and the Jizya (a tax paid by conquered infidels to the Islamic overlords...that is, unless the conquered wish to become Muslim). Concepts such as these helped make Islamic expansion one of the more successful sustained military campaigns of the last two thousand years. Combine this with the fact that Islam prescribes the death penalty for apostasy (converting away from Islam), and it's no wonder that most countries with Islamic majorities have almost no protected religious minorities.

In the modern age, one can anecdotally see that Islam conflicts with its neighbors everywhere it has neighbors. In western China, the Uyghurs are a constant thorn in the side of the Han majority, with violent riots in 2009 causing the internet in the country to shut down briefly. In Egypt, the Coptic Christians are more and more frequently being violently attacked. Pakistan has executed many people under ethically reprehensible laws regarding blasphemy. These kinds of conflicts are rare between other religions. Buddhists committing suicide bombings against Christians? Hindu blasphemy laws carrying the death penalty in India? Adherents of Shinto declaring a fatwa of violence against Daoists? These things are unheard of.

Until Islam opens itself up to correction, until the bad parts of Mohammed's character are openly reviled, until the Jizya and Dhimmis are but embarrassing relics of a forgotten past, until apostasy does not carry the death penalty in Saudi Arabia, until there is no country where you can be killed for preaching the modern relevance of Buddha or the Tao Te Ching, Islam cannot command my respect. Muslims have my respect by virtue of our common humanity, and I would never advocate violence, oppression, or discrimination against them. However, I stand philosophically opposed to Islam.

Very rational post.

 

[ACamp1900]

Please elaborate. I made a generic comparison... what's the issue?

You said Christains condone murder of this and that... While complaining about how Muslims are painted... If you can't see the problem there, beyond the fact you are just flat wrong... Then there is no sense continuing with you.

 

[ACamp1900]

You can also take parts of the New Testament out of context as well.

You can take anything out of context...

 

[IrishJayhawk]

You can take anything out of context...

I think that's sort of his point.

 

[ACamp1900]

I think that's sort of his point.

No, his point was to defend Muslims for things that do happen while attacking Christians on things that don't.... If that wasn't it then his point was extremely poorly presented.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

You said Christains condone murder of this and that... While complaining about how Muslims are painted... If you can't see the problem there, beyond the fact you are just flat wrong... Then there is no sense continuing with you.

If you think that I believe that Christianity condones murder... you're right, there is no sense in continuing.

 

[MNIrishman]

pkt: That's a totally legitimate point, but an issue I have with that fact, despite its historical normativity, is that Islam holds Muhammad as the ultimate literal role model. Thus today we get stories like this: Nujood Ali Picture – Yemen Photo - National Geographic Photo of the Day

 

[IrishJayhawk]

No, his point was to defend Muslims for things that do happen while attacking Christians on things that don't.... If that wasn't it then his point was extremely poorly presented.

I won't speak for Lou, but I think that's what pkt was saying...i.e., you can take anything out of context.

 

[ACamp1900]

Christianity does, however, condone killing homosexuals, adulterers, etc... no?

If you think that I believe that Christianity condones murder... you're right, there is no sense in continuing.

Sorry for taking your words as they are written...


My bad.

 

[pkt77242]

You can take anything out of context...

Ok, Timothy 1 2:12 " I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet." Holy **** that looks like Paul is practicing a little misogyny. Does that make Christians misogynistic? I generally don't think so (thoug there are some sects that take it pretty far).

 

[ACamp1900]

My intention is not to vilify Christianity but only to point out the hypocrisy of calling Islam a religion of violence while ignoring the violent words found in our own Bible.

The assumption here is that those calling Muslims this and that are Christian.... No?

 

[ACamp1900]

Ok, Timothy 1 2:12 " I do not permit a woman to teach or to assume authority over a man;[a] she must be quiet." Holy **** that looks like Paul is practicing a little misogyny.

You realize I agree with you, as I have... Right?? Also, never have I .... Ever attacked Islam in the ways being laid out here... In this thread or otherwise...

My beef is with bs statements about my faith, in a thread that defends another from assumed attacks again, by those of mine.

Soooooo??

 

[In Lou I Trust]

Sorry for taking your words as they are written...


My bad.

Apology accepted. That was meant as sarcasm, not to be taken literally.

 

[ACamp1900]

Apology accepted. That was meant as sarcasm, not to be taken literally.

If that's the case you really should have made that clear... As it was, it reads very literal.

Either way... Have a good one.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

The assumption here is that those calling Muslims this and that are Christian.... No?

No assumptions made on my part. While fishing through my posts in this thread did you find the one where I brought Christianity up first?

 

[irishpat183]

Why are some using the "words in the bible" as a comeback to Muslims that are ACTUALLY CARRYING OUT ATTACKS IN THE NAME OF THEIR BOOK?

When's the last time a Christian set down a bomb in a crowd full of innocent people and walked away...in the name of Jesus?

Our military has it's own reasons, and it ain't the bible. Therefore, you can't use that example and say that "Christianity is a religion of violence" due to "drones" and other bullshit you pointed out.

Sheesh. Talk about ignorant.

 

[Zwidmanio]

Those people have no right to complain about anyone being mis-characterized then IMO if they use those feelings, interpretations to paint Christans... Flat ignorant.


Let me be clear, Mosaic Law has NOTHING to do with Christianity other providing a perspective...

Was this edited? Also, where was I trying to "mis-characterize" Christian belief? I thought that my statement was fairly clear that I was addressing a perception that some people have, but perhaps I should have fleshed it out some more so it would not be misunderstood. I just thought there was an interesting parallel between the discussion in this thread regarding perceptions and misconceptions about Islam and the fact that there are some that believe that the Bible, and thus Christianity, might condone the killing of those that commit sodomy and adultery.

In both cases, the problem lies with, as you've pointed out, ignorance of the actual beliefs and practices of the majority of those that practice a certain religion. There have always been, and always will be, those that take religion and twist the meanings behind the teachings to use it to justify their agendas, on all sides. That doesn't mean that snippets of teachings or words taken from religious texts are representative of the beliefs and/or practices of adherents.

 

[irishpat183]

And another point...our media doesn't help these situations. And no, it's not just "Fox". The entire MSM is guilty of fear mongering.

 

[ACamp1900]

I agree with that... zmanio.... Again, my point is some sit here and defend one religion while actively mis characterizing another... That set me off... And those actions aren't proving anyone's hypocrisy but theirs....


I have and will defend most Muslims and Islam for the most part... Same with Christianity...

Anyway, moving on.

 

[IrishinTN]

Christianity does, however, condone killing homosexuals, adulterers, etc... no?

Absolutely not? How did you come up with that? Homosexuals are openly accepted as is anyone in a Christian church. However, interpretations on scripture differ as to accepting homosexuality. But nowhere does Jesus condone the wanton killing of an individual due to sin.

It is the act (no matter what act, not only homosexuality) that is not condoned in Christianity. That includes ALL manner of sin. All of us need to turn towards Christ in our religion so that we can become more like him. That is a daily (and sometimes hourly) process. No one is perfect, so we need to accept everyone the same. We all need to focus on our own personal relationship to Jesus Christ. Not stick our noses in someone else's.

Other than the Westboro folks, you do not see our preachers having sermons on killing people who don't believe like we do. You see lectures on being peaceful and spreading that peace to others.

 

[Zwidmanio]

Why are some using the "words in the bible" as a comeback to Muslims that are ACTUALLY CARRYING OUT ATTACKS IN THE NAME OF THEIR BOOK?

When's the last time a Christian set down a bomb in a crowd full of innocent people and walked away...in the name of Jesus?

Our military has it's own reasons, and it ain't the bible. Therefore, you can't use that example and say that "Christianity is a religion of violence" due to "drones" and other bullshit you pointed out.

Sheesh. Talk about ignorant.

Goodness, to make it perfectly clear, and I'm pretty sure I speak for others here as well, I don't think anybody was trying to attack the Bible and Christianity to justify Muslims carrying out attacks. The point was that any religion's teachings can, and have been, twisted around by those with power and agendas. This is why it is important to try and have a better understanding of a religion before making hard and fast claims as to what that religion is all about.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

I agree with that... zmanio.... Again, my point is some sit here and defend one religion while actively mis characterizing another... That set me off... And those actions aren't proving anyone's hypocrisy but theirs....


I have and will defend most Muslims and Islam for the most part... Same with Christianity...

Anyway, moving on.

Your faith has marred your judgement. I was playing devil's advocate trying to make a point that not everything found in religious text is to be considered the end all be all or that it pertains to today. Just as you have pointed out that the Old Testament "has nothing to do with Christianity" I was pointing out that not all of the teachings of Islam are to be considered pertinent to today's Muslims. I am not attacking Christianity... I just want those that look at Islam as some evil book to look at how their own book can be taken out of context.

 

[pkt77242]

Goodness, to make it perfectly clear, and I'm pretty sure I speak for others here as well, I don't think anybody was trying to attack the Bible and Christianity to justify Muslims carrying out attacks. The point was that any religion's teachings can, and have been, twisted around by those with power and agendas. This is why it is important to try and have a better understanding of a religion before making hard and fast claims as to what that religion is all about.

End of Thread. Well said

 

[AvesEvo]

Why are some using the "words in the bible" as a comeback to Muslims that are ACTUALLY CARRYING OUT ATTACKS IN THE NAME OF THEIR BOOK?

When's the last time a Christian set down a bomb in a crowd full of innocent people and walked away...in the name of Jesus?

Our military has it's own reasons, and it ain't the bible. Therefore, you can't use that example and say that "Christianity is a religion of violence" due to "drones" and other bullshit you pointed out.

Sheesh. Talk about ignorant.

If you only want to include bombs, 2011 and eight people died.

 

[IrishJayhawk]

Goodness, to make it perfectly clear, and I'm pretty sure I speak for others here as well, I don't think anybody was trying to attack the Bible and Christianity to justify Muslims carrying out attacks. The point was that any religion's teachings can, and have been, twisted around by those with power and agendas. This is why it is important to try and have a better understanding of a religion before making hard and fast claims as to what that religion is all about.

^this

 

[JughedJones]

1. Muhammad was a warlord... this is a fact. This is not debatable. When the top guy in your religion basically gained his power due to war/killing his enemies... and that's the guy you're supposed to emulate... it's intellectually dishonest to say that Islam is not a "violent" religion. Compare and contrast this to Jesus who was the epitome of non-violence or the Buddha. It's a completely different paragon.

2. Almost every major terrorist attack in the United States in recent memory (10-15 years) was performed by a Muslim and they did it for reasons linking back to their religion... this is why public perception is the way it is. If you had Jews blowing up stuff and saying "I did this for Yahweh", etc. you wouldn't have this perception.

When you look at people who aren't Muslim that have committed terrorist acts in this country... example, Timothy McVeigh, who was raised Roman Catholic I think... I can't think of a single time where they cite "religion" as their reason for the act. It's always another motive. At least I can't think of an example in the past 10-15 years of someone who has blown something up "for Jesus."

In short... it baffles me that people are so "offended" by the link made by the general public to Islam. Of course 99.9% of Muslims aren't terrorists. But when every single religiously motivated terrorist attack in the United States is committed by a Muslim... to try to refute the correlation is ridiculous.

Give me a break. I won't even bother listing what's wrong with this statement. I'm sure others already handled it.

 

[magogian]

Does Christianity openly accept homosexuals now? Are priests no longer accused of molestation and pedophilia?

Lol, what does that have to have do with it? We are talking about violence.

 

[AvesEvo]

Lol, what does that have to have do with it? We are talking about violence.

Isn't molestation a form of violence?

 

[IrishLax]

To circle back to the OP.... the discussion was supposed to be about:

"how Islam has become synonymous with terrorism this past decade."

Frankly, nothing about the middle ages, inquisition, drone attacks, etc. have ANYTHING to do with how the public perceives Islam or why it has 'become synonymous with terrorism.' I really think I answered it in my OP... the reason the American public draws that conclusion is obvious. For the past decade or so, every single major act of terrorism committed indiscriminately against the general American civilian public by a religious group/fanatic/zealot has been done by a MUSLIM person.

This isn't debatable. There are no Jewish, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, etc. fanatics who have attempted/succeeded in multiple act of indiscriminate mass murder of American civilians.

It also isn't debatable that the only religious group with organized terrorist cells who aim to regularly attack the general American public do it in the name of Islam.

It also isn't debatable that 99.9%+ of Muslims are not terrorist.

But it's frankly a really stupid question/discussion to have on "why" Islam = terrorism to the general American public. The answer is obvious. The minute Westboro Baptist Church starts blowing up buildings or committing mass murder "Baptists" would also get associated with terrorism. It doesn't matter if it is "wrong" or "ignorant" or even if you think Muslims are "justified"... it is what it is and it won't change except through time... time in which American civilians aren't targeted for mass murder by people who claim to be doing so in the name of Islam.

 

[IrishLax]

Give me a break. I won't even bother listing what's wrong with this statement. I'm sure others already handled it.

Try. There's only 2 points. Nothing I said is even remotely close to inaccurate.