Muslims and terrorists

[In Lou I Trust]

I am creating this thread in hopes of having an educational discussion about Islam and how it has become synonymous with terrorism this past decade.

I've had many friends on Facebook post inaccurate garbage about Islam and its followers. Islam is NOT a violent religion. One of the biggest challenges for Islam today is a combination of Islamic extremists and ignorant Americans. "Death to all infidels" (as one of my friends posted) is not a pillar of Islamic faith. The 5 pillars are belief, prayer, fasting, giving, and pilgrimage. I'm not here to write a book of a post but was hoping to engage in a conversation with those who may or may not know much about Muslims.

 

[irishbird]

I am creating this thread in hopes of having an educational discussion about Islam and how it has become synonymous with terrorism this past decade.

I've had many friends on Facebook post inaccurate garbage about Islam and its followers. Islam is NOT a violent religion. One of the biggest challenges for Islam today is a combination of Islamic extremists and ignorant Americans. "Death to all infidels" (as one of my friends posted) is not a pillar of Islamic faith. The 5 pillars are belief, prayer, fasting, giving, and pilgrimage. I'm not here to write a book of a post but was hoping to engage in a conversation with those who may or may not know much about Muslims.

Agree 100%

 

[Kak7304]

I am creating this thread in hopes of having an educational discussion about Islam and how it has become synonymous with terrorism this past decade.

I've had many friends on Facebook post inaccurate garbage about Islam and its followers. Islam is NOT a violent religion. One of the biggest challenges for Islam today is a combination of Islamic extremists and ignorant Americans. "Death to all infidels" (as one of my friends posted) is not a pillar of Islamic faith. The 5 pillars are belief, prayer, fasting, giving, and pilgrimage. I'm not here to write a book of a post but was hoping to engage in a conversation with those who may or may not know much about Muslims.

Excellent post. Just as the beliefs of the Westboro Baptist Church are not representative of Christianity, extremists are not representative of most Muslims.

 

[magogian]

Interesting question. How do you determine whether a religion is violent?

For example, do you only look at its religious texts? Would you include the Hadiths and religious traditions?

Or do you look only how its adherents act?

Some combination thereof?

 

[Junkhead]

Excellent post. Just as the beliefs of the Westboro Baptist Church are not representative of Christianity, extremists are not representative of most Muslims.

I agree about the Westboro Baptist, they are disgusting people. But have they blown anyone up either?

 

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

The Qur'an was actually really progressive on women's rights for the time. The whole book is great "poetry" (not sure what else to call it) and if people are so quick to judge a group based on a minority, don't be upset if people start treating y'all like you are NDNation.

 

[IrishLax]

I am creating this thread in hopes of having an educational discussion about Islam and how it has become synonymous with terrorism this past decade.

I've had many friends on Facebook post inaccurate garbage about Islam and its followers. Islam is NOT a violent religion. One of the biggest challenges for Islam today is a combination of Islamic extremists and ignorant Americans. "Death to all infidels" (as one of my friends posted) is not a pillar of Islamic faith. The 5 pillars are belief, prayer, fasting, giving, and pilgrimage. I'm not here to write a book of a post but was hoping to engage in a conversation with those who may or may not know much about Muslims.

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.

 

[nsideirish]

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.

Anti-abortion violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[IrishLax]

Anti-abortion violence - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1 murder listed in the period of time I defined (10-15 years)..... effectively proving my point.

 

[nsideirish]

1 murder listed in the period of time I defined (10-15 years)..... effectively proving my point.

Still many incidents of firebombs, arson, etc. Terrorism does not have to involve death to be considered terrorism.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

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.

Do you know the difference between Shia and Sunni? Do you know where these major groups are located and the differences between what they preach?

 

[IrishLax]

Still many incidents of firebombs, arson, etc. Terrorism does not have to involve death to be considered terrorism.

Sorry, but you're missing the big picture. I'm explaining why the public perception exists the way it does.

You're talking about less than 1 incident per year listed of vandalism/arson/bombing/etc. on that Wikipedia page. Less than 1 incident per year where no one is getting killed IS NOT going to register in the forefront of public concern as a big deal. Why? Because you have 30,000+ cases of arson per year. So this isn't going to stick out.

How many people have died to abortion crazies? 1. And it was a worker, not an innocent bystander.

Now, what if abortion crazies had killed thousands of random innocent bystanders to try to make their point "for Jesus"? Then you would have people thinking the same thing about these Christian groups as they do about Muslims.

 

[IrishLax]

Do you know the difference between Shia and Sunni? Do you know where these major groups are located and the differences between what they preach?

Yes.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

Yes.

So you know that most, if not all, of the extremists are Shiites, correct? Do you believe that the Bible promotes killing?

 

[nsideirish]

Sorry, but you're missing the big picture. I'm explaining why the public perception exists the way it does.

You're talking about less than 1 incident per year listed of vandalism/arson/bombing/etc. on that Wikipedia page. Less than 1 incident per year where no one is getting killed IS NOT going to register in the forefront of public concern as a big deal. Why? Because you have 30,000+ cases of arson per year. So this isn't going to stick out.

How many people have died to abortion crazies? 1. And it was a worker, not an innocent bystander.

Now, what if abortion crazies had killed thousands of random innocent bystanders to try to make their point "for Jesus"? Then you would have people thinking the same thing about these Christian groups as they do about Muslims.

Show me some Christian countries that are victims of constant intervention, drone bombings, etc. Islam is not a violent religion. But when their countries are under constant attack, intervention, etc., religion is a good rallying point. I highly recommend the book "The Looming Tower" which looks at Bin *****--and other terrorists--and their youth, motivations, etc.

Many on this board consider the IRA freedom fighters. Ask any Englishman and you'll get a different answer. I think Americans like to turn a blind eye to all the innocents our military kills. But when our innocents die, it is terrorism.

 

[ryno 24]

So, I studied medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy and wrote my thesis on some of this. Their theology is not about learning more about God. That is what philosophy is for, their theology is for arguing and fighting against infidels. They have some very interesting philosophic points that evolved some points about God and political philosophy. But they very much fought to further their religion.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Two issues here for most of us. First, as IrishLax pointed out, almost every terrorist act committed here in the US and worldwide for the past several years was committed by a Muslim in the name of his religion. It's hard not to associate the religion with such acts.

Second, we all know the old saying about how the only thing evil needs in order to succeed is for good men to do nothing. I don't doubt that most Muslims are peaceful and don't condone the acts done in their religion's name, but darn few of them speak out against it.

Accurate or not, terrorists have become the face of Islam. Most terrorists are Muslim and few if any Muslims openly condemn their acts. Hard for your religion to not have a perception problem with that combination.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

So, I studied medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy and wrote my thesis on some of this. Their theology is not about learning more about God. That is what philosophy is for, their theology is for arguing and fighting against infidels. They have some very interesting philosophic points that evolved some points about God and political philosophy. But they very much fought to further their religion.

I think the keyword here is MEDIEVAL.

 

[nsideirish]

So, I studied medieval Islamic and Jewish philosophy and wrote my thesis on some of this. Their theology is not about learning more about God. That is what philosophy is for, their theology is for arguing and fighting against infidels. They have some very interesting philosophic points that evolved some points about God and political philosophy. But they very much fought to further their religion.

Crusades?

 

[GowerND11]

People argue about Islam being violent, but what about Christianity? Sure it was founded through nonviolence. But what about the Crusades, The Spanish Inquisition, The Troubles (more political, but still Catholic v Protistant), The Thirty Years War, etc. Or even in the Old Testament. David was a great military leader with a violent streak.

Before we all judge Islam, and those who adhere to it that are nonviolent, let us not forget the violent Christian past.

 

[magogian]

Before we all judge Islam, and those who adhere to it that are nonviolent, let us not forget the violent Christian past.

Christianity had its problems and dealt with them.

Islam hasn't.

 

[ryno 24]

I think the keyword here is MEDIEVAL.

Their philosophy is still very much based on the medieval philosophers such as al farabbi, avicenna, al Ghazali, and Averroes.

As far as the crusades go. Christianity as a religion does not have conquering as part of their plan, people can go wrong.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

Christianity had its problems and dealt with them.

Islam hasn't.

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

 

[pkt77242]

Two issues here for most of us. First, as IrishLax pointed out, almost every terrorist act committed here in the US and worldwide for the past several years was committed by a Muslim in the name of his religion. It's hard not to associate the religion with such acts.

Second, we all know the old saying about how the only thing evil needs in order to succeed is for good men to do nothing. I don't doubt that most Muslims are peaceful and don't condone the acts done in their religion's name, but darn few of them speak out against it.

Accurate or not, terrorists have become the face of Islam. Most terrorists are Muslim and few if any Muslims openly condemn their acts. Hard for your religion to not have a perception problem with that combination.

They would view all of our drone attacks, invasion of Iraq and Afganistan, and many other acts as terrorism on our part. Just saying.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

Their philosophy is still very much based on the medieval philosophers such as al farabbi, avicenna, al Ghazali, and Averroes.

As far as the crusades go. Christianity as a religion does not have conquering as part of their plan, people can go wrong.

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

 

[GowerND11]

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

They would view all of our drone attacks, invasion of Iraq and Afganistan, and many other acts as terrorism on our part. Just saying.

Exactly. Look at it from another perspective.

 

[ryno 24]

No Christianity does not condone this unless you are talking about Westboro Babtist. Christianity truly teaches love.

 

[In Lou I Trust]

No Christianity does not condone this unless you are talking about Westboro Babtist. Christianity truly teaches love.

Old Testament.

 

[ryno 24]

Christianity is based on the new testament, while their are some old testament elements. I have many saudi friends who are Islam and they are good people and many Muslims are, but they do have radical elements built into their theology.

 

[pkt77242]

No Christianity does not condone this unless you are talking about Westboro Babtist. Christianity truly teaches love.

Are you kidding me? Dont your remeber the bill in Uganda about killing gay people (they can already be imprisoned for 14 years) and it was being pushed by evangelical americans. Yep. I will add that the Muslim countries are even worse to the LGBT>