World leaders promoting tolerance; but what do you really know about Islam?

reply to post by My.mind.is.mine


Good to hear, more reason to keep trumpeting the truth.

reply to post by iIuminaIi


And we should continue to push for equal rights until they are universal.

That is common sense.

reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan


I completely agree with you.

But I really do think that your statement in practice doesn't ring true. People throughout history have enacted, upon their faith, things that they believed were right, and obviously weren't. We see this time and time again in modern times too.

Morals are learned, not intuitive.

reply to post by poet1b


Speaking indirectly is not common sense , its a backdoor attack.



I know how you rhyme , your intention is despicable.

Please provide evidence with your choppy arguments.

So essentially the argument for Islam is that we are misunderstanding, misinterpreting, taking quotes out of context - the problem is so many Muslims and Islamic authorities do the exact same thing - as jihad is waged against Christians in many countries in the middle east.

Even some individuals in this thread has admitted they feel uncomfortable around Muslims, because of these extremists. Extremism is not uncommon, unlike some would like you to think.....and I know some will like you to think I am painting all Muslims in this manner, I am not.

reply to post by MidnightTide


The true Arabic meaning of the word jihad is Struggle. However in Islam it is often used to describe the striving in the way of god. There are many forms of jihad but the most important ones are Jihad al-nafs (jihad against ones self), jihad bil-lisan (jihad by being vocal), jihad bil yad (jihad by using action), and Jihad bis saif (jihad by using the sword). Each jihad is ranked differently and it was reported that Muhammad returned from a battle and said “We have returned from the lesser jihad (going into battle) to the greater jihad (the struggle of the soul).” This means that a Muslim struggling against himself and his soul is more important than the jihad of going into war. Another misconception is that only when a person dies in war does that person becomes a martyr. This is, however, false and it is believed that anyone doing anything for the sake of god and is killed becomes a martyr. A person who dies while performing pilgrimage in Mecca, a woman who dies while giving birth, or even someone who dies in a car crash while he was on his way to the mosque are all considered martyrs.


Did islam spread by force terror events since 1400 years ago?



_______________________________________________________



Guess what? "Jihad" was taught by "Jesus" too !




"WATTA SHOCK"

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by TRGreer

 

No where have I made the claim you have Contributed to me.

It is very wrong for you to make a false statement such as this.

Huh?

Back to the bigger argument. Indulge me in an example. The American judicial system. Lets say a group of people are caught committing a hate crime. Lets call them the lunacy movement. Under US law does the group get charged as a whole? Do you charge the whole of the lunacy movement with one crime and call it done? Of course not. Each is charged according to their part in the crime and any other members who were not involved are not charged at all. Each must take responsibility for their own actions. When you make a blanket statement about a religion, belief, philosophy, etc, you condemn all that follow that faith without taking into account that there are many innocent good people who follow that belief (this can also be applied to racism,sexism, and many many more). How long before you or others decide to connect Islam to Arabs or those of African decent simply because that is the majority of the Islamic faith? This is how these twisted views grow. History shows time and again how this frame of mind can grow into a monstrosity. A destructive chain reaction resulting many times in wide scale war and death.
Individuals living in peace not causing harm to anyone should not be punished for the actions of others despite any relation they may have to those others. Why is this so hard to understand?

I had to be away from this thread for a bit, and I was anxious to see how it was progressing. I thought, perhaps, that with me out of the way for a bit, CoolerAbdullah786, and TRGreer, among others, could calm down and try a new approach with other people. I've read through the pages I've missed and learned a few things about these discussions.

The primary points from one side seem to be:

1) Regardless of the horrendous, barbaric, things we are doing, your side occasionally does something objectionable, so you can't criticize our acts.

2) There's some other group who is responsible for all the bad stuff. We don't really try to stop them, because after all, they are our brothers, but don't blame us.

3) The fact that vast majorities in some Islamic countries, and sizeable percentages in others, support the idea of killing people who leave Islam, is irrelevant because not every single Muslim was polled.

4) Islamic violence isn't about religion, it's about politics. Despite point 3) above, and the destruction of churches (which aren't being used as campaign headquarters, by the way.)

5) Islamic violence isn't about religion, It's about culture. (A culture that is shaped by the religious officials and laws.)

6) If something bad happens and is attributed to the koran or a hadith, it's a mistranslation, interpreted incorrectly, not accepted by our group, or "Your book has some bad parts in it meant for people two thousand years ago, so why can't we have bad parts now?"

7) And last. (Because, I'm getting tired of this.) If you don't happen to agree, and desire to continue, "I'm going to ignore you now."

I know religion becomes an emotional subject, and everyone wants to defend their own beliefs, but I'm not seeing a real discussion here. One side is warm and welcoming to those who agree with them, and aggressive, condescending, and antagonistic to those who don't. I was hoping something good would have come from this, and maybe it will in a few more pages, so I won't give up yet.

But as an earlier poster said, it seems there are just some things that you can't talk to a Muslim about without causing serious offense.

reply to post by charles1952


I really don't believe you are open to honest discussion on Islam. Your post show time and again that you are very opinionated when it comes to this topic. Even though you seem to show respect outwardly I can still see the hate and fear hidden in your perspective.

Just to clarify I am not Muslim nor have I ever been. Cracks me up how many assume I am because of my defense of Islam. Silly thing is I am not defending Islam. I am defending an individuals sovereignty and right to live in peace without being held accountable for others actions.

reply to post by TRGreer


Got some land to sell me in Atlantis as well? Funny how seconds after you post you have a star.

Nothing that charles said was untrue. (and perhaps all those misinterpretations aren't so....perhaps they are closer to the truth and others are just trying to cover things up)

reply to post by iIuminaIi


I'm sure you know all about the back door and the bottom.

I don't rhyme.

The first to call foul is usually the first to have committed the foul.

Same thing with accusations.

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by TRGreer

 

Got some land to sell me in Atlantis as well? Funny how seconds after you post you have a star.

Nothing that charles said was untrue. (and perhaps all those misinterpretations aren't so....perhaps they are closer to the truth and others are just trying to cover things up)

edit on 29-7-2012 by MidnightTide because: (no reason given)

I don't even pay attention to stars or flags. I give them out but I don't keep track of my own. Stars and flags are not why I come to ATS. Charles makes the choice to single out the followers of one religion and condemn them based on hateful propaganda and unfounded hearsay. He denies individual rights in favor of grouping and convicting as a whole. Here ... A star for you.

reply to post by TRGreer

Dear TRGreer,

Consider what you've said.

I really don't believe you are open to honest discussion on Islam. Your post show time and again that you are very opinionated when it comes to this topic. Even though you seem to show respect outwardly I can still see the hate and fear hidden in your perspective.

If I've read this right, you're saying an opinionated person can't have an honest discussion on Islam? The only people who can discuss Islam are those that don't have an opinion on it? What about you? Are you opinionated on the topic?

I show respect outwardly, but have hate and fear hidden in me? If true, doesn't my holding back negative emotions show just how much I'm trying to work with you?

Just to clarify I am not Muslim nor have I ever been. Cracks me up how many assume I am because of my defense of Islam.

I don't believe I've called any poster a Muslim. It doesn't matter to me, I'm looking at the ideas and arguments.

I am defending an individuals sovereignty and right to live in peace without being held accountable for others actions.

Very interesting wording. Almost, if I may say so, cunning and sly. Which individual is being held accountable for a suicide bombing, or stoning, or church destruction, or killing? No one is, outside the actor. You're defending something that isn't being attacked. I predict you'll win.

I hate to be repetitive, so I'll try to streamline this. People are concerned about a group, a society, a culture, a religion. A religion dedicated in large part to conquering, in whichever manner is most effective, the world for Allah. We have seen murderers of families celebrated in the streets, governments rewarding the families of suicide bombers. Religious rules which would be unspeakable anywhere else, are imposed on populations. African countries are invaded with Allah's name being the prominent battle-cry.

Forgive me, for I may be a little emotional. But where are the efforts to prevent this? Where is the compensation for the victims? Why is this not condemned from every mosque in the world? Why are other Muslims not turning the violent ones in? Why aren't the killers and destroyers punished, ostracized, something?

You speak about an individual's soveregnity. You mean, if they subject themselves to all of the Islamic rules, don't you? Are they free to leave, say what they want, scrawl a cartoon on the ground, criticize their leaders, criticize their religion, date who they want, when they want to?

I may have said too much. I'd love to have a discussion, but a discussion requires something from both sides. I don't care to be so upset and I would love to have it explained why I shouldn't be. But no more condescension, insults and evasions, please.

With respect,
Charles1952

reply to post by TRGreer


This thread isn't about every religion, it is about Islam - if you want to discuss the evils of Christianity, or the big bad USA, then make a thread about it.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by iIuminaIi

 

I'm sure you know all about the back door and the bottom.

I don't rhyme.

The first to call foul is usually the first to have committed the foul.

Same thing with accusations.

Meh.




Keep exposing yourself..You're quite charming though

reply to post by charles1952


I am sorry you are upset. I said in the very beginning there would be no real discussion on the topic between you and I. I tried to tell you.

Originally posted by MidnightTide
reply to post by TRGreer

 

This thread isn't about every religion, it is about Islam - if you want to discuss the evils of Christianity, or the big bad USA, then make a thread about it.

Actually the OP challenged me on the atrocities done by Christians and I obliged. Besides my whole argument was never meant to say all Christians are bad. The rights of peaceful individuals of the Christian faith should be protected as well. All peaceful individuals rights should be protected. The OP would not accept well know facts about some who claim his belief. I finally gave him what he asked for.

reply to post by TRGreer

I am sorry you are upset. I said in the very beginning there would be no real discussion on the topic between you and I. I tried to tell you.

You are quite right, but I never realized it was becuse you didn't want to have the conversation.

I've posted legitimate points in a respectful manner. They have been ignored. I have answered questions asked of me as completely and honestly as I could. My questions have been ignored. I have agreed with you that individual sovereignity is important. Members have said that I am truthful.

If positions can not be discussed, if diplomacy fails, if there is no understanding and agreement, there are, as far as I can see, two options. One is total surrender. I'm not inclined to take that route.

Originally posted by My.mind.is.mine



Peace,

If you asked somebody who supported the death penalty for apostasy, they would quite a hadith, which is largely based off of arab culture, as the Prophet was still an arab man, despite achieving prophethood.

Even wikipedia acknowledges it's not in the doctrine. (keeping in mind wikipedia isn't a source, but a starting point for research)

The Qur'an itself does not prescribe any earthly punishment for apostasy; Islamic scholarship differs on its punishment, ranging from execution – based on an interpretation of certain hadiths – to no punishment at all as long as they "do not work against the Muslim society or nation."

link

First I would just like to thank you and Cooler for responding to me. I think that even our conversation here shows the more people can reasonably discuss issues such as this, the more common ground we can actually see.

I understand again that my issue isn't against what you interpret the Qu'ran as actually saying, and although there are probably multiple ways to interpret, I can clearly see your an inteligent person and will accept that your interpretation seems correct to me on this issue.

I think that we are sort of ships passing by each other argumentitively here. I see that it is quite important for you to understand that my concerns with Islam aren't actually about the Qu'ran or religion, theyre about specific cultures. I am willing to agree with this.

My point is that these cultures seem quite dangerous indeed, at least in the fact that they would be willing to advocate the death or serious punishment of people that offend them with free speech.

As far as i can see , the OP is referencing world leaders wanting us to respect THESE cultures, and not neccessarily just the religion and what it actually says as you are defending.

That is why I am concerned. Regardless of what Islam techniquely says, a large group that claims to be operating in the name of Islam are doing some things that I find quite appaling. And many people claim we need to respect these cultures that advocate this.

Im saying that although I respect their right to have their culture, that respects end when they call for violence against other cultures.

And I don't agree that I'm in any paradox. I'm a black man so my culture is American culture. I respect my culture, and acknowledge its flaws. But I also acknowledge that me calling it a flaw is based solely off of my perception. Likewise I respect theirs, and acknowledge its flaws, and the fact that again that's based off of OUR perception as citizens of the west.

Their rights go to the end of the earth as far as I'm concerned, as that's their land. If they bring that over this way, they'd run into a problem not only with western non muslims, but western muslims, and I can guarantee that. The number of muslims waking up and separating culture from faith has been growing lately.

I disagree. I think that calling for murder for a work of fiction is not justified even if it is their culture. Wrong is wrong, and saying "well its our country, butt out" isn't a justifible defense in my opinion.

I respect the fact you are saying that if this was brought over here you and other western Muslims would oppose this. And I am very encouraged at your point that more are waking up to this and getting to true faith. I might be an atheist, but anyone who pratices a faith of peace is a great person in my book.

Calling for the death of somebody of a certain color is totally different from this issue. And I never said I respect the custom, I simply said I respect their CULTURE in GENERAL, and its difference, don't confuse my point.

Point taken, I understand you dont respect this aspect of it. Again, I respect anyones right to have their own culture, but once it harms others, my respect for it ends.

As for the skin color issue being different, I sort of disagree. While techniquely true, calling for the murder of innocents based on a percieved insult should never, ever be justified. And when a culture does this, its hard to seperate these abhorrent parts of their culture with the reasonble parts

.

On your last point, how many people have been killed for apostasy, or expressing free speech in the west? If there are examples, I guarantee they are victims of a culture that I'm probably not a fan of, and I feel for them.

I'll answer in my next posts.

reply to post by Murgatroid

Do you HONESTLY believe that the Vatican is or was ever run by Christians? If so you are MASSIVELY deceived and probably do not even know what a Christian actually is.

Do you HONESTLY believe that the "terrorists" are or were ever run by Muslims?
If so you are MASSIVELY deceived and probably do not even know what a Muslim actually is.