If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
The "Islam Is Peace" campaign...
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Come to think of it, if you think that was an insult perhaps you have not been on many message boards after all...
Yes, about that... I still fail to see what multiculturalism has got to do with the the topic in hand... or indeed, how it could be anti-semitic.
You've got any figures for that?
Honour killings are not restricted of people of Muslim origin. In any case, cheeta's remarks could be interpreted as some kind of constant and mass killings taking place on both Muslim countries and the West by Muslim extremists. That is certainly not the case.
I still don't see the significance of multiculturalism at all I'm afraid. Nor am I convinced either way by single articles by people who are almost certainly not exactly impartial in the matter.
Perhaps that could be because just like Christianity or Judaism, Islam has some good sides that promote good things and have caused good in the world. Perhaps they were concerned by the double standards seen in the West that painted its own chosen religion as peaceful and wonderful while portraying another religion that is pretty similar in values as monstruous. Perhaps they were trying to counter the long and arduous hate campaign waged by the far right and by sectors of the press in this country and elsewhere. Perhaps they have met many decent Muslims and give people credit even if they disagree with some of the dogma. Etc etc.
And no, I'm not suggesting everyone with grave concerns about Islam has an agenda at work or far right leanings. But there is a rather nauseating, thinly-veiled campaign in parts of the mainstream media (let alone obscure websites and organisations) that is behind much of the witch-hunt ordinary, decent Muslims are finding themselves the victims of.
You are right that many things in Islam need to change. But many other things need to, and by focusing only on one problem while ignoring the others little will be solved, and the very people you are trying to save will dig in deeper. Few Muslims will listen to people in the West about the need for reform and more tolerance when the leader of the free world speaks of 'Crusades' and on God's instructions (!) bombs the shit out of Muslim country after Muslim country in the Middle East, describing everyone a terrorist and a fundamentalist, and while giving unilateral support and carte blanche to a certain other country in the area to perpetrate 40 years of appalling abuse, indiscriminated attacks, nuclear proliferation and illegal land occupation.
The more you alineate people, the less likely are you to change their views. We should be engaging positively in all fronts with Muslim scholars and States, not dragging Islam through the mud if we do not have the decency to do the same about our own religion and conduct.
Just like Ahmadinjihad said that iran has no homosexuals and then later his aides corrected it saying Ahmad meant to say the gays in iran are not like the gays in America.
Of course my opinion does not matter. So make your interpretation work first and then I will be so happy that I will even have a smile as I let you lop tarts in my face.
But yes, a country can have many secular laws that contradicts islam. Over time however, the islamists will win since they can always prove the secular law is against the islamic law.
And guess what, most islamic countries now have a clause in their constitution stating that no law is above the koran. Even Iraq's new constitution and Afghanistan have that bullshit Koran above All clause (I thought we went to Iraq & Afghanistan to free them).
Aladdin can sing and dance all he wants about how the "Majority" of muslims do not care about the koran. Yet, they agree to have the koran above any secular law or lawmaker in the country.
And who gets to interpret if the law is against the koran or not? of course the Mullahs and Imams. So now EVERY muslim country, even the ones Aladdin came from or visited, has a council of Theocrat Turbanites. And the Council of Turbanites sits there and review every law and if the law is opposed to the Koran, the law gets Vetoed.
Some Muslim countries will even claim they achieved Democracy (See: Iran). Since they let you vote from amongst the turbanites. The Turbanites will elect few turbanites amongst themselves and then the people will pick which turbanite will wear the "Big Turban" for the next few years. It is almost like electing a Republican from Texas.
The people however, do not get to pick from doctors or engineers or lawyers or scientists or journalists. The people only get to pick a Turban from amongst the Turban.
A Turban, elected or not, that will sit above elected lawmakers. That in short, is Theocracy.
No, nothing like that. One was a mistranslation of what he said, admitted by the American newspaper that translated it. The other was him cocking it up and backtracking.
Here is the link about Jordan:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3088828.stm
Incidentally, that does the link got to do with Muslims at large?
I think Sam Harris makes an important point on this particular issue. He stressed that it's important that we (referring to atheist, secular and humanist groups in this particular lecture) shouldn't attack "religion" when a particular religious belief infringes on the rest of us (let's say for example, a ban on stem cell research). The thing about religious beliefs is that even though they are all equally irrational, members of every different religion can see the irrationality in all of the other religions. And so when someone wants to ban stem cell research on the basis of religion, it's important to bring a rational argument against that specific religious argument, rather than simply dismissing it because it's religious and shrugging and simply saying "another example of religious nutters". Dismiss it because it's religious, and you're alienating all of the religious people who can see the irrationality in the argument that stem cell research is murder, and would agree with you if you were willing to have a reasoned debate into it. Attack religion as a whole in this instance, and you only damage your own cause.
And so I'd disagree that we should point out the bad parts of every religion, or point out that every religion has bad parts every time we criticise one of them. I think every time a specific aspect of a specific dogma comes into public discussion or attempts to infringe upon others, it should be argued specifically. That way the law of averages says that the majority of people are not going to have that specific religious belief about that specific issue, even if they do all identify as Christian, Muslim, whatever. So to attack the entire religion, or all of religion in general in this instance would completely fuck up any chances for rationality to prevail.
Muslims will riot over the stupidest of reasons and will not self-criticize or riot or demonstrate against the most blatant of human right violations made by muslims. Islamic forums, which we assume are carried by the more learned muslims, The multi-lingual muslims who can use a computer and type, will not carry a shred of condemnation to "Jihadis going against the peaceful teachings of islam".
That is a hasty Generalization. Accusing cheetah of claiming there is a Constant Mass Killing. But yes there is mass killing. When in 20 years, no one got more then 1yr jail time for honor killing, in Jordan, where your darling non-koran following friends live, then I consider it state sponsored gendercide. Mass Killing of Jordanian Women.
What is constant however, is the state of hate and fear that result whenever a criminal and his crime are allowed to thrive in a society.
When 90% of certain islamic populations have their women circumcized (mutilated). And the habit increasing in new muslim areas when islam did not exist as a legal entity few decades ago, then I consider it a constant state of pussy mutilation. Do you want to marry a woman who Constantly does not have a pussy, Aladdin?
Perhaps Perhaps Perhaps but is sure is that the Imams and Mullah are not being criticized, it is the perception of the West that is being criticized. Which is why the campaign for "Islam is Peace" is flawed. As I stated earlier it should be: "Why Islam is not Peace" And it should be directed to shame the failed scholars of islam. Not the Dhimmified West.
Mainstream Western media is extremely tolerant of islam. Go sing that tune somewhere else. And no, blogs are not mainstream.
Tu Coque. I do not care about Bush or Sharon when I apostate or criticise islam in the middle east or Europe actually. I care about "Turbanman" that will make his fatwa in a mosque for some weak willed "Not a True Muslim" to pick on the fatwa, and come slit my throat.
I am sorry. I am not in the appeasement business. Go pray to the statue of Chamberlain or make sure you face Brown next time you hit your prayer rug. I am like the jew who escaped from his concentration camp. I am the Simon Wiesenthal coming to look for the murderers and their ideologies. Your islamic train is being driven by Wahabis. Your new imams (last 10 years), ALL of them, every Single Last One of them, are being trained with Wahabi books and Wahabi money sitting in Wahabi Madrassas.
I will not use the velvet glove with Fascists. Fascists Love nothing more then the sight of people wearing Velvet Gloves. Instead you deal with fascists by exposing their man-cults. By ridiculing them and by shaming their followers. And nothing, scares a fascist worse then ridicule.
Which verse are you referring to? Mathew? Isn't that the Mathew verse where Christ politically extricates himself from the OT? something about "I have come to complete the covenant"?
And what happens with "Completed Covenants"? aren't they complete? closed? finished? done?
When muslim guys carry in their cell phones beheadings and exchange the videos like they were, the baseball cards of a player who just died from heart attack, that is a tacit support for violence.
Have you never felt compelled to believe in Islam because of the consequences you could suffer in the afterlife? Which is something that is preached and drilled into us over and over again throughout our vunerable youth/childhood, and even adulthood?
Sure, they are complete twats. Though to be honest I don't see it much different than those in the West- particularly in the US- who go to sites such as liveleak.com and download videoclips of the mighty USAF dropping laser guided bombs on Iraqis and brave Marines machine gunning anything that moves.
Unfortunately politics have been muddled with religion and we have a generation of people (on both sides) that have been radicalised. I'm not optimist about the future and for as long as there is war and conflict in the Middle East religion will continue to be thrown into the mix and play a bit part in the conflict. Not an attractive outlook for anyone concerned.
Now maybe we can get back to discussing the topic.
Intelligence or literacy has never been mutually exclusive with capacity for extremism or violence.
Oh dear dear dear... starting to scrap the bottom of the barrel a little don't you think?
Do you have any evidence to support that claim? And more importantly, what percentage of the total Muslim population of the world do these "certain islamic populations" comprise?
Pray do tell.
:rolleyes:
Yawn... And you'd started so well...
If only the West could join in and shame the failed scholars, instead of pretending most muslims are violent and indulging in pathetic generalisations...
Hell, we're seeing such generalisations on this thread so what hope there is?
No thanks, I think I'd rather stay here and ensure a sense of proportion and fairness is injected when needed
I suspect you are far more likely to have your throat slit by a hoodie on the upper decker of the 33 bus, but do feel free to check for mad muslims under the bed every night.
You've lost it now pal
Haven't I made it clear that I do NOT think that most Muslims are violent?
Yet why do you continue to repeat this?
Like we stated, the vast majority of 'Muslims' are merely born into this religion and they will probably live the whole of their life without reading or understanding the Quran. We should be thankful that the vast majority of Muslims are like this.
- Some Islamic states practice female gential mutilation on 90% of their population
- Every Iman in the last ten years has been trained with with Wahabi money using Wahabi texts
Your comments about Muslim's 'rioting for any reason', use of slang terms for Muslims, all suggests that you don't have much interest in a reasoned or intelligent debate.
You've agreed not to post anything hateful or insulting by posting here. If you continue to be unable to debate an issue without making insulting comments you'll be toast.
No, that figure is wrong. It is 97% .
The 1996 Demographic and Health Survey in Egypt revealed that female circumcision is virtually universal among women, with 97% between the ages 15-49 having been circumcised. Among survey respondents with one or more living daughters, 87% report that at least one daughter has already been circumcised or that they intend to have the daughter circumcised in the future. The median age at circumcision is 9 - 8 years of age.
Source
http://www.womenaid.org/press/info/fgm/fgm-egypt.htm
However, I just did a quick search on the study and it doesn't seem to be related to the practice of Islam:
http://www.measuredhs.com/topics/gender/FGC-CD/start.cfm
So just a bit of balance there. There's also a table up and Iran, Indonesia, Iraq, Turkey etc. are not featured which is surprising as they have very large Islamic populations.
There is also a hadith in which the Prophet Muhammad approves the practise, which I was going to quote here until I realised that the scholar from Al Azhar University has quoted it already in this clip.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rUvrHsPaTSo
What does this has to do with Muslims at large? This has to do with the enlightened Muslims in Jordan. Like your friends. Here you have 60 out of 85 Jordanian Turbanites voting against criminalizing honor killing. These Jordanian "Males" would rather sit and watch Jordanian women get killed and NO ACTION of any consequence would be taken against the killer.
These males are acknowledging that if their Daughters or Sisters or cousins get honor killed, they would rather let the murderer go for 6 month to a year. Now if Murder your wife, hands you 6 month in jail, how much you think they hand to Wife Beating?
And if the wife is allowed to get beat, then you can bet your family jewels, that everybody else in the house is permitted to get beat by the man of the house.
Here is a little Gift from the Koran: For the record: This verse is translated to sound really nice in English. In Arabic it reads much worse. And one English translation, the translator was so ashamed from this verse that he added (lightly) after 'beat them'.
* In Arabic it does not say "Men are the maintainers", it says "Men are held a degree above women".
*In Arabic it does not permit the beating if you "fear desertion", merely it permits the beating sequence if you "fear discord".
* Allah preference for men is preposterous:
First: Allah prefers men because he made men better! (so men are better).
Second: Allah prefers men by what men spend from their pockets. Allah has no appreciation or regards for the women that used to die during childbirth at rates reaching 20% in certain times. But Allah will prefer men by what they spend, from their pockets.
You were asking if I am feeling okay, thanx for asking, how about you, you feeling me?
Well, this is a public debate forum for anyone to partake in discussion, we don't exclude 'kaffirs' (or 'infidel, derogatory term used by Indian Muslims for Christians'), if you want a free discussion between yourselves go set up your own forum where you can ban all the kaffirs. Or do you just want to preach?
And back to the original point. You can pick out as many examples as you like of Islam bringing evils upon the world, but making unsubstantiated claims this has real world relevance is just propaganda. It was used as an argument against Islam. Jim V asked for a source, so one was posted up citing Egypt as a muslim country (yes) that has a high rate of female genital mutilation (yes). I looked at the source, and found that it was not related to Islam at all and that the practices of circumcision in Eygpt predates Islam. Therefore it's completely invalid and using it as an argument against Islam is wrong.
Once again Baal - please provide some link for this - oh and I missed it before - this isn't 'our' Islamic train, it's a discussion about Islam, I doubt very much anyone who has posted follows Islam.
Religion always clings the longest around the statute books. This is true even of democracies where archaic laws regarding oral or anal sex remain even when the majority of the population probably don't give a toss about it.
I have no wish to ban all the kaffirs, especially as I am one. The point I was making there is that whether or not you or I agree that FGM is, or is not, sanctioned by Islam, will make no difference to the female population of Egypt. It will not reduce the practise if you convince me this is against Islam, it will not increase if I convince you it is not. It needs muslims themselves to reject the practise, and especially influential muslims to pronounce it contrary to Islam.
That was why, in the interests of a free debate I posted a link to a debate between two muslims about it. Did you watch it? Or were you too interested in trying to score points off a stranger on the net?