lowing do you understand the difference between culture and religion? because you cant say that islam wouldnt work in the west because our culture is so vastly different the the various cultures throughout ME, africa etc... thats why muslims in america/europe ARE a good indicator because they are intergrated into our culture yet still beleive in their religion. islam is not more violent than many other religions/sects/cults yet they exist fine in the west and there is no reason why islam couldnt...
Poll
How'd you feel if they built a Mosque in your negihborhood?
| I'd be mad and I'd complain about it | 14% | 14% - 48 | ||||
| I wouldn't care tbh | 55% | 55% - 184 | ||||
| I think it would improve the neighborhood | 2% | 2% - 9 | ||||
| Fuck Islam | 27% | 27% - 91 | ||||
| Total: 332 | ||||||
1. What a totally stupid fucking answer. You know that only 30% of Germans voted for the Nazi Party. YOU CAN'T JUDGE GERMAN PEOPLE BASED ON THE ETHOS OF THE NAZI PARTY JUST LIKE YOU CAN'T JUDGE MUSLIMS BASED ON THE ACTS OF AL QAEDA. Sheesh. You're losing it. You're obviously not interested in making posts that allow you to retain your dignity any longer. You have to have a statistical basis for your answer. Otherwise you have to be judging the Q'uran on the text alone, in which case, you would by default have to declare Christianity and Judaism likewise violent on the basis of Leviticus alone.lowing wrote:
1. nope. I am judging a religion and a culture. Based on your argument I can not judge the Nazi Party based on Hitler, Goering, Gerbells, and Himmler. Becasue there were probably a few that were actually nice guys and never killed anyone.CameronPoe wrote:
Certainly doesn't seem that way. You lived in Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan at some point? You're not characterising a whole plethora of nations on the basis of a minority of nations are you? You're not characterising a whole plethora of people on the basis of a minority are you? Answer those two questions truthfully with one word answers and be able to defend your position and I'll accept your argument.lowing wrote:
No my problem is I can read, see and hear.
2. nope. I am not judging individual people. Posiedons step mom I am sure is a very nice lady, Braddocks store owner friends I am sure are very nice people. Their religion however, is a violent and intolerant religion. History and current events proves this.
2. Wow. It's not the people that practice that matter, it's your misinterpretation of someone elses religion, based on how it is practiced by a minority, that matters now. lol. Losing it. Despite the fact that very few nations practice full on Sharia law and despite the fact that Islamic-based terrorism incidents are very few and far between (despite there being 1.3bn muslims) you persists with your ridiculous mantra.
I think the difference between us is that I deal in the realm of facts and you deal in the realm of opinions.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-01 01:27:24)
1. Cam if you read closely you will see that I did not mention the German people, not once, I sadi the Nazi Party. So pretty much your rsponse is invalid, try again. Also do not forget t oexpalin how Islam in the world is none of my business becasue I am not Muslim, yet the Isarali Palestinian conflict is YOUR business.CameronPoe wrote:
1. What a totally stupid fucking answer. You know that only 30% of Germans voted for the Nazi Party. YOU CAN'T JUDGE GERMAN PEOPLE BASED ON THE ETHOS OF THE NAZI PARTY JUST LIKE YOU CAN'T JUDGE MUSLIMS BASED ON THE ACTS OF AL QAEDA. Sheesh. You're losing it. You're obviously not interested in making posts that allow you to retain your dignity any longer. You have to have a statistical basis for your answer. Otherwise you have to be judging the Q'uran on the text alone, in which case, you would by default have to declare Christianity and Judaism likewise violent on the basis of Leviticus alone.lowing wrote:
1. nope. I am judging a religion and a culture. Based on your argument I can not judge the Nazi Party based on Hitler, Goering, Gerbells, and Himmler. Becasue there were probably a few that were actually nice guys and never killed anyone.CameronPoe wrote:
Certainly doesn't seem that way. You lived in Iran, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan at some point? You're not characterising a whole plethora of nations on the basis of a minority of nations are you? You're not characterising a whole plethora of people on the basis of a minority are you? Answer those two questions truthfully with one word answers and be able to defend your position and I'll accept your argument.
2. nope. I am not judging individual people. Posiedons step mom I am sure is a very nice lady, Braddocks store owner friends I am sure are very nice people. Their religion however, is a violent and intolerant religion. History and current events proves this.
2. Wow. It's not the people that practice that matter, it's your misinterpretation of someone elses religion, based on how it is practiced by a minority, that matters now. lol. Losing it. Despite the fact that very few nations practice full on Sharia law and despite the fact that Islamic-based terrorism incidents are very few and far between (despite there being 1.3bn muslims) you persists with your ridiculous mantra.
I think the difference between us is that I deal in the realm of facts and you deal in the realm of opinions.
2. I did not mention terrorism, that is another matter. Again stop trying to take my argument to the extreme so you can justify yours. I condemn a religion not individuals. This religion is violent and intolerant. Individuals within it may not be, but this religion IS. Again you are using the "small insignificant" members of this religion outside the ME as your sample. This is generalizing on your part, and we do dnot generalize.
Islam is more than just a religion, it is a way of life. If you do not think so, then you are not practicing Islam. It is not a religion that is practiced 1 hour a week in church like ChrisianityLittle BaBy JESUS wrote:
lowing do you understand the difference between culture and religion? because you cant say that islam wouldnt work in the west because our culture is so vastly different the the various cultures throughout ME, africa etc... thats why muslims in america/europe ARE a good indicator because they are intergrated into our culture yet still beleive in their religion. islam is not more violent than many other religions/sects/cults yet they exist fine in the west and there is no reason why islam couldnt...
I noticed you chose not to use Germans as your example, hence the reason your analogy didn't reflect the Islamic example. I corrected your analogy for you to make it more representative of reality. If you can't accept that then you are in fact finally losing it.lowing wrote:
1. Cam if you read closely you will see that I did not mention the German people, not once, I sadi the Nazi Party. So pretty much your rsponse is invalid, try again. Also do not forget t oexpalin how Islam in the world is none of my business becasue I am not Muslim, yet the Isarali Palestinian conflict is YOUR business.
You really can't handle being wrong can you? Describing someone who is very specifically not generalising as a 'generaliser'. Hilarious. My 'vast majority' includes those living in China, Morocco, UAE, Qatar, Kyrgyztan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkey, Egypt, Malaysia, Oman, Kuwait, Tunisia, Algeria, Senegal, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Kosovo, Albania, Azerbaijan, Jordan, etc., etc., etc.lowing wrote:
2. I did not mention terrorism, that is another matter. Again stop trying to take my argument to the extreme so you can justify yours. I condemn a religion not individuals. This religion is violent and intolerant. Individuals within it may not be, but this religion IS. Again you are using the "small insignificant" members of this religion outside the ME as your sample. This is generalizing on your part, and we do dnot generalize.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-01 04:05:08)
They pray 5 times a day, what a big deal. How do you know how much Christians pray? I still don't get the "way of life" thing you mention. All Religions affect your way of life. Many people live according to the rules of their Religion.lowing wrote:
Islam is more than just a religion, it is a way of life. If you do not think so, then you are not practicing Islam. It is not a religion that is practiced 1 hour a week in church like ChrisianityLittle BaBy JESUS wrote:
lowing do you understand the difference between culture and religion? because you cant say that islam wouldnt work in the west because our culture is so vastly different the the various cultures throughout ME, africa etc... thats why muslims in america/europe ARE a good indicator because they are intergrated into our culture yet still beleive in their religion. islam is not more violent than many other religions/sects/cults yet they exist fine in the west and there is no reason why islam couldnt...
If you are narrowing the boundaries that define Islam, then you are being the extremist onelowing wrote:
Islam is more than just a religion, it is a way of life. If you do not think so, then you are not practicing Islam.
1. If you noticed I didn't use the German people, then do not argue that I my analogy did. My anaolgy did reflect he Islamic example. Nazi party being an organization ( religion) with certain ideologies ( beliefs). This may not reflect the personalities however, of ALL members and actions of this organization ( religion) never the less the organization ( religion) itself is cloaked in violence, and intolerance.CameronPoe wrote:
I noticed you chose not to use Germans as your example, hence the reason your analogy didn't reflect the Islamic example. I corrected your analogy for you to make it more representative of reality. If you can't accept that then you are in fact finally losing it.lowing wrote:
1. Cam if you read closely you will see that I did not mention the German people, not once, I sadi the Nazi Party. So pretty much your rsponse is invalid, try again. Also do not forget t oexpalin how Islam in the world is none of my business becasue I am not Muslim, yet the Isarali Palestinian conflict is YOUR business.You really can't handle being wrong can you? Describing someone who is very specifically not generalising as a 'generaliser'. Hilarious.lowing wrote:
2. I did not mention terrorism, that is another matter. Again stop trying to take my argument to the extreme so you can justify yours. I condemn a religion not individuals. This religion is violent and intolerant. Individuals within it may not be, but this religion IS. Again you are using the "small insignificant" members of this religion outside the ME as your sample. This is generalizing on your part, and we do dnot generalize.
2. Using a small sample of people as your proof is not generalizing, but using a countries laws and beliefs is generalizing.ok got it. I don't care if I an wrong, other than telling me based on your own opinion, show me links to pages proving to me that Islam is not violent, or intolerant to non-believers gays or women. Now remember I said ISLAM I did not say specific individuals.
I would care as little as if they put up another cookie cutter protestant establishment (not church, but establishment - I know what words I use) or any other religious structure or gathering place. Idiocy and ignorance breeds violence, and misinterpretation. No religion is without weakness for this or immune from such trappings.
God I hope not, becasue if the did, we are in real trouble with Islam. More than I thought.sergeriver wrote:
Many people live according to the rules of their Religion.
Then a couple of guys who were up to no good, started building Mosques in my neighbourhood.
READ GODDAMNIT READ. Read the words that I write. Your analogy was CRAP. I didn't say you used German people in the analogy. I said that you should have: that way your analogy would have been worth something. FACT: The majority of Muslim people across the entire world are peaceful adherents of their religion. Germans for instance in 1933. FACT: A small number of Muslims engage in violent acts driven by selective reading of the Q'uran. The Nazi party if you will, all of whose members believed in Germanic supremacy (much like Al Qaeda and other minority groups). Nazis represented a MINORITY of the Germanic people. Most Germans wanted to get on with their lives and live in peace and prosperity.lowing wrote:
1. If you noticed I didn't use the German people, then do not argue that I my analogy did. My anaolgy did reflect he Islamic example. Nazi party being an organization ( religion) with certain ideologies ( beliefs). This may not reflect the personalities however, of ALL members and actions of this organization ( religion) never the less the organization ( religion) itself is cloaked in violence, and intolerance.
I also note that you use this Nazi example because you want to equate Nazism with Islam, which is quite frankly disgusting. A real Goebbels tactic if ever there was one...
Read my edit. I am using a far more massive majority of people than you could ever muster in your stupid generalisations. A list of Islamic countries a mile long where the Q'uran is not interepreted as you would have us believe it is interpreted everywhere. Countries where homosexuality doesn't warrant the death penalty. Countries where public flogging and public executions are not part of the legal system. You really are blind.lowing wrote:
2. Using a small sample of people as your proof is not generalizing, but using a countries laws and beliefs is generalizing.ok got it. I don't care if I an wrong, other than telling me based on your own opinion, show me links to pages proving to me that Islam is not violent, or intolerant to non-believers gays or women. Now remember I said ISLAM I did not say specific individuals.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-01 04:18:35)
1. No for my analogy to be crap I WOULD include all the German people, but since not ALL the German people belonged to the Nazi Party that analogy would be flawed. As I said it I judged the NAzi Party, not individuals within it. I judge Islam, not individuals within it. Why not make the comparison, I am pretty sure the Islamic leaders were allied to Germany in their "final solution" to the Jewish problem.CameronPoe wrote:
READ GODDAMNIT READ. Read the words that I write. Your analogy was CRAP. I didn't say you used German people in the analogy. I said that you should have: that way your analogy would have been worth something. FACT: The majority of Muslim people across the entire world are peaceful adherents of their religion. Germans for instance in 1933. FACT: A small number of Muslims engage in violent acts driven by selective reading of the Q'uran. The Nazi party if you will, all of whose members believed in Germanic supremacy (much like Al Qaeda and other minority groups). Nazis represented a MINORITY of the Germanic people. Most Germans wanted to get on with their lives and live in peace and prosperity.lowing wrote:
1. If you noticed I didn't use the German people, then do not argue that I my analogy did. My anaolgy did reflect he Islamic example. Nazi party being an organization ( religion) with certain ideologies ( beliefs). This may not reflect the personalities however, of ALL members and actions of this organization ( religion) never the less the organization ( religion) itself is cloaked in violence, and intolerance.
I also note that you use this Nazi example because you want to equate Nazism with Islam, which is quite frankly disgusting. A real Goebbels tactic if ever there was one...
Read my edit. I am using a far more massive majority of people than you could ever muster in your stupid generalisations. A list of Islamic countries a mile long where the Q'uran is not interepreted as you would have us believe it is interpreted everywhere. Countries where homosexuality doesn't warrant the death penalty. Countries where public flogging and public executions are not part of the legal system. You really are blind.lowing wrote:
2. Using a small sample of people as your proof is not generalizing, but using a countries laws and beliefs is generalizing.ok got it. I don't care if I an wrong, other than telling me based on your own opinion, show me links to pages proving to me that Islam is not violent, or intolerant to non-believers gays or women. Now remember I said ISLAM I did not say specific individuals.
2. You mean in these countries, women are not second class citizens under Islamic teachings and gays can freely and openly be gay without punishment, or condemnation from Islamic laws or teachings ? and this is the attitude with Islam in the world? Very cool.
Last edited by lowing (2008-04-01 04:36:42)
How is the Qu'ran worse than the Old Testament? Explain that to me coz I don't know as much as you about Religion, therefore I can't make a fair judgement about one or the other.lowing wrote:
God I hope not, becasue if the did, we are in real trouble with Islam. More than I thought.sergeriver wrote:
Many people live according to the rules of their Religion.
Here is a cast iron irrefutable fact: The interpretation of the Q'uran that is adhered to by the majority of people throughout the entire Islamic world and in the west is a peaceful interpretation. The interpretation of the Q'uran adhered to in the likes of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and the North West Frontier Provinces has violent elements especially in terms of punishments for contravention of Sharia Law. The interpretation of the Q'uran adhered to by a number of militant groups such as Al Qaeda (extreme minorities) is extremely violent and culturally imperialistic.lowing wrote:
1. No for my analogy to be crap I WOULD include all the German people, but since not ALL the German people belonged to the Nazi Party that analogy would be flawed. As I said it I judged the NAzi Party, not individuals within it. I judge Islam, not individuals within it. Why not make the comparison, I am pretty sure the Islamic leaders were allied to Germany in their "final solution" to the Jewish problem.
Incidentally Zionist organisations allied themselves with Hitler strangely enough....
There is no legal basis in many of those countries for violently punishing them on the basis of their being gay or female. You won't see flogging or public executions either.lowing wrote:
2. You mean in these countries, women are not second class citizens under Islamic teachings and gays can freely and openly be gay without punishment, or condemnation from Islamic laws or teachings ? and this is the attitude with Islam in the world? Very cool.
Thank the lord only minority of Americans and practically noone else in the rest of the world holds the opinions you hold. Otherwise we'd all quite possibly be dead already.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-01 05:06:04)
ROFLCameronPoe wrote:
READ GODDAMNIT READ
If Lowing is analphabetic as well, I wonder who's posting his comments, unless of course Cam ascended to the status of archangel.
Here are the stats:
Predominantly Islamic Countries (with capital punishment details in parentheses)
Bosnia & Herzegovina (N/A)
Kosovo (N/A)
Albania (N/A)
Turkey (N/A)
Azerbaijan (N/A)
Bahrain (Murder, Treason)
Bangladesh (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Prostitute Trafficking)
Brunei (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Weapons Trafficking)
Kazakhstan (N/A)
Tajikistan (Murder, Rape, Terrorism, Genocide)
Turkmenistan (N/A)
Uzbekistan (N/A)
Pakistan (Murder, Sodomy, Gang Rape, Mutiny)
Lebanon (Murder)
Jordan (Murder)
Afghanistan (Murder, Child Smuggling for organ use (??), Apostasy)
Iran (Sodomy, Apostasy, Terrorism, Rape, Kidnap, Drug Trafficking, Murder)
Iraq (Murder, Rape, Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Malaysia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Gun Crime)
Maldives (Murder)
Indonesia (Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Oman (Murder, Drug Trafficking)
Qatar (Treason, Apostasy (no recorded executions for apostasy however))
Saudi Arabia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Apostasy, Witchcraft, Sexual Misconduct) <- often by sword
Syria (Treason, Murder, Desertion, Rape, Aggravated Robbery)
Kuwait (Drug Trafficking, Rape, Murder)
UAE (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Homosexuality, Rape, Treason, Apostasy, Terrorism)
Yemen (Murder, Adultery, Homosexuality, Apostasy)
Egypt (Murder, Treason, Kidnapping & Rape)
Libya (Murder, Treason)
Algeria (Treason, Terrorism, Murder, Kidnap, Aggravated Robbery)
Tunisia (N/A)
Morocco (Terrorism (soon to be abolished altogether)
Sudan (Sodomy, Treason, Apostasy, Prostitution, Murder, Arms Trafficking, Drug Trafficking)
I've highlighted in orange bold the minority of Islamic nations that issue capital punishment for sexual 'deviancy' or 'Islamic' reasons, as per their archaic interpretation of Islam (as compared against the interpretation in the other nations).
For comparison:
USA (Murder, Espionage, Treason, Drug Trafficking)
EU (N/A)
Coupling the above facts with the fact that Islam-driven acts of terror are perpetrated by an even smaller minority of people and are rather few and far between we rationally come to the conclusion that:
Islam is predominantly peaceful. Intolerant maybe, but hey: it's a young religion.
Predominantly Islamic Countries (with capital punishment details in parentheses)
Bosnia & Herzegovina (N/A)
Kosovo (N/A)
Albania (N/A)
Turkey (N/A)
Azerbaijan (N/A)
Bahrain (Murder, Treason)
Bangladesh (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Prostitute Trafficking)
Brunei (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Weapons Trafficking)
Kazakhstan (N/A)
Tajikistan (Murder, Rape, Terrorism, Genocide)
Turkmenistan (N/A)
Uzbekistan (N/A)
Pakistan (Murder, Sodomy, Gang Rape, Mutiny)
Lebanon (Murder)
Jordan (Murder)
Afghanistan (Murder, Child Smuggling for organ use (??), Apostasy)
Iran (Sodomy, Apostasy, Terrorism, Rape, Kidnap, Drug Trafficking, Murder)
Iraq (Murder, Rape, Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Malaysia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Gun Crime)
Maldives (Murder)
Indonesia (Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Oman (Murder, Drug Trafficking)
Qatar (Treason, Apostasy (no recorded executions for apostasy however))
Saudi Arabia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Apostasy, Witchcraft, Sexual Misconduct) <- often by sword
Syria (Treason, Murder, Desertion, Rape, Aggravated Robbery)
Kuwait (Drug Trafficking, Rape, Murder)
UAE (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Homosexuality, Rape, Treason, Apostasy, Terrorism)
Yemen (Murder, Adultery, Homosexuality, Apostasy)
Egypt (Murder, Treason, Kidnapping & Rape)
Libya (Murder, Treason)
Algeria (Treason, Terrorism, Murder, Kidnap, Aggravated Robbery)
Tunisia (N/A)
Morocco (Terrorism (soon to be abolished altogether)
Sudan (Sodomy, Treason, Apostasy, Prostitution, Murder, Arms Trafficking, Drug Trafficking)
I've highlighted in orange bold the minority of Islamic nations that issue capital punishment for sexual 'deviancy' or 'Islamic' reasons, as per their archaic interpretation of Islam (as compared against the interpretation in the other nations).
For comparison:
USA (Murder, Espionage, Treason, Drug Trafficking)
EU (N/A)
Coupling the above facts with the fact that Islam-driven acts of terror are perpetrated by an even smaller minority of people and are rather few and far between we rationally come to the conclusion that:
Islam is predominantly peaceful. Intolerant maybe, but hey: it's a young religion.
Last edited by CameronPoe (2008-04-01 05:44:18)
Well somehow i doubt the Islamic countries in north africa were very pleased about German invasion.. correct me if im mistaken but didnt the british gather armies through out africa and the middle east to fight the germans?lowing wrote:
1. No for my analogy to be crap I WOULD include all the German people, but since not ALL the German people belonged to the Nazi Party that analogy would be flawed. As I said it I judged the NAzi Party, not individuals within it. I judge Islam, not individuals within it. Why not make the comparison, I am pretty sure the Islamic leaders were allied to Germany in their "final solution" to the Jewish problem.CameronPoe wrote:
READ GODDAMNIT READ. Read the words that I write. Your analogy was CRAP. I didn't say you used German people in the analogy. I said that you should have: that way your analogy would have been worth something. FACT: The majority of Muslim people across the entire world are peaceful adherents of their religion. Germans for instance in 1933. FACT: A small number of Muslims engage in violent acts driven by selective reading of the Q'uran. The Nazi party if you will, all of whose members believed in Germanic supremacy (much like Al Qaeda and other minority groups). Nazis represented a MINORITY of the Germanic people. Most Germans wanted to get on with their lives and live in peace and prosperity.lowing wrote:
1. If you noticed I didn't use the German people, then do not argue that I my analogy did. My anaolgy did reflect he Islamic example. Nazi party being an organization ( religion) with certain ideologies ( beliefs). This may not reflect the personalities however, of ALL members and actions of this organization ( religion) never the less the organization ( religion) itself is cloaked in violence, and intolerance.
I also note that you use this Nazi example because you want to equate Nazism with Islam, which is quite frankly disgusting. A real Goebbels tactic if ever there was one...
Read my edit. I am using a far more massive majority of people than you could ever muster in your stupid generalisations. A list of Islamic countries a mile long where the Q'uran is not interepreted as you would have us believe it is interpreted everywhere. Countries where homosexuality doesn't warrant the death penalty. Countries where public flogging and public executions are not part of the legal system. You really are blind.lowing wrote:
2. Using a small sample of people as your proof is not generalizing, but using a countries laws and beliefs is generalizing.ok got it. I don't care if I an wrong, other than telling me based on your own opinion, show me links to pages proving to me that Islam is not violent, or intolerant to non-believers gays or women. Now remember I said ISLAM I did not say specific individuals.
2. You mean in these countries, women are not second class citizens under Islamic teachings and gays can freely and openly be gay without punishment, or condemnation from Islamic laws or teachings ? and this is the attitude with Islam in the world? Very cool.
so id say u are flawed there as well... i doubt muslims preach the destruction of judaism... (their removal from isreal mabye.. but thats a hole nothing topic entirely.)
Lowing: Perhaps a better analogy would be to compare a sect of Islam (ie, Wahabbism) to the Nazi Party.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
I could only be bothered to read about 20 pages of this thread, so be patient with me. I'll simply adress the OP.
We have a mosque in our small city, and it doesn't bother me. Interestingly enough, the mosque was built next to the location where the catholics men's choir holds its sessions, and they get along fine.
By comparison, we have a lot more christian churches here than mosques, in line with the demographic. Freedom of religion applies to everyone, as long as the religion in question doesn't go against the secular law. Interestingly, muslims here seem to be able to do both ( practice their religion and follow our secular laws ). So I wouldn't know why this should not be possible in other countries.
Lowing will probably argue that those aren't "real" muslims, and that they're not following "real" islam by living peacefully among us.
But even if that were true, it would only mean that islam as a religion is still under development. As Cam has said, islam is a "young" religion, compared to other big monotheistic religions, so it should come at no surprise that there is room for improvement.
Those 1.3-1.6 billions muslims won't just go away, you know. We all live on the same planet, and there is simply no way for us to exclude muslims from our societies in the long run. The influence islam has had on this planet is undeniable.
So, lowing doesn't like islam, and what it represents. Fair enough. Neither do I. Some aspects of this religion are backwards, and contradict our western beliefs with regard to various issues, such as women's rights, gays, freedom of religion, and others. But as I said, islam is not going away. Just ignoring it cannot be an option. if we want to help muslims all over the world to get rid off the more radical and oppressive parts of their religion, we need to approach them. Isolation cannot be the solution.
We have a mosque in our small city, and it doesn't bother me. Interestingly enough, the mosque was built next to the location where the catholics men's choir holds its sessions, and they get along fine.
By comparison, we have a lot more christian churches here than mosques, in line with the demographic. Freedom of religion applies to everyone, as long as the religion in question doesn't go against the secular law. Interestingly, muslims here seem to be able to do both ( practice their religion and follow our secular laws ). So I wouldn't know why this should not be possible in other countries.
Lowing will probably argue that those aren't "real" muslims, and that they're not following "real" islam by living peacefully among us.
But even if that were true, it would only mean that islam as a religion is still under development. As Cam has said, islam is a "young" religion, compared to other big monotheistic religions, so it should come at no surprise that there is room for improvement.
Those 1.3-1.6 billions muslims won't just go away, you know. We all live on the same planet, and there is simply no way for us to exclude muslims from our societies in the long run. The influence islam has had on this planet is undeniable.
So, lowing doesn't like islam, and what it represents. Fair enough. Neither do I. Some aspects of this religion are backwards, and contradict our western beliefs with regard to various issues, such as women's rights, gays, freedom of religion, and others. But as I said, islam is not going away. Just ignoring it cannot be an option. if we want to help muslims all over the world to get rid off the more radical and oppressive parts of their religion, we need to approach them. Isolation cannot be the solution.
And the award for best post of the thread goes to B.Schuss. +1B.Schuss wrote:
I could only be bothered to read about 20 pages of this thread, so be patient with me. I'll simply adress the OP.
We have a mosque in our small city, and it doesn't bother me. Interestingly enough, the mosque was built next to the location where the catholics men's choir holds its sessions, and they get along fine.
By comparison, we have a lot more christian churches here than mosques, in line with the demographic. Freedom of religion applies to everyone, as long as the religion in question doesn't go against the secular law. Interestingly, muslims here seem to be able to do both ( practice their religion and follow our secular laws ). So I wouldn't know why this should not be possible in other countries.
Lowing will probably argue that those aren't "real" muslims, and that they're not following "real" islam by living peacefully among us.
But even if that were true, it would only mean that islam as a religion is still under development. As Cam has said, islam is a "young" religion, compared to other big monotheistic religions, so it should come at no surprise that there is room for improvement.
Those 1.3-1.6 billions muslims won't just go away, you know. We all live on the same planet, and there is simply no way for us to exclude muslims from our societies in the long run. The influence islam has had on this planet is undeniable.
So, lowing doesn't like islam, and what it represents. Fair enough. Neither do I. Some aspects of this religion are backwards, and contradict our western beliefs with regard to various issues, such as women's rights, gays, freedom of religion, and others. But as I said, islam is not going away. Just ignoring it cannot be an option. if we want to help muslims all over the world to get rid off the more radical and oppressive parts of their religion, we need to approach them. Isolation cannot be the solution.
Last edited by sergeriver (2008-04-01 11:21:31)
What's wrong with capital punishment for (gang) rape? Seriously, they should introduce it here in Holland.CameronPoe wrote:
Here are the stats:
Predominantly Islamic Countries (with capital punishment details in parentheses)
Bosnia & Herzegovina (N/A)
Kosovo (N/A)
Albania (N/A)
Turkey (N/A)
Azerbaijan (N/A)
Bahrain (Murder, Treason)
Bangladesh (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Prostitute Trafficking)
Brunei (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Weapons Trafficking)
Kazakhstan (N/A)
Tajikistan (Murder, Rape, Terrorism, Genocide)
Turkmenistan (N/A)
Uzbekistan (N/A)
Pakistan (Murder, Sodomy, Gang Rape, Mutiny)
Lebanon (Murder)
Jordan (Murder)
Afghanistan (Murder, Child Smuggling for organ use (??), Apostasy)
Iran (Sodomy, Apostasy, Terrorism, Rape, Kidnap, Drug Trafficking, Murder)
Iraq (Murder, Rape, Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Malaysia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Gun Crime)
Maldives (Murder)
Indonesia (Drug Trafficking, Terrorism)
Oman (Murder, Drug Trafficking)
Qatar (Treason, Apostasy (no recorded executions for apostasy however))
Saudi Arabia (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Apostasy, Witchcraft, Sexual Misconduct) <- often by sword
Syria (Treason, Murder, Desertion, Rape, Aggravated Robbery)
Kuwait (Drug Trafficking, Rape, Murder)
UAE (Murder, Drug Trafficking, Homosexuality, Rape, Treason, Apostasy, Terrorism)
Yemen (Murder, Adultery, Homosexuality, Apostasy)
Egypt (Murder, Treason, Kidnapping & Rape)
Libya (Murder, Treason)
Algeria (Treason, Terrorism, Murder, Kidnap, Aggravated Robbery)
Tunisia (N/A)
Morocco (Terrorism (soon to be abolished altogether)
Sudan (Sodomy, Treason, Apostasy, Prostitution, Murder, Arms Trafficking, Drug Trafficking)
I've highlighted in orange bold the minority of Islamic nations that issue capital punishment for sexual 'deviancy' or 'Islamic' reasons, as per their archaic interpretation of Islam (as compared against the interpretation in the other nations).
For comparison:
USA (Murder, Espionage, Treason, Drug Trafficking)
EU (N/A)
Coupling the above facts with the fact that Islam-driven acts of terror are perpetrated by an even smaller minority of people and are rather few and far between we rationally come to the conclusion that:
Islam is predominantly peaceful. Intolerant maybe, but hey: it's a young religion.
Gang rape is currently quite fashionably here amongst low-intellect teenagers. What they do now is "sentence" the perpetrators to a 2-day perpetrator-course, then send them back to school in the same class as their victim. If the girl has a problem with it, then that's her problem since the perpetrators have "served their sentence".
FFS capital punishment is the least you can do! These guys deserve to be burned on a stake, are never gonna make a signifcant contribution to society, they'll only cost money and remain scum for the rest of their lives.
But then again Holland is also the country that practically promotes softdrugs (though punishes the cultivators) and, to enable prostitutes to pay taxes, legalized prostitution, meanwhile stimulating human trafficking a la "Lilya 4 Ever".
Oh yes,.. the Dutch pride for being tolerant and social,.. scared and selfish that is! God/Allah, I hate this country's policies!
P.S. pardon me for the off topic raging.
Here is a cast iron irrefutable fact: Islam considered violent intolerant and archaic by many nations, that is EXACTLY why govts. are doing back flips to appease this religion, they are afraid of the consequences of NOT appearing to be "pro-Islam". It is EXACTLY the reason why other countries like Denmark have taken a stand again being intimidated by this religion and printing FREELY any damn thing they want. You think for some reason I am the only person that sees Islam as a 500 year old outdated, intolerant religion, yet you can find article after article, story after story, written by people farther "in the know" )be they ex-Muslim or not,) than you or I that completely and utterly say YOU ARE WRONG.CameronPoe wrote:
Here is a cast iron irrefutable fact: The interpretation of the Q'uran that is adhered to by the majority of people throughout the entire Islamic world and in the west is a peaceful interpretation. The interpretation of the Q'uran adhered to in the likes of Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan and the North West Frontier Provinces has violent elements especially in terms of punishments for contravention of Sharia Law. The interpretation of the Q'uran adhered to by a number of militant groups such as Al Qaeda (extreme minorities) is extremely violent and culturally imperialistic.lowing wrote:
1. No for my analogy to be crap I WOULD include all the German people, but since not ALL the German people belonged to the Nazi Party that analogy would be flawed. As I said it I judged the NAzi Party, not individuals within it. I judge Islam, not individuals within it. Why not make the comparison, I am pretty sure the Islamic leaders were allied to Germany in their "final solution" to the Jewish problem.
Incidentally Zionist organisations allied themselves with Hitler strangely enough....There is no legal basis in many of those countries for violently punishing them on the basis of their being gay or female. You won't see flogging or public executions either.lowing wrote:
2. You mean in these countries, women are not second class citizens under Islamic teachings and gays can freely and openly be gay without punishment, or condemnation from Islamic laws or teachings ? and this is the attitude with Islam in the world? Very cool.
Thank the lord only minority of Americans and practically noone else in the rest of the world holds the opinions you hold. Otherwise we'd all quite possibly be dead already.
No it isn't.lowing wrote:
Here is a cast iron irrefutable fact: Islam considered violent intolerant and archaic by many nations, that is EXACTLY why govts. are doing back flips to appease this religion, they are afraid of the consequences of NOT appearing to be "pro-Islam". It is EXACTLY the reason why other countries like Denmark have taken a stand again being intimidated by this religion and printing FREELY any damn thing they want.
I'd refute that all day long.
lowing wrote:
I am the only person that sees Islam as a 500 year old outdated, intolerant religion.