HOME | DD
AtheosEmanon — Muslim doesn't equal Terrorist
by-nc-nd
Published: 2011-07-31 20:50:04 +0000 UTC; Views: 11319; Favourites: 385; Downloads: 53
Redirect to original
Description
This is a simple stamp I am doing. I do not think this requires much explanation. Looking around on this site, and on another site that I am on [sodahead] people get so angry when you will not equate Muslim with terrorist.If you do not say that all Muslims are terrorists they smear you as anti American. Which is idiotic.
As someone who has many Muslim family members, several of whom are in the US military, two of whom have died in combat defending this country.
It would be a disservice to my family, especially the Muslims [all muslims even those who are not in my family] who died defending this country, to just lump them all in with the terrorists and textual literalists. Yes, there may be some questionable verses in the Quran where modern terrorists will use for their personal gains, but most of these texts are taken and should be understand from a historical standpoint of what Muhammad and other Muslims went through in the infancy of the faith where being a new religion left them open to attacks from the established faiths and being of a cultural difference in a time where culture was all that mattered also left them open to some attacks. So when used in modern tongue to incite violence, it would do a disservice to their own faith in that the same book that they use to speak of violence speaks to them not being the ones who are supposed to instigate said violence in many other verses.
It is one thing to say Islamic extremists are bad and condemn them. It is quite another thing to say ALL MUSLIMS are bad people because of what the extremists do. If extremists do terrible things, I shall condemn them, I shall not then say well... they were Muslims so all Muslims are bad. That, to me, makes no sense.
I condemn all acts of religious extremism or acts that are done by non-religious people who needlessly kill innocent people. Yet I will not go..well that person is a Christian, so all Christians are bad. That person is a Jew, so all Jews are bad. That person is a Muslim, so all Muslims are bad. That person is an atheist, so all atheists are bad.
Then you always get the.. typical liberal!!! Muslim apologist!!
It is not that we defend Muslims, it is that we do not condemn the vast majority who have not done anything and attempt to attribute the actions of the extremists to them….for that is not logically sound.
My favorite is when they try and use the text of Islam to show why all Muslims are terrorist… yeah, I guess all Jews are terrorists as well since their text aka old testament is just as bad…
People of all religions have their extremists. I would no more smear Muslims for the terrorists acts of the minority than I would smear all Christians for the tens of thousands of kids that have been abused and in some cases killed by extremist Christians in south Africa [“Saving Africa’s witch children” is the name of the documentary done on this] nor would I condemn all Christians for the acts of the “Lord's Resistance Army” who are a Christian paramilitary group who is killing people, raping people, etc.
I mean if the only basis for judging them as people is the text then certainly stoning your mother for wearing a dress of different fabrics, stoning anyone who is not a virgin, stoning anyone who believes in a different god.. all of which are in the old testament would also qualify those groups as terrorists...
As Aesop says in his “The wolf and the lamb” … “A tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny” Okay, some groups, like the Islamic extremists, use religion, others use nationalism, others use ethnicity… does not make the whole group bad.
So I will say again, I will not smear all Muslims, as bad people because of what a minority of their faith does, that, to me, makes absolutely no sense at all.
I may be an atheist, but as stated above, I have family members who are Muslim, Christians, Jewish, Buddhists and many other faiths. So it would not be logically sound for me to smear ALL MUSLIMS as being terrorists for what a small minority of the faith does.
If you have a different opinion, that is great, then make your own stamp equating Islam/Muslims to terrorism. I am not here to have an online pissing match.
As always comrades,
Let knowledge be that truth, which portrays humanity, condemns malevolence; that respects the differences in others while abandoning the hatred and misconceptions of the past.
-Emanon
Related content
Comments: 656
Islam is not having there's now. This has been going on since the Ottoman period, and it's not changing. When a group is being taught that violence is okay through the use of "holy" books and that acting on said violence is ok, then that "book"/religion is not a good one. These terror attacks will continue to happen as long as Islam is taught as the "religion of peace" to the people. It's fact that has been proven time and again. I'm honestly getting sick and tired of Muslim apologists trying to turn the table on this issue. Terrorists have killed enough of our family and friends. Stop making excuses and help solve the issue so that the deaths of innocents will cease!
EDIT: And also, that example you brought up about the OT was baloney. What are you even saying? That makes no sense. I told you that I said "inb4 you bring Christianity into a conversation where it wasn't mentioned and bring a random strawman into it"
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
a period for me is not a season, what we saw during the ottoman empire was dominion, absolute control, the battle for the future of the faith is coexistence,,, and that is the period that is happening now, one faction, smaller but louder and more violent trying to drag the rest of it back to a dominionist view.
I do not believe in any of the religious texts, relics of a people during a particular time, holding little, for me, relative modern view but I am an atheist so people can believe whatever they choose to believe.
When you have 1.6 billion people.. what percent do you think are the ones committing the actual violence?
www.thereligionofpeace.com/
even the website that tracks Islamic attacks puts that number at a small percentage of the whole, so I would not smear all people of a faith because of those that do violence in their quests to hold dominion over a region and then perhaps a world.
"terrorists" have killed more Muslims than anyone, so it is not about being a "Muslim apologist" as you just said, which makes little sense, it is not throwing the entirety of a religion or people under the bus or lumping them all together when they bear the majority of the brunt of the victims.
Per your "edit" when you read the Sermon on the mount, your Christ says until heaven and earth shall pass not one letter of the law is to be done away with until the entirety of the law is fulfilled. When one learns of what the Prophet was to do in jewish prophecy then one will see the entirety of the prophecy has not yet been fulfilled.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You're not listening to me. I told you that what Radical Muslims are doing is the same thing the Ottoman's did. Their empire crumbled (as most did) and they're still salty about it. They are trying to rebuild their empire through the use of Sharia Law in the West. Isn't it odd that every country that Muslims migrate too, that country goes to shit? I'm not slamming the people, I'm slamming the ideology they bring with them. They continue to preach that their religion is the best one, and yet if it's helped build your country to such amazing ideals, why are you running from it in hopes of a better life? That's right, because there's war in the streets. And you can't say "oh that's in the past" because this theory has been shown accurate in modern times. Sweden, Germany, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, etc. Wherever Islam goes, it brings death.
It really doesn't matter if you;re an atheist or not. That's not what I asked you. You're defending these people for supporting this religion that is killing your neighbors. THAT is what I was talking about I don't give a damn about your views on their relics, etc. I'm talking about stop trying to make excuses and supporting them when what they're doing is not right. They're having so much trouble in the West because our country (US/ Canada) was built on a complete different set of ideals than them. Our country was built on the back of Christianity, while there's was built on Sharia.
And you prove my point of supporting them by pointing out the small percentage. Yes, there is a small percentage of Muslims that are killing, but that's just it. That "small" percent is causing the most damage! There was a study done recently that polled Muslims and asked the question, "Do you believe that infidels should be killed for their lack of faith?" About 40% believed that they should be killed, about 50% believed that they wouldn't kill them, but wouldn't help if they WERE being killed, and only 10% didn't want them to be killed. Now don't quote me on the numbers cause I don't have the poll in front of me, but that is a shockingly low number of Muslims that believe "infidels" shouldn't be slaughtered for not believing in their Allah and prophet Mohammed (and yes, I know they don't worship Mohammed and only look to him as a spiritual leading figure. I have studied this religion, I was only making a point). When you baby these people and tell them that it's ok to continue following this religion that creates terrorists you're not helping anybody. The small percentage is doing more damage than a large crowd of Westerners could ever do. And seeing as you have seen the website that tracks Islamic TERRORIST attacks I'm shocked that you're still supporting this as you've seen the staggeringly high number of deaths committed at their hands.
"'terrorists' have killed more Muslims than anyone, so it is not about being a "Muslim apologist" as you just said," TERRORISTS. ARE. BORN. FROM. ISLAM. WHICH. MUSLIMS. FOLLOW. MEANING. THEY. ARE MUSLIMS. Jesus Christ! It's not that hard to put two and two together. "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim." There are exceptions to this rule of course (eg: The Columbine shooters), but when the majority of a certain killing group come from a group that follow a list of certain ideals, WHAT DO YOU THINK THEY'LL BE CLASSIFIED AS?! AND CORRECTLY SO. Not to mention the fact that literally EVERY terrorist screams "Allah Akbar" before they blow themselves and others to bits.
"which makes little sense, it is not throwing the entirety of a religion or people under the bus or lumping them all together when they bear the majority of the brunt of the victims" Now I have Muslim friends, don't get me wrong. As I said before, I am not slamming the people (and by people I mean the majority that live in the West and don't fully follow the Quran's teaching on violence, and are generally nice people, not the radicals), but there comes a time where you have to put your foot down and aid those trying to stop the dying of lives. This is starting to piss me, and many people off. They need to STOP killing our families and friends, and the very first step is at the source: The Quran and "prophet" Mohammad (I could rant about this vile, evil man for decades but I'll save you the time and energy).
EDIT: And once again you are just putting gibberish together and expecting me to understand what you're talking about. Stop it. What are you talking about? First off, "your Christ" is pretty damn insulting. I get that you're an atheist, but the common courtesy is to say "Christ" when speaking to someone who believes in Him. The majority of the world follow this respectful rule. Second, what prophecy are you talking about? I don't get what you're saying. Are you talking about Revelation? Because yes, God did say that the laws He set in place for this world, Heaven and hell shall not pass away until the law is fulfilled, so what are you trying to say? That the prophecy hasn't come to pass yet? Congratulations, they tend not to do that until the time they're meant to. And why are you bringing Jewish prophecies into a conversation about Christianity? They're two separate things.
EDIT 2: You and I BOTH know that that website you linked is not the only one that points out the atrocities Muslims commit because of Islam. Don't cherry-pick websites. Pull up the lists and statistical facts you're glossing over in favor of keeping them in a good light.
👍: 0 ⏩: 4
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
"TERRORISTS. ARE. BORN. FROM. ISLAM. WHICH. MUSLIMS. FOLLOW. MEANING. THEY. ARE MUSLIMS. Jesus Christ! It's not that hard to put two and two together. Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim."
Christian terrorists in the world outnumber Muslim ones by a wide margin, according to US & international law enforcement organisations. Between the KKK, Christian Identity, the Lord's Resistance Army, the IRA, all the white nationalist Christian militias, and the individual Christian terrorists like Anders Breivik, there's no shortage of terrorists that aren't Muslim. Also, terrorism has been around for a long time, and only in recent years has it been "born from Islam." Guy Fawkes? 1st century Jewish Sicarii Zealots in Judaea Province? The Sons of Liberty? The leaders of France's Reign of Terror? Irish Republican Brotherhood? All terrorists of their times, none of them Muslim. And the Muslims of the 1770s were apparently peaceful enough that the Founding Fathers of the US made special note of it in the Treaty of Tripoli.
It's important to know your history, lest we make the mistake of repeating it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Oh FUCK OFF. Seriously.
I stopped paying attention to this months ago. I already stated in the previous comment thread that there are some exceptions to the rule, but most are Muslim because of the Quran, which they follow. I'm done repeating myself over and over to people that won't listen. We've already seen the effects the Quran's teachings have had in our world today. Countries ruled by it are going to shit and their citizens are running to OUR countries because their's are dying. Then, because they are still following the Quran, they begin to infect us as well.
This is getting really annoying. Don't come to me with that "holier-than-thou-educate-yourself-lest-you-repeat-mistakes" attitude. You're not that slick and I'm all out of shits to give.
If you guys want to continue ignoring what's going on right in front of your damn eyes than fine, do what you want, but I will fight to keep those I care about safe as long as I can.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
And yet, everything you said is equally true of Christians. Look at Uganda, for instance. Or the sheer number of terrorist organisations committing crimes in the name of Christianity (KKK, Christian Identity, the IRA, Lord's Resistance Army, etc.). Fact: Christian terrorists outnumber Muslim terrorists by a wide margin. They're just not noted as much in sensationalist news outlets.
There's a billion Muslims on the planet, and a few thousand are terrorists. The ones leaving Muslim countries are fleeing the terrorists - you know, the people who mostly target other Muslims for not being fundamentalist enough? Would you stay in a place where the local Christians were terrorised by the KKK for not falling in line with their ideals?
I'm not "slick." I'm just not an uneducated bigot, and I've actually met hundreds of Muslims. They exist all over the place, and the ones I met during my time in NYC were all anti-jihadi, pro-America Muslim Americans (many were born here, in fact).
But hey, believe what you like. "Most Muslims are terrorists!" "Most Mexicans are drug dealers!" "Most Catholics are paedophiles!" All equally correct. But you know what? Don't be surprised when other people call you out on your backwards stereotyping, conspiracy-like claims & misinformation.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
LMAO How long did it take you to come up with that? It is LITERALLY almost January. I believe I told you to piss off? You should probably do that then.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
It is 11:52 PM here in NYC, I will check back on in the morning and throughout the day tomorrow to await a reply and will try to make it shorter but that of course depends on how much I will reply back to.
I hope it will remain civil as it has for the most part thus far.
enjoy your evening. I must be off now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
a long comment, this should be interesting, I will try to address your points made and hopefully, this will not become a never-ending discussion but time will tell. I am longwinded, for that I do apologize and will try to shorten my responses in your reply since I do not want this just getting longer and longer and becoming a neve-ending disagreemnt.
I was listening to you, I merely disagreed with you. I am of the Aesop's view that a tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny, nationalism, and religion have been the two most used ones over the centuries for those that cling to the past that never was to go to a position they never had, in the fundamentalists case it is controlling the Arab world first and then the entire world after that.
Though with respect to the Ottomans, there were issues within the faith since the death of Mohammed over which branch was the right one, breaking away to the two primary sects we know now, and thus the two primary ones fighting with each other.
You say you are not slamming a people after saying every country they migrate to goes to shit... that is some interesting nonshamming of a people.
When you utilize "they" having traveled to many countries around this beautiful world, , yes there are some fundamentalists that believe some vile, things and believe in the subjugation of this and that group. and I make it a habit to condemn the vile ones like Al Qaeda, ISIL etc without just throwing the entirety of 1.8 billion people under the same banner as those harming them.
Of course, we must not forget our hand in such things, when we look at, especially the modern violence, the congressional report from 1956 Bruce-Lovette Report which showed that since the 1940s Americans have been interfering and overthrowing and in some cases backing the most violent of groups in order to overthrow leaders that would not do our bidding or just to install leaders who would be more favorable to us. - - we certainly do not bear the brunt of the blame, but one has to wonder what would the world be if we had not thrown over the PM of Iran in 1953, if we had not turned a blind eye to Saudi Arabia for decades at which funds some of the most violent fundamentalist groups around the world and yet we turn a blind eye to it.
You asked nothing, but I told you. I am defending not massively generalizing a people, if we are speaking of just the radicals that is one thing, but the comment seems to expand beyond that, to even the victims that attempt to flee to safety after being slaughtered by the radicals.
"supporting them when what they're doing is not right."
Show me one instance in my comment where I supported radical Islam? .
"was built on a completely different set of ideals than them. Our country was built on the back of Christianity, while there's was built on Sharia. "
I would imagine your understanding of Sharia to be the Western narrative, where Sharia just means god's law, it is what tells Muslims to pray 5x a day, proper bathing, the law etc.. but I would not wish to live under any type of religious law...
Though as a Black man in this country (America) .. this nation was founding on the genocide of one group and the enslavement of another.. let us not boil that down into simply "Christianity"
Of course their nations were not simply founded on Sharia since before Islam those people were already thre, they just had a mix and match of more spiritualist type faiths,... which is part of the reason the idiots in ISIL Are blowing up statues of a culture that traces its roots in some cases long before the founding of Islam.
So it is proving your point as to not throw the entirety of a people under a bush by pointing out the fact that I do distinguish between the radicals doing the violence and those non-radicalized Muslims at which are the largest percent of the victims.. if it is proving your point to make sure to distinguish between villain and victim then that seems and odd point to have to prove.
I am not disagreeing with your claim that a study was done, you said "recently" when I googled for that study or rather the question you quotes the only study that came up was a 2010 study, was that the one you are referring to? I am unsure since you said "study done recently" and 7 years ago is not exactly a recent study.
If you are referring to that 2010 study, yes I am aware of it, I am also aware if you look at the 2010 study they spoke to around 2-3,000 people..
Now of those 2-3,000 people, they harbor some nonsense views, but where I stop short is.. okay the views of 3,000 people can be used to just mass generalize the 1.6 billion people within that religion. That is where we appear to differ.
www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/…
The other I found citing numbers are mostly from a 2011 poll of Muslims in countries
Since we are speaking of Sharia, I found the countries and how they view ISIS vs their views of the sharia interesting. In Indonesia, 72% of people support Sharia, and yet 79% view ISIL unfavorably. In Jordan, 71% support Sharia yet 94% view ISIL unfavorable.
I do not mean to be condescending but am asking seriously have you ever taken a religious studies course? In these courses we learned beyond the mere Western understanding of the text of the book and to look at them academically. Yes, to the Western understanding you hear sharia and the first thing one thinks is beheading of people, violence, but the text is far more than just that, Sharia covers some of the most mundane things like burial rituals, prayer, dietary etc.. to yes even the brutality to a point though in the Sharia it is meant more for times of war and you are not supposed to harm civilians.
I am supporting not conflating terrorists with general Muslims. Yes look at that site, with 1.8 billion Muslims on earth, the site says there have been around 32K attacks since 9/11 condemn those that do the attacks, but I do not just go all Muslims this or that because as you saw on the site.. the majority of people they have killed are also Muslims.
"TERRORISTS. ARE. BORN. FROM. ISLAM. WHICH. MUSLIMS. FOLLOW. MEANING. THEY. ARE MUSLIMS"
Terrorists are born from Islam which Muslims follow so that equates the two groups? I am sure the capitalization was meant to convey some rah rah charge, .. but it remains the point still, I shall condemn the acts of violence, not throw the entirety of a people. I say this as someone with family in the Middle East, some sadly have been killed by suicide bombers, have been killed in other terrorist attacks, so I will condemn the terrorists until the cows come home I just will not go... TERRORISTS BELIEVE IN ISLAM ERGO ALL BELIEVERS IN ISLAM MUST BE BAD.
... Though your letters made little sense since I never said the terrorists who did the deeds were not Muslims, nowhere in my writing did I say they were not Muslims, I just said I will not conflate them with all of the Muslims who have not done the deed.
I am going to ask you a serious question, and please do not take it the wrong way. Please answer honestly, have you studied the Quran? I am not speaking of just a few verses here and there, have you studied the text of the quran from a say academic standpoint? Religious texts, are often speak out both sides of their mouth, in one period of time one can use one verse to say violence is justified while an entirely different verse saying killing of innocents is never justified.
That is what I meant in my opening by referring to Aesop.
""Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim.""
Wait, ALL terrorists on Earth are Muslim?
Was Dylan Roof a Muslim?
Terrorism under United States statute is the use of violence to promote a political or religious ideology ... hmm, a man who walked into a church and kills 9 people because he said he believed in White supremacy and wanted to start a race war under said definition is a terrorist.
Do not get me wrong, yes the majority of terrorist attacks in the West have been done by Muslims, BUT the whole ONLY Muslims are terrorists is something I think to be bullshit.
The Buddhists in Myanmar slaughtering Muslims are terrorists. now I am not trying to paint a 1:1 picture but to say only Muslims are terrorists seems to give a free pass to all other acts of terrorism committed by non-Muslims.
The columbine shooters would not fit the US definition of domestic terrorism, they wanted to shoot up a school and did, it was not for a political or religious ideology as such even if they had lived they would not have been charged with any kind of terrorist charges.
"Now I have Muslim friends, don't get me wrong. As I said before, I am not slamming the people (and by people I mean the majority that live in the West and don't fully follow the Quran's teaching on violence, and are generally nice people, not the radicals), but there comes a time where you ...
With the greatest respect, much of your comment you are basically accusing me being a radical Islamic sympathizer because I will not throw the entirety of the faith under the bus. I do not doubt you have Muslims friends, so you would then understand my reservation of just saying MUSLIMS ARE . no the fundamentalists are.. morons, terrible, terrorists the textual literalists are the same.. but I hold off the mass MUSLIMS ARE because that would then throw them all under the bus, both villain and victim.
Have you ever been to the Middle East? I have been fortunate enough to have been several times and yes there are very violent people there, but if you ever go you will find most of the people are just ..sadly people living under violent regimes vs they all holding to the same strict view of Islam as the textual literalists do longing for a time before modern technological advancement.
"They need to STOP killing our families and friends, and the very first step is at the source: The Quran and "prophet" Mohammad (I could rant about this vile, evil man for decades but I'll save you the time and energy)."
That is part of the issue, for you "our" is just the Western world.. for me "our" includes my many relatives in the Middle East who sadly have been victims of suicide bombings, who sadly have died in terrorist shooting up a place.. and I am not just speaking of my Muslim relatives, I am also speaking of some of my Jewish family in places like Israel who fight such as well.
"EDIT: And once again you are just putting gibberish together and expecting me to understand what you're talking about. Stop it. What are you talking about? First off, "your Christ" is pretty damn insulting. I get that you're an atheist, but the common courtesy is to say "Christ" when speaking to someone who believes in Him...."
I said your Christ because I never believe the man existed if you believe such that tis fine. It is like a Gandhi quote when he sia d
'I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians, your Christians are so unlike your Christ"
he was not saying your christ to be insulting, he was saying your Christ because that is a figure in a belief structure you have at which does not exist in his belief structure, so it was an example more of an abstract idea than an actual individual.
Have you not read the Tanakh? It is really not two separate things, the reason many Jews do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah is because in the Jewish texts there are things at which the Messiah was said to do, make Israel the center of the world, bring about world peace and a list of other things at which has not been done. Now, if someone wants to believe Jesus was that individual, have at it.
www.jewfaq.org/mashiach.htm
This link speaks of what the Messiah was supposed to accomplished, now if Christians choose believe Jesus was that person then .. have at it, but when reading the text .. it does not appear to be the case. Not that I care either way, one has the right to believe in whatever they wish, if that Is Christianity for this one,. Islam for that one, Judaism for that one.. okay
"EDIT 2: You and I BOTH know that that website you linked is not the only one that points out the atrocities Muslims commit because of Islam. Don't cherry-pick websites. Pull up the lists and statistical facts you're glossing over in favor of keeping them in a good light."
So I linked you to a site at which is the most details of Islamic attack around the world and that is cherry picking websites?
If you have a site at which links and lists each and every reported terrorist attack updating almost daily of terrorists attack done by Muslims, I would like to see it.
I looked at the list, I say again, what did I say that was untrue? That the majority of their victims are Muslim, so that is why I am hesitant to just lump em all in as seemingly the same.
I would ask you another honest question, in your first comment you said
"Ok, you're right. Most"
Do you honestly believe that over 900 million Muslims are terrorists?
... I am sure when I check back I may have a very long reply and I will do my best to address each and every point made and if there was something at which you said that you feel I did not address then do point me towards it and I will do my best to address it.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
To be honest I'm growing tired of this entire conversation.
EDIT: I am also black. African-Canadian so there's that fact. I hate bringing my race into everything but you mentioned it so I thought I should too. My family also moved because of gang activity going down in my neighborhood and moved to Canada to get a safe life.
One, I have in fact taken religious courses before and in them I leaned about Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and and Hinduism.
Two, when I talk about how every country they migrate too goes to shit, I am not talking about the people. I am talking about the religion and views they bring over as a result of Sharia (which is still a shit structure and ruins everything it touches). They act in a way that does not conform to the Western ideals and laws, which is what you should do when you choose to leave your own country and immigrate to a new one. My mother did that when she and my father moved from Africa to the States, and my siblings and I did it when we moved to Canada. We truly immigrated. The problem is that Muslims do not. The majority come to a country, refuse to learn its language, and operate in the same way they would back home, which does not fit with the way it works in the Western world, and so problems arise. I am not slamming the people, only the religion their laws are based around.
Three, I don't need to go to the Middle East to know about the shit that goes down there. It doesn't matter. I know that there is a percentage there that are trying to escape and find a life elsewhere, but they have to realize that the reason their country is shit is because of Sharia. Sharia is not good. They have to know that when they migrate they have to dump Sharia in order to survive properly.
Four, "Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim." This was just an example, not an absolute. I quoted something many have said, because the statistics have shown this to be true in many cases.
Fifth, "TERRORISTS. ARE. BORN. FROM. ISLAM. WHICH. MUSLIMS. FOLLOW. MEANING. THEY. ARE MUSLIMS" I will defend this until, as you said, "The cows come home". When a group of individuals get the idea to kill "infidels" from a "holy" book, and then set to carry this out, and when they all seem to be coming from a certain religion, the point writes itself. Quit trying to stray away from the real issue here. THEY ARE KILLING OUR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS, AND CLAIMING THEY DO IT BECAUSE WE'RE "INFIDELS". They get this idea BECAUSE of the Quran. It is an evil, EVIL book.
Sixth, if you know that I believe in Christ, then it is still common courtesy to say "Christ"' rather than "your Christ". It comes off as condescending, as if I'm wrong for believing in your Christ.
Seventh, no, I have not read the Tanahk, because I don't believe in that religion, and I don't want to. It holds no relevance to me. Please do not talk to me about how it's not "two separate" things. The Bible is the only Holy Book to me that matters. All others are imitations of it. That is my belief, and I will not read it unless it is for educational purposes (which is why I read the Quran, to understand it and see why so many follow it). I already know what Jesus accomplished, and the Bible tells us of what He's GOING to accomplish. I already know all that. I don't need some crock coming up with their theories on what Jesus did/didn't do. It's all there in plain English (or whatever language it's translated in, unlike the Quran which was only supposed to be in Arabic (which is one of the RULES of the Quran)) in the Bible.
Eight, There is a reason why the majority of terrorist victims are Muslim. It is the Radicals killing the "peaceful" Muslims, that don't follow the full extent of the Quran. You said it before that Radicals believe that they are the "true" Muslims, and so they punish those that don't, and become friends with the infidels. It is said in the Quran that you are to kill those that do not believe in the religion, and those that believe but do not follow it to its extent (don't take me on my word here, I can't remember the full quote, but this is definitely the gist of it). THAT is the reason why most of the victims are Muslims. Because they choose not to kill when they SHOULD be killing. I believe the term the Radicals call them is "Suni" but I can't recall.
Honestly, I'm getting annoyed by this whole thing.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I will, once again, address every comment as I see them.
It is not about bringing race into everything, it is about the Southern Poverty Law Center said in America White nationalists and racists commit more individual acts against this or that group than Muslims, so the whole GREAT FEAR of Muslims, especially in America just makes me go eh.. because on a statistical basis there are greater threats. That is not to say radical Islam poses no threat but also not to overhype it as the media loves to do as it revs up to the next war.
If you have taken religious courses, and I am not doubting that, then surely they covered shariah and as such you better than most (since most people have not studied the world religions) would understand shariah outside of the Western understanding of it as just fundamentalism.
The people are part of the religion, so it is hard to separate the two, when hundreds of thousands of them went to Germany over the last few years, they still practice their faith and it has not gone to shit.
I do not follow the shariah since I am not a Muslim, but I also understand, as I would have thought a student who has studied the religions would understand it is far more than just the western narrative of violence at which I would have hoped your religious studies class would have taught that.
Assimilation takes time, what you are looking at is the normal process of assimilation as a student of history would tell you, look at when the Irish came to America, when the Jews came to America, when the Italians came to America, for decades after they often move and created their own conclaves of areas that were primarily made of their ilk and over decades assimilated to the larger groups .. yet in modern times people expect it to happen instantaneously .. it rarely happens that quick unless force is applies.
It is also usually generational, so when you say the majority refuse to.... that is also expecting an instantaneous application of assimilation that rarely happens when swaths of groups come to an area at once.. in the case of your parents it tends to happen quicker on the individual basis because you are thrust into it to expel, yet when large amounts of a single group come they tend to do it over a longer period of time and usually it is more the children and grandchildren you would see assimilate into that country's culture than the parents who tend to try to hold onto to their customs and beliefs.
I did not see you "needed" to, I asked have you. One needs not do anything, but for me it did give another perspective outside of the simple Western narrative of the grand generalization of a people.
... the reason their country is "shit" as you say is that of fundamentalism, not simply shariah.. which once again, makes me wonder if the religious class you took taught you about that outside of the Western narrative.
You can defend whatever you wish, and I can disagree with your assertion because it holds to a view that seemingly paints both victim and villain with the same stroke with little care of differentiation between the groups.
(I assume the caps lock signifies .. intensity or something so.. okay..)
I am not really generally here for a grand courtesy, it is your Christ, if one wishes to get hung up on that there is little I can do on that.
It is not about believing in that religion, but if one is a believer in Christ I would think they would then want to study the text at which their Christ believed in.. It is not about becoming Jewish, but like with anything else, it is about gaining a greater understanding.
Though, for point of reference, you said a " I have in fact taken religious courses before and in them I leaned about Buddhism, Christianity, Islam and and Hinduism. "
A religious course that teaches about Christianity and Islam but not Judaism? At which the tanakh is seen as the "first book" in Islam, the bible the "second book" and the Quran the "third book" of Islam, Jesus is mentioned more times in the Quran than Mohammed..and the prophets if the Jewish faith, for the most part are the prophets in Islam, so unsure how a religious course can study Christianity and Islam without teaching the Jewish text aka the Tanakh.
imitations? it came over 1,000 years before your bible so how could it, therefore, be an imitation of your bible?. um the Tanakh is the text of that the person you believe in followed and reference on the Sermon on the mount in your bible... so um.. okay..
Yes, the radicals believe in textual literalism, which I personally find stupid to read the text of a religion, any religion, literal from a time before they understand most of the beautiful wonders of nature as we know now..
Yes, it does say that in the Quran, most Muslims do not do that but which was also part of the reason I asked if you read the Tanakh, the book of your Jesus Christ.. because that comes from the Old testament which also speaks of killing of nonbelievers, which was done in the battle of the great faith around 2000 years ago, just as the Christians had their battle around 1000 and what I See as the Muslims having their great battles now, far more than the small areas that covered their wars centuries ago.
..if you believe that the reason most of the victims are Muslims is that they choose not to kill when they should be killing um.. that is .. something to say the least.
Sunni is a sect of Islam, like Shia.. Around 85% of all Muslims are Sunni, around 10-13% are shia, and 2-5% are around a more mysticism Islam for example Sufism. - - of which, with greatest respect, a religious studies course should have covered this with you already.
As always, I will answer any future message when I see it.
This was far shorter than my previous reply, and perhaps the replies will just get smaller until we either find something we agree on or simply agree to disagree.
Either way, have a good one.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
In general, I agree with that statement, the overwhelming majority of Muslims are not.
Unless you are saying that no Muslim is a terrorist then I would not agree with that.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
To Muslims: How does it feel to worship a pedophile who raped a 9 year old and regularly raped women? Not very "progressive", don't you think?
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
1) Moslems don't worship the Prophet Mohammed.
2) Most modern scholars believe Aisha was older than nine at the time she consummated her marriage to Mohammed. While her age would be less than the modern standard of age of consent, it would be along the lines of what was socially acceptable in those days.
3) There is no evidence-save for that drawn from the Appeal to Ignorance Fallacy-to suggest the Prophet Mohammed raped anyone.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I am not a Muslim so I will leave them to answer that.. though I often find the accusation interesting from an atheistic point of view.. since by most religious scholars say Mary was around 12 or 13 years old when she got married and her husband, Joseph, was an elderly man..
so I .. an atheist just always find it interesting that that is often the go to insult... or question about their faith since we rarely hear it asked of Christians.. but such is life.. but as stated, I am not a Muslim so will leave it for them, if any happen to come to this page, to this specific piece, and to your specific comment and choose to answer.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
"Elderly" being by the standards of a time where the average life span was forty years or so.
Putting that aside, it is irrelevant to the Christian faith. It was the social norms of the times, having no bearings on the nature of our faith or Joseph's piety.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
I would disagree it is irrelevant, if the claim is an old man bedded a young girl, it seems an interesting conversation to ask of their own faith where an old man bedded a young girl - - especially since this person's is just going around commenting many Muslim pieces and calling em pieces of shit which he has been doing for a long while.. I merely ask him to look at his own faith or faith he expressed he was around the time when he commented originally. - - so since he just calls Muslims pieces of shit, I wondered what he or how he made excuses for the similarities of older men bedding young women in his own faith.
As far as his age, that depends who you ask, some catholic believe him to be in his 90s.. The bible does not specifically give an exact age.. I do not generally worry about that personally, believe whatever you wish, I just found it interesting given this particular person going around calling people pieces of shit simply because an old man slept with a young girl .. hmm but such is life.
I personally have no belief in the man, so people are free to believe in whatever they want..
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You can't just assume that anyone who hates Moslems is a Christian. That's as bigoted as it is ignorant to the modern political clime.
"Young" by standards that would not be established until near two millennia after the supposedly offending party's death.
Never say "some Catholics". "Some Catholics" supported Hitler. "Some Catholics" died under his regime (more, I feel obligated to add). "Some Catholics" believe homosexual marriage is perfectly morally permissible (I raise this merely as a point, I have no interest in that debate). "Some Catholics" believe it to be a sin. If you can't cite the historian/theologian/propagandist/what-have-you don't use it in an argument.
Saint Joseph was considerably older than Our Lady at the time of their wedding, this is generally accepted. Such were the standards of the time and as I said, it is irrelevant to Joseph's piety.
If you don't care, why did you deem to argue?
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
** It is almost 12:40 am, I am heading out any replies will be addressed either in the morning or early afternoon..
of course if you do not reply to the comment until after that time then just forget this comment**
have a good one, am off now.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
I did not assume anyone who hates Muslims is a Christian.. do not put words in my mouth. I said "I merely ask him to look at his own faith or faith he expressed he was around the time when he commented originally" because when he originally made the comment, I thought he was trolling so I checked other comments and in those comments he appeared to say he was a Christian. Thus my asking him about his own faith.
In his latest round of comments, he is not mentioning his faith and just calling any Muslim he appears to be commenting, just insults because of their faith.
I say "some catholics" because when it comes to religion, many sects believe different things, nowhere did I say all of this or that group believe Joseph was this or that age, since when it comes to religion, finding 100% agreement on every minute detail would be damn near impossible.
Nowhere did I say I do not care, I said I do worry about his age personally, and that people can believe whatever they wish. But if you (not you as in you, referring to him) are going to come to my page and just attack a group because of their religion, then I would then question what the person's motives are and then question their own professed beliefs.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
What percent of Muslims would you say have committed or are involved in any acts of terrorism?
I will use a site that prides itself on anti islam and tracking Islamic extremism
www.thereligionofpeace.com/
a religion of 1.8 billion, you would forgive me if I am not moved by surveys where in some areas, though the country have tens of millions question a few hundred people.
I say this as a student of history and religion.
Though then I would question the understanding of the Shairiah of the individual.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
You do realize what you are looking at in the polls ins percentage, not a number of individuals who answered? So its 86% etc... do you really think they would only ask under a hundred people those questions?
Obviously not every Muslim kills people. But every Muslim is a part of religion in which killing gays, raped women, and people who arent Muslims or want to leave Islam is Okay and encouraged. Many Muslims will tell you there is no half-Muslims who only agree with some parts or Quran and dont agree with parts that tell you to stone people to death, rape, marry kids, kill those who mock or question Islam etc etc... youre either a true Muslim, or not a Muslim at all.
There are many good Muslims, but they are all subscribed to this cancer of the world called Islam which needs to be removed permanently. Until that is done violence will not stop.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
The entirety of this can be summed up in the bold text at the bottom.
""You do realize what you are looking at in the polls ins percentage, not a number of individuals who answered? So its 86% etc... do you really think they would only ask under a hundred people those questions?"
In some areas they asked a few hundred, in some a few thousand, but in a religion of 1.8 billion people, evidence is in actions more than thoughts when the claim is their violence..
"Obviously not every Muslim kills people. But every Muslim is a part of religion in which killing gays, raped women, and people who arent Muslims or want to leave Islam is Okay and encouraged. Many Muslims will tell you there is no half-Muslims who only agree with some parts or Quran and dont agree with parts that tell you to stone people to death, rape, marry kids, kill those who mock or question Islam etc etc... youre either a true Muslim, or not a Muslim at all."
It was not about whether or not every Muslim kills people, it was about in the claim that they are violent, in 16 years there have been just say 31,000 attacks, saying 5 people each (even though usually 2- people each) .. that is 155,000 people in a religion of 1.8 billion who commit acts of terrorism.. and most of their victims are also Muslims ..it speaks to a mass branding issue that is the problem with much of those who make this claim.
What do you mean by "half Muslims"? just as there are many Muslims who understand we do not live in 600 A.D. any more.
""There are many good Muslims, but they are all subscribed to this cancer of the world called Islam which needs to be removed permanently. Until that is done violence will not stop."
That is like saying there are many Good Jews, but all subscribed to this cancer called Judaism..
Unless you will deny that the old testament is just as violent as the Quran which said it first to stone women who are not virgins on their wedding night, stone those who work on the sabbath, kill disobedient children etc etc..
Islam, in the Islamic faith is the "third book" their first book is the Old Testament, the second book is the Christian bible and they believe their text is the third book, which is why many Christian and Judaic prophets are also prophets in islam..
Though I judge actions, of 1.8 billion Muslims, am I to cast them all as this or that because some do terrible things, and for those that do do terrible things of which there is a considerable number - - most of the victims are also Muslims. Am I to cast the victim in the same shade as the villain?
As Aesop said, a tyrant will always find a pretext for his tyranny, religion has been a personal favorite for centuries because it is to be taken on faith, not fact.
I am no fan of Islam, i am an atheist so I think the texts of Islam, Judaism, Bible are wrong, and will call out Islamic extremists, I will not cast the entire black and white view to the victim as I do the villain.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
3,000 people died simultaneously when 2.8M Muslims were treated with repulse and disrespect for crimes committed by extremist followers of Islam. If they need to be "allies" to the American people and scope out Islamic extremists, then I suggest the same be applied for Christians and the Ku Klux Klan, alongside the numbers of crusades that were inflicted over the expanse of centuries. Y'all Anti-Muslims can shut the fuck up.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Agreed. If "Muslims" in general were terrorists we would already be fucked. There are 1.8 billion of em, if even half were terrorists, 900 million terrorists, nearly 1/7th of the world . then we would already be up shit's creek without a paddle
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
Especially considering that the religion itself is universalizing, I doubt that it would have such "extremist" views as the Islamaphobes claim.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
by 2050 it is expected to be the majority faith on earth.. so those making the claims of smearing it better get to breeding quicker I guess.
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
No one is saying all Muslim's are terrorists; those people are in the minority and don't represent the actual argument. The actual argument is that most acts of terrorism (especially in the past year or so) are motivated by the religion of Islam and committed by ethnic Muslims, and many Islamic nations/practitioners either show active or passive support to these acts of terrorism.
I know that liberals like to misinterpret legitimate criticism as a bunch of old crotchety republicans trying to promote "white supremacy", but in many cases its good to actually look at the facts instead of staying in your echo chamber.
👍: 0 ⏩: 3
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Actually, most acts of terrorism that get news publicity are motivated by Muslim extremists.
Christian terrorists outnumber Muslim ones by a significant margin, but get less news coverage. Anton Breivik, the Lord's Resistance Army, Army of God, the KKK, various white-Christian militia groups, and any number of mass shooters have been motivated entirely by Christian extremism.
👍: 0 ⏩: 2
another group to add to the christian terrorist groups are the anti-balaka from the southern horn and central sections of africa. they commit genocide against muslims in their controlled areas to "purify" them.
also, lets not forget that one of the members of one of the most influential bands in music history was shot by a christian fundamentalist that was offended by his statements about god.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
cdn.static-economist.com/sites…
www.cnsnews.com/news/article/s…
az616578.vo.msecnd.net/files/r…
👍: 0 ⏩: 0
Sadly there are many people who hold the view that the terms are synonymous, but I am not saying those people are of any meaningful majority.
Yes, most acts of religious based terrorism is because of Islam, or terrorism in general linked to Islam by nations who do the killings themselves, or perhaps sadly nations like the United states that just arm the nations doing the killing.
The second claim is a over-generalization, are there some liberals that are like that sure. Enough to generalize all liberals or just make a generalization of liberals as such, no.
... unsure how I admit how a claim of liberals liking to misinterpret legitimate criticism as Republicans pushing white supremacy in the context of the subject, but okay.
👍: 0 ⏩: 1
<= Prev | | Next =>