Originally posted by whodey Yes, I do know a Muslim and he is a nice man. However, within the radical world of Islam there is a large contengency that is violent.
Originally posted by whodey Yes, I do know a Muslim and he is a nice man. However, within the radical world of Islam there is a large contengency that is violent.
Then you know that the stereotype used to demonise Muslims is as evil as the stereotypes that Hitler used to demonise the Jews.
Originally posted by aardvarkhome Then you know that the stereotype used to demonise Muslims is as evil as the stereotypes that Hitler used to demonise the Jews.
ignoring the religion, yet seeing the religiosity of the people...
is it not true (as stated by the attackers) that those who attacked the u.s. and the e.u. were doing so in the name of islam and allah? many now say how inhumane and evil the crusades were. they point out that many terrible things happened (and were done) in the name of god. i agree. but is this really any different? do all muslims believe in violence. no. quite the contrary. but is one of the promises of the religion known as islam that those who kill non-muslims will go to paradise as recorded in the koran? yes. so, as with many christians, there seems to be a drastic difference between what the specific religions holy book says and what the people practice. but i digress...
again, it was muslims who in the name of islam carried out the attacks. facts are facts. logic is logic. to deny either is neither safe nor wise.
but...
(sorry meant to include this earlier)
while one may judge a religion on whether or not they can follow it, one may not judge an entire people group on the actions of a few, or even many. to my knowledge people groups are still comprised of individuals who make decisions for themselves.
Originally posted by aardvarkhome Then you know that the stereotype used to demonise Muslims is as evil as the stereotypes that Hitler used to demonise the Jews.
Did I say that ALL Muslims are violent? No. That would be a stereotype. I said that the Islamic world appears to have a radical element that is prone to violence. I have listed examples to explain my position. I think this is due to the fact that Muhammad at times used violent tactics to achieve his goals which involved killing. Now his followers have to ask the question, when is it OK for us to use violence to achieve our goals. They also have to ask themselves which goals call for acheiving them through violence. From what I can acsertain, Muhammad preached jihad to relieve oppression and preached relieving that oppression with the sword. In terms of Christianity, however, Christ never preached this despite living under the oppression of the Roman Empire which was much to the shagrin of many of his followers. Christ came to relieve the oppression of the individual in terms of individual sin in mens lives and not the secondary effects of sin such as political oppression and such. Christ also taught to love those who you consider to be your oppressers and not to render evil for evil. Islam has no such doctrine and therefore is subject to personal interpretation and/or preference. Who is to say what perceived oppression is worthy of Jihad and which is not? These are gray areas for many followers of Muhammad.
Originally posted by aardvarkhome Then you know that the stereotype used to demonise Muslims is as evil as the stereotypes that Hitler used to demonise the Jews.
Originally posted by aardvarkhome Then you know that the stereotype used to demonise Muslims is as evil as the stereotypes that Hitler used to demonise the Jews.
Using this logic would mean that demonising Nazi's as prone to violence would be equally troubling to you. When I make such judgements I look at the teachings of the leader from whom people follow. If any one had bothered reading his writings, it would not be hard to determain violence was on the horizen for his followers.
Originally posted by whodey Using this logic would mean that demonising Nazi's as prone to violence would be equally troubling to you.
That would be factually incorrect, since many Nazis were mild-mannered office workers who preferred to let technology do the dirty work. Inhuman, yes, but not especially violent.
I take it you're comparing Mein Kampf to the Koran, and are about to produce a cut and paste proving that Islam is a violent religion. Don't forget to point out how classical Arabic can be interpreted in various ways, depending on the context. And check your sources...
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage That would be factually incorrect, since many Nazis were mild-mannered office workers who preferred to let technology do the dirty work. Inhuman, yes, but not especially violent.
I take it you're comparing Mein Kampf to the Koran, and are about to produce a cut and paste proving that Islam is a violent religion. Don't forget to point out how classic ...[text shortened]... Arabic can be interpreted in various ways, depending on the context. And check your sources...
Yes, and there are many mild mannered Muslims as I have stated. Don't get me wrong, I do not place Muhammad in the same category as Hitler, however, they both at times rationalize using violence as a means for acheiveing their goals. It would only stand to reason that his followers will do so as well.
Originally posted by Bosse de Nage So you agree with aardvarkhome. Good. Glad you've come to your senses.
He's been saying that from the start. Sometimes I have the feeling that people confuse pointing out some general traits of a group with prejudice which applied to all elements of that same group.
22 May '06 10:01
Da Vinci Code analogous to Satanic Verses
Back to Top