Anti-Mosque Hysteria Elsewhere, Too

[jbg]

Exactly. Of course they were Christian. Unfortunately, there are a million times more radical Muslims than BDs.

Also, Branch Davidians are mostly dangerous to their captives, not to the world at large.

[dre]

Exactly. Of course they were Christian. Unfortunately, there are a million times more radical Muslims than BDs. Possibly even a hundred million times more now. That's why it's hilarious to listen to so many people in this forum try to draw some type of equivilance between the two. As if a dozen or so people, who want to be left alone, poses the same threat as tens of millions of people, who seek out others to do harm in any way they can.

That's why it's hilarious to listen to so many people in this forum try to draw some type of equivilance between the two.

Nobody is doing that. Someone asked for examples of bad things Christians do today, and other people came up with some things. That doesnt mean theres a claim of equivalency.

The reality is that Christians live in wealthy and highly structured modern societies... if they act radical they get thrown in Jail, and they dont have much to be upset about. Many muslims live in societies where the government is actually complicit in radicalism, and face real poverty and hardship that most Christians have never even dreamed of.

In any case you just need to read more carefully.

million times more radical Muslims than BDs

That really depends how you define the word. The vast vast vast majority of muslims dont do anything crazy or violent to anybody. So you must be talking about radical "beliefs". But I find most or all religion beliefs to be pretty radical.

Take Christianity...

The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

That seems pretty radical to me.

Edited August 24, 2010 by dre

[Shady]

The reality is that Christians live in wealthy and highly structured modern societies

Yes, societies in most cases created by Christians.

That really depends how you define the word. The vast vast vast majority of muslims dont do anything crazy or violent to anybody.

I define it by people willing to commit very violent acts. Even if it's just 1% of Muslims. Thats still 150 million people.

[dre]

Yes, societies in most cases created by Christians.

I define it by people willing to commit very violent acts. Even if it's just 1% of Muslims. Thats still 150 million people.

Modern western socieites were made to ESCAPE from Christianity. People had just lived through a time when the church was an brutally oppressive instrument of civil authority, and part of the reason people are here is because they fled that brutally oppresive regime. Which is of course why in the most of the west the Church was given about as much civil authority as the characters on sesame street. ZILCH.

And my guess is that you couldnt provide evidence to support the believe that even .0001 percent of muslims are violent radicals. Never mind 1%.

people willing to commit very violent acts

Yeah? What about the Christians in western militaries? Are they willing to commit very violent acts?

[Guest American Woman]

And this is the reason I said that pedophilia was essentially sanctioned within the Catholic church system. Have any of those who did the abusing been reprimanded? Jailed? Fined? There was that huge controvery last year about it.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1184828/Revealed-decades-ritual-child-abuse-Catholic-schools-orphanages-damned-report.html

Of course some of those who have done the abusing within the Catholic church have been reprimanded, jailed, and fined. You linked to a situation in the Irish Republic, which in no way is evidence that it's "sanctioned within the Catholic church system." That's like saying because there are some mosques that preach hatred of the west and fund terrorist organizations that "terrorism is sanctioned within the Islamic mosque system." Are you prepared to say that?

Would you really consider those people catholics?

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2009/05/the_catholic_league_downplays.php

No they should not be considered Catholics at all.

Yes, I would consider them Catholics. Not good Catholics, but Catholics just the same, unless they've been excommunicated. Just like the terrorists were indeed Muslims. The idea that all religious people are good people is ludicrous.

Were the Branch Davidians Christians or an oddball out of the mainstream Christian group? This comes down to different sects within a religion because not all of them interperet the religious text the same way. The different factions of Christianity prove it. Are they still Christians or a radical fringe element of Christianity?

I don't know enough about them, but "Catholics" definitely are "Christians," just as the terrorists are Muslims. They aren't part of some oddball out of the mainstream Muslim group. And of course not all Christians or Muslims or Jews or Buddhists interpret the religious text the same way. Who ever said they did?

And if we break the law we are dealt with. Jail time.

But it doesn't mean Canadians are no longer Canadians. We don't say, 'you weren't a good Canadian, you broke our laws, so you are no longer a Canadian.'

Many who have violated church laws (at the same time they are breaking civil laws), while telling everyone else to uphold them should not be considered a member of that religion. If the church and followers are not willing to do anything about it, then guess what, the abuse will continue.

Again, it's nonsense to feel they shouldn't be considered a member of that religion any more than a Canadian violating Canadian law (not everyone gets caught or is found guilty or does jail time even if guilty), while telling everyone else to uphold the law, isn't a Canadian. In fact, that would describe a few government officials, would it not? And yet we don't say he should not be considered a Canadian. And even if you did declare that he/she isn't a Canadian, he/she would still be a Canadian; unless his/her citizenship were revoked, same as a member of a religion is a member unless excommunicated.

But yes, if no one is willing to do anything about abuse, it will go on. Which I think has been a lot of people's point. I don't think you're saying anything that anyone else hasn't said. Yet it seems no one is to question Islam or anything Muslims do. To express concern over one thing makes one a bigot. There are definitely a different set of rules regarding Islam within the "PC crowd."

[Guest American Woman]

Uh yes actually they are, just like the Westboro Baptists are an oddball non-mainstream group. While the Muslims that are building are moderates belonging to a moderate Muslim group, which is something even fox said before all this started up. So for years now I've heard people asking "Where are the moderate Muslims?" And what happens when they show up? People sh!t all over them, accusing them of being terrorists sympathizers and radicals. If I was a Muslim I would keep my head down to.

So what oddball non-mainstream sect of Islam do all the terrorists belong to? See, the Westboro Baptists are all part of the same sect, going to the same church. Can't say the same for the terrorists. They are part of mainstream Islam. They don't have some off-the-wall sect where they all worship together. See, that's a major part of the problem. No one knows who they are. Can't say the same for the Westboro Baptists.

Edited August 24, 2010 by American Woman

[dre]

the terrorists are Muslims. They aren't part of some oddball out of the mainstream Muslim group

Yes they are... They are members of AlQeada motivated not by religion but by AlQeadas goal of kicking foreign armies out of the middle east.

You can run and hide from this fact all you want.

[dre]

To express concern over one thing makes one a bigot.

No. To make literally hundreds and hundreds of posts critical of all kinds of aspects of Islam while at the same time writing hundreds and hundreds of posts in opposition to stupid ass church makes it quite likely ones a bigot. Or a simpleton. Could be either I guess.

[DogOnPorch]

Yes they are... They are members of AlQeada motivated not by religion but by AlQeadas goal of kicking foreign armies out of the middle east.

You can run and hide from this fact all you want.

Al Qaeda's ideology is Qutbism...a very literal and radical form of Sunni Islam. Qutbism believes all those Muslims who don't subsciribe to Qutbism are defacto apostates until reaffirmed. Ayman al-Zawahiri is an actual student of Qutb while bin Laden was a Wahhabist who 'progressed' to Qutbism.

[M.Dancer]

So what oddball non-mainstream sect of Islam do all the terrorists belong to?

wahhabi

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/gulf/wahhabi.htm

[ToadBrother]

Yes, societies in most cases created by Christians.

That's a pretty damned loaded statement. Most of those societies, at least in Europe, largely inherited the laws and notions of the rule of law from the Romans. Constitutional government is, by and large, one of the greatest gifts of the Romans, and was invented centuries before Christ.

And it's not as if Christendom was for much its tenure all that friendly, either. For a long stretch of time, right up until events like Charles I and Louis XVI losing their heads, the main Christian churches had quite happily supported notions like absolutism. By and large, Christendom was dragged into its current state of affairs during the Enlightenment, and the Enlightenment's chief gift was the de-religification of politics (if you will), so that horrific events like the Thirty Years War (one of the bloodiest, most destructive wars in European history), or the unfair and often brutal and murderous treatment of non-comformists (like the poor Huguenots in France or the Puritans during the late Tudor and early Stuart dynasties) and non-believers (like Jews) wouldn't happen any more.

It was the fading of the authority of Christian churches and the slow integration of secular notions of freedom of worship that built our society. To one degree or another Christianity, or at least branches of it (in particular Catholicism) were extremely hostile to secularism, and many churches still are.

Edited August 25, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Shady]

Modern western socieites were made to ESCAPE from Christianity.

Not at all. Perhaps you're just unaware of the Judeo-Christian influences on the creation of liberal democracies.

They are members of AlQeada motivated not by religion but by AlQeadas goal of kicking foreign armies out of the middle east.

Yes, because of religious reasons. I'm sorry that you're unaware of Al Qaeda's religious doctrine. It's one of the reasons the 9/11 hijackers screamed 'God is great' before the planes hit the towers.

Uh no, Societies created through secularism. Societies where Christian influence, and all other religious influence, was kept out of Government.

That's not true at all. I'm sorry that you're also unaware of the Judeo-Christian influences on the creation of liberal democracies.

That's a pretty damned loaded statement.

Not at all. Once again, I'm sorry that you're unaware of the Judeo-Christian influences on the creation of liberal democracies and our laws.

[M.Dancer]

Not at all. Perhaps you're just unaware of the Judeo-Christian influences on the creation of liberal democracies.

It is easy to be unaware of what isn't there.

[Guest TrueMetis]

That's not true at all. I'm sorry that you're also unaware of the Judeo-Christian influences on the creation of liberal democracies.

Such as?

So what oddball non-mainstream sect of Islam do all the terrorists belong to?

wahhabi

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/gulf/wahhabi.htm

[Shady]

It is easy to be unaware of what isn't there.

Yes, to somebody ill-informed.

[Guest American Woman]

American Woman, on 24 August 2010 - 04:50 PM, said: So what oddball non-mainstream sect of Islam do all the terrorists belong to?

M.Dancer, on 24 August 2010 - 05:06 PM, said: wahhabi

He's wrong, which makes you wrong.

[M.Dancer]

Yes, to somebody ill-informed.

I know, I tend to overlook Spinoza, Meslier, Hume, Mill and the greater part of the knowledge trust that created liberalism

[Guest TrueMetis]

He's wrong, which makes you wrong.

My mistake. It seems they follow Qutbism

The radical Islamist movement in general and al-Qaeda in particular developed during the Islamic revival and Islamist movement of the last three decades of the 20th century along with less extreme movements.

Some have argued that "without the writings" of Islamic author and thinker Sayyid Qutb "al-Qaeda would not have existed."[41] Qutb preached that because of the lack of sharia law the Muslim world was no longer Muslim, having reverted to pre-Islamic ignorance known as jahiliyyah.

To restore Islam, a vanguard movement of righteous Muslims was needed to establish "true Islamic states", implement Sharia, and rid the Muslim world of any non-Muslim influences, such as concepts like socialism or nationalism. Enemies of Islam included "treacherous Orientalists"[42] and "world Jewry", who plotted "conspiracies" and "wicked[ly]" opposed Islam.

In the words of Mohammed Jamal Khalifa, a close college friend of Osama bin Laden: Islam is different from any other religion; it's a way of life. We [Khalifa and bin Laden] were trying to understand what Islam has to say about how we eat, who we marry, how we talk. We read Sayyid Qutb. He was the one who most affected our generation.[43]

Qutb had an even greater influence on Osama bin Laden's mentor and another leading member of al-Qaeda,[44] Ayman al-Zawahiri. Zawahiri's uncle and maternal family patriarch, Mafouz Azzam, was Qutb's student, then protégé, then personal lawyer and finally executor of his estate—one of the last people to see Qutb before his execution. "Young Ayman al-Zawahiri heard again and again from his beloved uncle Mahfouz about the purity of Qutb's character and the torment he had endured in prison."[45] Zawahiri paid homage to Qutb in his work Knights under the Prophet's Banner.[46]

One of the most powerful effects of Qutb's ideas was the idea that many who said they were Muslims were not, i.e., they were apostates, which not only gave jihadists "a legal loophole around the prohibition of killing another Muslim," but made "it a religious obligation to execute" the self-professed Muslim. These alleged apostates included leaders of Muslim countries, since they failed to enforce sharia law.[47]

The fatwa on terrorism is regarded as the direct assault on the ideology of Al-Qaeda which dismantles it from the sources of Quran and sunnah[48]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Qaeda#Ideology

Sounds like an oddball non-mainstream sect of Islam to me.

Edited August 25, 2010 by TrueMetis

[DogOnPorch]

Try to keep up.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16914&view=findpost&p=573351

[dre]

Try to keep up.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=16914&view=findpost&p=573351

Poor poor DOP and AW

[Shady]

Poor poor DOP and AW

Why poor them? You're the so-called progressive who's been twisting yourself into a pretzel defending the most anti-gay, anti-woman, anti-human rights religion on the planet.

[DogOnPorch]

Poor poor DOP and AW

How so?

[DogOnPorch]

Poor poor DOP and AW

Apparently you're unable to answer why you made this statement.

[dre]

Its just sad watching you guys get so badly roughed up thats all.

[Shady]

Its just sad watching you guys get so badly roughed up thats all.

Is that all you could come up with.