Jump to content

Islam Is A Failure


Recommended Posts

If Islam is a success where exactly has it succeeded ?  Let's provide some evidence of its relevancy and success if you truly believe that it is not a failure.

Hey, I don't know about everyone else on this forum, but I never said Islam was a success either, which is yet another biased and opiniated statement. That's why religion can't be considered a success or a failure.

It quite obviously has failed its constituents. This is why 55 % of young Arabs want to leave according to recent reports.

Leave from where? Their countries? If so, once again Islamic nations aren't the only ones that are as horrible as you've described. If you're talking about renouncing their faiths, just because a slight majority disapproves and desires to leave doesn't mean it's a failure. I still fail to see your definition of success and failure, and why it those two terms have relevancy to religion at all.

A philosophy which avows an intention in keeping someone ignorant poor and spiteful does not constitute either a noble religious ideal or good governance.

According to this idea, Hinduism too is a failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 176
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Yes we all understand the reasons why religions and gods persist. Thanks for the illumination. As always your posts are so educational.

Read the post first before replying. I stated clearly that in today's world Islam has failed. I did not mention pre-Christian controlled Spain. I did not mention Baghdad circa 1000 AD. I did not comment on Christian atrocities, I am not a protagonist for the Catholic Church. That is a whole separate thread and a good one. I said Islam NOW. Islam is a state AND societal organising principle and a philosophy of being, it transcends simple spirituality. The purpose of such a system of belief should be not only spiritual succour but life NOW not only when they die and get 72 virgins. I have listed sources, reasons and rationale for the argument that 1.3 billion people are being failed by their religious and state leaders NOW in a comprehensive social system that is anti-modern. Other religions are not anti-modern to the extent that the Islamic ideal is.

For Muslims, Islam is not merely a system of belief and worship, a compartment of life, so to speak, distinct from other compartments which are the concern of nonreligious authorities administering nonreligious laws.  It is rather the whole of life, and its rules include civil, criminal and even what we would call constitutional law.
B. Lewis, Islam and the West.

Islam is very very different in structure, goals and application than Christianity.

I have even quoted from the zealot and racist Said who admits that Islam has failed. None of your posts have addressed my basic premise nor contradicted with proof any of the lists and evidence i have provided as to why it is failing NOW.

As i already posted which you did not bother to read:

Terror in the name of Islam is a daily event. If Islam is a success where exactly has it succeeded ? Its governance tells people to eschew the modern world. It facilitates and breeds its own inner demise. Let's provide some evidence of its relevancy and success if you truly believe that it is not a failure.

It quite obviously has failed its constituents. This is why 55 % of young Arabs want to leave according to recent reports.

When most of the population is illiterate and half starved i find it difficult to state as the Liberal media does that Islam is peaceful, coherent and cultured. Even in moderate countries the religion is abusive to the population and negates modernity.

This follows on logically from Lewis' quote. In structure and intent the religion, the state, the party and the leaders meld into one instrument -which is used to deny freedom, economic liberation and education and culture.

You can disagree violently that Islam has failed. Good for you. Now provide evidence to support your arguments. Provide evidence to contradict the thesis that the totality of Islam is successful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Provide evidence to contradict the thesis that the totality of Islam is successful.

Why should I? It never worked before. You simply disgard the evidence or say that the source, even if the rest of the logical world respects it, is false. Or you simply just ignore it and say I never post any evidence.

As always your posts are so educational.

As your posts are always to hateful, intolerant, pro-oblivion, and anti-peace. :) I have no problems seeing you banned.

The purpose of such a system of belief should be not only spiritual succour but life NOW not only when they die and get 72 virgins

Because the beliefs of 1/10,200 of the overall muslim population applies to the rest of the 10,199/10,200 people :)? Have you ever spoken with anyone from that area?

My post, was to give you two options: Answer that it, the pure religion was failing and look like a complete idiot, or answer that it isn't failing and contridict yourself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone once called me the anti-muslim hitler. I have some MAJOR issues with the islamic religion, but I would never go NEAR as far as our friend here has. if someone wanted to, he could be sued for ... something I'm sure. This is among the most ignorant things I've ever come across... which is why I'm ignoring this thread for the most part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever. That is so lame.

Provide evidence to the contrary of the thread's thesis was what i asked and this is the best you can do ?

Slander and name calling ?

That is sad.

Well in that case thread closed, i don't, nor does anyone else have the time to read your drivel.

Nova you should seriously get lost somewhere you are truly a none value add. Pell, add something besides nonsense. The arguments presented CAN be refuted if a. you understand the topic and b. can make a coherent argument.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam? A failure?

Personally I can tell you that Islam is in its inquisitional period, the period of religious intolerance and hatred against one another and other religions that developed in Christianity around the same age (1400s).

Islam has shown to be the most tolerant Abrahamian religion to date. Judaism persecuted against pagans, Muslims, and even Christians. Christianity persecuted against everything :P. But until recently, Islam only went against those that weren't peoples of the book (Christians, Jews, and at one point, Zorastrians).

Therefore it is unfair and untrue to call Islam a failure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK. I will leave the harmless and peace stuff for history.

In the here and now however, it has been hijacked by some pretty screwed up violent fundementalists. The face of Islam is not peace. No matter what you say, no matter what it actually is, the face of Islam is a burning sword trying to smite the unbeliever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes KK, you have hit the nail on the head. First Islam Teaches hate, you can't have that. Thats where it happens the Islamic Fundamentalist schools. Thats what we, and our allies need to concentrate on.

Its like instead of taking out fire ants one by one, take out the whole colony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Derek good analogy. Maybe the Cdn military could afford a few anteaters. Maybe dat is da Canadian way.

When you talk to the average Joe about Islam they usually say it is peaceful and 'read the Koran'. I doubt that any of the media heads or average Joes have read a jot about the Koran or Islam, nor have they traveled or worked there, nor do they talk to people who have fled from there. Islam is a failure because it preaches a vision of the world and society that is rooted in mysticism, sham ceremony, hierarchical control, rejection of reality, and an abhorrence of non believers and their cultures. It rejects outside influences, panders to base and primal nationalism, and instructs the true believers to kill non believers [and receive 72 virgins in heaven].

As Mark Steyn stated, there is a reason why 5 Swedes live in the Arab world and 500.00 Arabs live in Sweden.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam holds no corner on being new or different than most religeons.

People believe thier religeon says what ever the man of the moment tells them it says.

I have my religeon, irrelevent what it is, but I am able to hold it true not by changing it to mean what I'm told to, but by clinging to what is right and what I feel.

Islam is not violent any more or less than the others. The morons listening to the bigger morons is the violent maker.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam is not violent any more or less than the others. The morons listening to the bigger morons is the violent maker.

Well, according to that, the "biggest moron" as you put it was Mohammed himself, who claimed to be a prophet of the same God as Moses and Jesus but proceeded to defecate all over their spiritual messages and legacies, instead electing to whip up the Arabs into a frenzy of aggression in the name of a God whom he claimed to speak for but never actually believed in, in order to fulfill a personal vendetta.

The root problem is that Mohammed was a liar and a petty warmonger and the religion that he founded, unsurprisingly, continues to lie to its faithful and to wage war on "unbelievers."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hugo, I would agree, Islam was spread with the sword not with flowers and chocolates. For the Islamic apologists I am still awaiting proof on its peacefulness. I guess one can use the following as proof of its benignity:

-PLA

-Arafat

-Osama Bin Laden

-Mahatir the Jew Hater

-Hussein

-Saud Family

-Syria

-Chechnya

-9-11

-Attacks in India

This says nothing of the history of the movement from 632 AD to 2000.

Seems like a peaceful group of people to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes Islam isn't/wasn't ever peaceful. They spread their religion by invading over countries. They tried to attack Rome numerous times. They just forced their religion on others, and they still do. Muhammad was nothin more than a terrorist himself.

well in the period you are referring to, that was the way of the world. are you saying that the church during that period was a poor victim? that europe was a peaceloving humanitarian region?

nope, the world was violent crusades were the way to expand power, so both sides did it. obviously it has no bearing on the philosophy of either religion, since society was primative and poor during that time and warfare was very common.

and by the way, the same argument coudl be made against teh US in teh last 50 years by the citizens of afganistan, or iran, or iraq and so it. it depends alot of perspective.

for example, sept 11th, 1973 in chile.

SirRiff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No religion completely "walks the talk", and Islam is no exeption. Every religion has killed and fought in the name of god or some other symbol.

Yes you are right. However, right now this religion is the base for today's violence. To me and my family, a Spanish Inquisition that occured centuries ago is far less dangerous than Wahabbiism is today. You can point here and there but the past, while instructive, is the past and is not here right now trying to kill us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What we have to look at is the foundations of the religion. The fact is that Islam is founded on lies. Although Mohammed claimed to be the latest and greatest of prophets of the same God, including in that list Moses, Jesus and all in between, much of what Islam professes is not in tune with Judeo-Christian theology.

For instance, Judeo-Christian scripture states that the universe is divided into heavenly and earthly realms, and God withholds his absolute power from the Earth. Islam, on the other hand, claims that God is omnipotent in both realms, which raises some pointed questions on pre-determinism that do not plague Judaism and Christianity.

It's also noteable that while Judeo-Christian scripture does not view violence and war as a good way to solve problems and does not promise heaven as a reward for valour in battle, Islam does. Mohammed, unlike Christ, was a man of war, and when snubbed in one city he went to another, where he received a more appreciative audience whom he quickly molded into an army to sack the city that spurned him.

This is the "root cause" of the violence and backwardness of Islam, and it is why, where Judaism and Christianity have pretty much left bloodshed and war in the name of God behind them, Islam never has. Most movements to reform and civilise the religion have actually been Westernising movements, and most of those self-confessed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, right now this religion is the base for today's violence.  To me and my family, a Spanish Inquisition that occured centuries ago is far less dangerous than Wahabbiism is today.  You can point here and there but the past, while instructive, is the past and is not here right now trying to kill us.

Unfortunatly you can't say that the Christian branch has stopped blood shed a long time ago, just look at the IRA.

It is true that the most recent attacks in the name of religion have come from Islamic sources, but that is only temporary as everything is.

[/quote=Hugo Oct. 28, 5:06 PM}What we have to look at is the foundations of the religion. The fact is that Islam is founded on lies. Although Mohammed claimed to be the latest and greatest of prophets of the same God, including in that list Moses, Jesus and all in between, much of what Islam professes is not in tune with Judeo-Christian theology.

Islam is not founded on lies but on its own belife's. Just because Islam doesn't completely confer with Christianity or Judaism, doesn't mean its lying, just that it has different views of religion that are not shared by the other two. It doesn't make any sense to say that they are lying because Christianity and Judaism do not agree on all aspects and have killed each other over this for thousands of years. A Jew could say that a Christian's religion is lies and vice versa.

To truthfully think about it from an unbiased perspective, you must acept all religions as some sort of understandible truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Islam is not founded on lies but on its own belife's.

This would be true if, like Buddhism or Hinduism, Islam claimed no connection to Judaism or Christianity. However, it does. It claims to be a development of the same religion, worshipping the same God, and yet it does not have a consistent theological theme. That's the lie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It claims to be a development of the same religion, worshipping the same God, and yet it does not have a consistent theological theme. That's the lie.

Does not Christianity have several different offbranches that have different theories and yet all worship god and Jesus? Whats wrong if Islam worships god and yet doesnot belive in Jesus or some other Christian belife?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly you can't say that the Christian branch has stopped blood shed a long time ago, just look at the IRA.

The IRA is not trying to take over the world so it is(while a weak example for your argument) not applicable to this whole issue.

Contiuing with my point you have raised another statement that is true but irrelevent

It is true that the most recent attacks in the name of religion have come from Islamic sources, but that is only temporary as everything is.

As I do not live in the days of the inquisition I do live in the days of militant Isalm. They are the problem and to try to dilute it with examples from centuries ago to how it will be hunky dory centuries from now is meaningless to the problem itself which is NOW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Unfortunatly you can't say that the Christian branch has stopped blood shed a long time ago, just look at the IRA.

The IRA is not a movement based upon religion, it is based upon nationalism. Judaism and Christianity have, as a whole, moved beyond the use of violence and the waging of war in the name of God.

Does not Christianity have several different offbranches that have different theories and yet all worship god and Jesus?

These are not major theological differences but differences in methodology of worship. Islam cannot claim to be an off-shoot of Christianity, nor can it claim to be the inheritor and descendant of Christ and Moses, any more than Karl Marx could claim to be continuing the works of Adam Smith. Yet, it does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,764
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    robretpeter42
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...