Quote: Original post by Valderman
Tell me, what fundamental beliefs about morality and society does Islam embody that christianity doesn't?

Some of the most striking differences are:

1) Islam emphasizes submission to the faith rather than voluntary conversion and a personal relationship with God. Departing the faith is prohibited. Islam seeks to convert the entire world, for it is the will of God, in contrast with Christianity and Judaism. Hence, Islam was midwifed by blood and conquest, a legacy that has not surprisingly persisted to the modern day, whereas Christianity began peacefully and returned to a mostly peaceful role in modern times after fostering modern liberal ideas such as human rights.

2) Islam does not distinguish between matters of religion and matters of state. It prescribes a system of law that governs all aspects of life and is an expression of God's divine will, making it impossible for it to be supplanted or eliminated (as it needs to be). It therefore encroaches upon the public square to a far greater degree than Christianity and does so while permitting barbaric customs.

3) Islam is based heavily on prescriptions and rules, unlike Christianity which broke with Jewish legalism. As I mentioned in (2), it codifies and enshrines barbaric customs, forcing even moderate Muslims to engage in impressive logical contortions to justify them (which they must, for Mohammad is the perfect Muslim who sets the example for all who follow him).

4) Islam treats non-believers as inferior citizens. It denies them equal treatment and rights. This problem manifests itself even in "progressive" Islamic countries like Malaysia and Indonesia.

These factors, among many others, conspire to make Islam an illiberal religion, antithetical to progress, and make modernization of Islamic societies all the more difficult to carry out. Islam cannot be reconciled with the Enlightenment Era principles that are fundamental to modern civilization: freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of faith, and rational government.

Quote: Original post by Valderman

Quote: I provided you with an article from a very distinguished figure

Distinguished or not, the article you provided was, simply put, garbage, for the very reasons I stated.

Quote: from where you can follow your own research if you really were interested about the truth.

How? As you might recall, every single statement in the article is unsourced. By randomly typing his assertions into Google? Please.

You asserted there were statistics to support your claims about Islam, yet when asked to produce them you put forward an article full of unsourced anecdotes about vaguely defined "conflicts" and demand it to be accepted as truth because the author is a "very distinguished figure."

Quote: Instead, you recur to ad hominem attacks and provide NOTHING to support your point of view.

I'm not the one claiming a group of 1.5 billion people, or at least a majority thereof, is to blame for the majority of all violence on the planet. When you're making such a bold claim, you'd better have something other than proof by authority to back it up.

By the way, why would your unsourced opinion piece make great evidence for your "statistics" when you're not accepting actual statistics that show the opposite of what you claim?

Are you really this idiot? Didn't you read that the statistics I quoted from the article are taken from the International Institute of Strategic Studies and the unrelated ones you provide are from loonwatch.com?

I understand you might feel the need to defend your girl, but please! Put some effort on it! FGS!

Quote: Original post by trzy
1) Islam emphasizes submission to the faith rather than voluntary conversion and a personal relationship with God.

Am I right to understand this as a claim that Islam demands conversion, even of the unwilling? You might want to provide a source for that.

Quote: 2) Islam does not distinguish between matters of religion and matters of state. It prescribes a system of law that governs all aspects of life and is an expression of God's divine will, making it impossible for it to be supplanted or eliminated (as it needs to be). It therefore encroaches upon the public square to a far greater degree than Christianity and does so while permitting barbaric customs.

No state religion distinguishes between matters of religion and matters of state, thus this criticism applies equally to christianity, as it is used as a state religion in quite a lot of places. Interestingly, the allegedly muslim nation of Turkey has neither state religion nor sharia laws, even though the government is thouroughly muslim and quite conservative.

Just like you can find christian nutcases that would have you bow down to their imaginary friend or get decapitated, you can find islamic ones. That you think all, or even most, practicioners of Islam are proponents of sharia laws says quite a lot about how much you really know about the matter.

Quote: 3) Islam is based heavily on prescriptions and rules, unlike Christianity which broke with Jewish legalism. As I mentioned in (2), it codifies and enshrines barbaric customs, forcing even moderate Muslims to engage in impressive logical contortions trying to justify them (which they must, for Mohammad is the perfect Muslim who sets the example for all who follow him).

Which are these barbaric customs you keep referring to? And what about some quite questionable christian values such as the irrational hatred towards homosexuals, polygamous relationships or children born out of wedlock? You'd be hard pressed to argue that banning either concept makes sense.

Quote: 4) Islam treats non-believers as inferior citizens. It denies them equal treatment and rights. This problem manifests itself even in "progressive" Islamic countries like Malaysia and Indonesia.

Interestingly, "progressive" christian countries such as France and Switzerland have recently enacted laws treating muslims as second class citizens. If you want to talk about history and traditions, then conversion by the sword has been pretty popular with the christian crowd, as well as the persecution of both jews and muslims.

Quote: These factors, among many others, conspire to make Islam an illiberal religion, antithetical to progress, and make modernization of Islamic societies all the more difficult to carry out.

Unfortunately, that applies to all religions or other dogmatic beliefs. Communism, capitalism, christianity, etc. - whenever you put a name to a set of beliefs and proclaim them to be worth pursuing for their own sake, you shackle the mind and prevent progress. Criticising Islam for this is hypocrisy at its finest.


Bottom line, you see muslims instead of people. In your mind, a christian or a jew is first and foremost a person, while a muslim is nothing but a muslim and thus the same as all other muslims, disregarding the fact that, just as with christianity, there are as many Islams as there are practitioners. All religions have retarded parts and practicioners, but for some reason people like to pretend that their religion doesn't.

Quote: Original post by owl
Are you really this idiot? Didn't you read that the statistics I quoted from the article are taken from the International Institute of Strategic Studies

No I didn't because what you actually provided was a completely unrelated, unsourced anecdotal opinion piece, along with the assertion that since it's written by "a distinguished person" I'm a moron for not accepting it as gospel.

If you would please provide a link to a report from the IISS supporting your claims, then perhaps I could take a look at them? I don't believe not being able to search your mind for relevant links qualifies me as an idiot though.

Quote: and the unrelated ones you provide are from loonwatch.com?

I apologize for that; that was the first page I could find that presented those statistics in a nice, comprehensible way. Or course, the source is Europol, and I think it's quite related since the source you linked to support your claims made quite a big deal out of "islamic terrorism."

Quote: I understand you might feel the need to defend your girl, but please! Put some effort on it! FGS!

Please, why would I? She's no muslim and even if she were, why would I care about the intertubes' opinion? No, the reason I'm even having this conversation is that narrow minds bother me; xenophobic people who can't see that just because someone is different doesn't mean that they're dangerous.

Since you're blaming all muslims for the actions of a few, can you tell me why I shouldn't blame you for actions perpetrated by people claiming to be christians or even represent the christian fate?

Quote: Original post by Valderman
Perhaps you're unaware that at least in Europe, who is shock full of muslims according to some, muslims account for a grand 0.4% of terrorist activity?

Note that this is not really comparable, at least on a mass psychological level. Most EU internal terrorist organisations are indeed separatist and/or left wing. ETA, xIRA, FLNC, former RAF, etc, all these are essentially home made. The general population considers these groups as internal issues, that arose entirely due to our own internal little mini-wars and screw ups. They're a part of Europe, they have always been, and due to our large cultural diversity and a strong regional identity, they're essentially inevitable. The goal of these terror groups is usually very localized. The FLNC wants Corsica to be independent, the multiple IRAs have a problem with the Brits in NI. Neither of them care about, say, Norway or Switzerland. Some of them might simply be mafia like crime organisations. But none of them wants to take over the world.

Islamic terror is very different. To most people in north western Europe, Islam is something very alien. Basically, there is a group of guys coming from abroad, with a religion no one really gives a shit about over here, and they suddenly tell everybody that if you do not become like them you should/will die. And then they start actually killing people. Even if the actual casualties in Europe are much lower than the ones from our home grown terror groups, Islam came from 'the outside', and it's something much more global. It is trying to exploit our values, like freedom of faith, and turn them against us. This is perceived as a much greater threat than any of the other internal terror groups.

Quote: Original post by owl

Quote: Original post by LessBread

Quote: Original post by owl
oh, btw. My middle finger to those who rated me down for having an oppinion.
drop dead pussies.

Are you regretting that you asked me to start this thread? [grin]

Oh God no! :) This is a perfect opportunity to unveil this anti-sionist charade the right-winged muslims are propagating through the western media. The truth is that they don't give a fuck about their own people. They prove it every day in under their own regimes.

Yeah, right. As if those "right-wing muslims" forced the IDF to commandeer a civilian ship in international waters! Sheesh!! Did those "right-wing muslims" trick the various Jews who organized the flotilla too?

Quote: Original post by LessBread

Quote: Original post by owl

Quote: Original post by LessBread

Quote: Original post by owl
oh, btw. My middle finger to those who rated me down for having an oppinion.
drop dead pussies.

Are you regretting that you asked me to start this thread? [grin]

Oh God no! :) This is a perfect opportunity to unveil this anti-sionist charade the right-winged muslims are propagating through the western media. The truth is that they don't give a fuck about their own people. They prove it every day in under their own regimes.

Yeah, right. As if those "right-wing muslims" forced the IDF to commandeer a civilian ship in international waters! Sheesh!! Did those "right-wing muslims" trick the various Jews who organized the flotilla too?

Pick a side dude or move to Iran.

Valderman, not all Muslims are evil and the Muslim religion isn't inherently bad. But you can't deny Muslim are involved in many conflicts, much more than their percentage of the population, search for armed conflicts and count. Of the top of my head there are Afganistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan, Ethiopia, Nigeria, and of course Israel.

Granted, in this silly heuristic, Jews are involved in a greater percentage of conflicts than their population, but a statistics of many cases is more conclusive than of one case.

Now if, for example, black people are much more involved in crime than white people, that doesn't mean the color is to blame. It doesn't mean you should prejudge a person by its color (although it is not without sense if no other data is available). Special zoom in is needed to deeply understand the root of the problem.

I don't know the background of half the conflicts, so my guess is just a guess,
but seems to me the (over simplified) root of the problem is that in many backward places, the Muslim religion is easily twisted to encourage great acts of evil, and add to it a desire by radical Islamists to impose their extreme religious rule over other nations.
Take a look of the TED talk Inside a school for suicide bombers.

As far as I know, Muslim is the only religion that promises 72 virgins in heaven for martyrdom, and Muslims are the only people who massively protest a caricature of their prophet.

Quote: Original post by Valderman
Europol, and I think it's quite related since the source you linked to support your claims made quite a big deal out of "islamic terrorism."

For starters I never mentioned islamic terrorism. If you dare to quote me exactly where I said that I'd take back all I said and give up my original point (that you seem to be so childishly trying to twist).

Sencondly, from your own document:

Quote: During 2008,359 individuals were tried on ter-
rorism charges in the member states in a total of
187 proceedings.Of 384 verdicts which were
pronounced in 2008,50 percent were related to
Islamist terrorism,and 39 percent to separatist
terrorism.The defendants were acquitted in 29
percent of the verdicts.Most,if not all,convic-
tions were related to terrorist offences that
occurred before 2008.

Half of the tryials on terrorism charges were related to Islamist terrorism.

You see? And idiot diggs his own hole.

Quote: Original post by trzy
Didn't Israel offer to allow the flotilla to dock at Ashdod and transport humanitarian supplies by land after inspection?

IDF says will stop flotilla, but transfer supplies to Gaza

Do you believe any of that? Especially when the article admits that it's part of a public relations effort?

Quote:
...
The IDF also decided it will transfer the humanitarian supplies carried on the ships to the Gaza Strip, after they undergo a security check.
...
Navy Commander Major-General Eliezer Marom said the navy forces will use measures to protect the soldiers' lives and ensure that there are no terrorist elements or explosives on the ships.

Marom said he instructed the forces to act sensibly and avoid provocations, adding that the IDF had no intention of harming the hundreds of passengers on board these ships.

Prior to making the announcement, IDF launched a PR counterattack against the international flotilla. Head of Gaza's Coordination and Liaison Authority, Colonel Moshe Levi convened a press conference and said that there was no shortage in food and supplies in the Strip.
...

Did you see the list of things the IDF considers a security risk? They won't allow those things through. Did you see where Turkey claimed to have inspected the cargo and found no weapons or explosives? Why would it take commandeering the ship to determine if it was carrying weapons? And given the incident, would you ever believe claims made by Marom in the press again?

And at any rate, none of that is relevant if the blockade is illegal and guess what? U.N. Human Rights Chief: Israel's Blockade of Gaza Strip Is Illegal (August 14, 2009)

Quote:
GENEVA — United Nations human rights chief Navi Pillay on Friday accused Israel of violating the rules of warfare with its blockade stopping people and goods from moving in or out of the Gaza Strip.
...
Pillay said the Gaza blockade amounts to collective punishment of civilians, which is prohibited under the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of warfare and occupation.

She cited the conventions' requirement that "no protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited."

The convention also bans reprisals against civilians under occupation and their property.

Pillay urged Israel to ease restrictions immediately "with a view to the complete lifting of the blockade and other restrictions."
...

Fourth Geneva Convention

Quote:
Article 33

No protected person may be punished for an offence he or she has not personally committed. Collective penalties and likewise all measures of intimidation or of terrorism are prohibited.

Pillage is prohibited.

Reprisals against protected persons and their property are prohibited.