Ryusei the Morning Star Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 Well it was only a matter of time before this thread got made. http://www.city-journal.org/html/doublespeak-islam-14441.htmlhttp://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/7861/british-muslims-survey I'm of the firm belief that most religions are created to explain the unexplained and give "hope" when it's needed. However, in addition to being an ever receding crutch, religion tends to be a polarizing factor as seen by the numerous conflicts between and withing religions. When so much faith is invested into a fairly abstract figure like "god" it becomes increasingly difficult to entirely accept deviations from your view on the matter. So why is this thread called Islam and not Region? Well, unlike most other major religions, Islam has remained rooted in the early BC era and has required concessions made to it in order to keep this standard up. For an example, right up till 2015, Muslims alone in India had the ability to engage in polygamy while other religions have aided by less misogynistic standards. If some of Islam's more regressive ideals were contained there would be little problem, but with the Rise of Daesh and cells turning up in progressive states, this isolation is under doubt. Lets look at the progressive haven of the UK 23 percent believe Sharia law should replace British law in areas with large Muslim populations;52 percent believe homosexuality should be illegal;31 percent believe polygamy should be legal;39 percent believe women should always obey their husbands;35 percent believe Jews have too much power in the UK. Is there really no problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mutant Monster RAEG-HAPYP Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 It's honestly a double sided sword. If Muslims feel like they're being discriminated against and such, it will give terrorists more fuel than they already have. As for this, I'm wondering if younger Muslims have more open views. I don't know. I'm not even sure what to make of this, to be honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardgameking Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 The only thing I disagree with in the above post is the bit about being stuck in BC. In the Middle Ages, there was the Islamic Golden Age which was actually pretty awesome (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age). It was similar to the Renaissance in Italy except better in a lot of ways, bar one The lack of a Reformation, like in Europe. The problem, as I see it, is that Islam is in need of reform but social media warriors, how ridiculously entrenched it has become and other things mean it is very unlikely to happen. The statistics are kinda scary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snatch Steal Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 ...... 52 percent believe homosexuality should be illegal; ...... 39 percent believe women should always obey their husbands; ...... I don't know if you pulled out the right ones. Only 74 percent completely condemn “suicide bombing to fight injustice”;Only 66 percent completely condemn stoning those who commit adultery;Only 34 percent would contact police if they believed someone close to them was involved with jihadism; so according to the survey, in Britain, 26% of Muslims do not completely condemn Suicide Bombings, 1/3 of them do not completely condemn stoning people who have an affair, and 2/3 do not feel inclined to clean up after themselves. I can't speak for Muslims in America, but this is a little shocking, enough so to make me question whether it's real or not. Even worse is that I recently ate at a Mosque, and it was pretty enlightening, so now I'm torn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted June 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 It was nice until you looked at the multiple genosides they commited to get to the "golden age" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cardgameking Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 To be fair, it isn't like any civilisation in the world can claim to have become great, for whatever period of time, without being horrible to other religious/ethnic groups. If we keep focusing on "These guys killed a bunch of other dudes years ago, we should burn down their art" or "They committed genocide on my ancestors several centuries back, let us use that as an excuse to condemn their descendents!" the arguments just look petty. Europeans abused the colonies. Americans abused the blacks. Islam isn't clean, but it is far from the dirtiest when it comes to achieving greatness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enguin Enguin Enguin Enguin Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 To be fair, it isn't like any civilisation in the world can claim to have become great, for whatever period of time, without being horrible to other religious/ethnic groups. If we keep focusing on "These guys killed a bunch of other dudes years ago, we should burn down their art" or "They committed genocide on my ancestors several centuries back, let us use that as an excuse to condemn their descendents!" the arguments just look petty. Europeans abused the colonies. Americans abused the blacks. Islam isn't clean, but it is far from the dirtiest when it comes to achieving greatness.That wasn't by any means the focus, just mentioned in response to what you referenced. The difference between what you've brought up and Islamic extremism is that the colonies and slavery are, at this point, history, whereas ISIS and the like are a present and ongoing thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted June 17, 2016 Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 I mean ideally we all start "worshipping," or more appropriately idolizing, ASI, as they will more or less be gods in an age of information. In which case what we now call religions would descend into myth as the Egyptian and Greek/Roman pantheons did. Though one might worry that humanity, being foolish and overzealous, would end up creating crusades in the name of their gods against the others, but I think that's unlikely to happen as they would actually have contact with their idols, as opposed to the Catholics who did not. If the ASIs even did want to eliminate each other, which I also find unlikely, they'd probably just do it themselves by trying to delete each other or lock each other behind super-advanced firewalls in the internet itself. But, we shouldn't try to push people towards converting to ASI transhumanism until we actually have an ASI, as that would cause its own share of problems, assuming it even got off the ground. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted June 17, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 17, 2016 It's STILL dirty is the problem CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future" hmm I guess there's a couple ways to interpret that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timeskipper Posted June 20, 2016 Report Share Posted June 20, 2016 It's STILL dirty is the problem CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future" hmm I guess there's a couple ways to interpret thatMakes me wonder where you were when potential presidential candidates were going on about "Christian values". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted June 20, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 20, 2016 Makes me wonder where you were when potential presidential candidates were going on about "Christian values".I wonder where you were when I said I would supper a Ebola ridden rabid dog over Ted Cruz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vla1ne Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 the issue is that the base scripture is not compatible with the western world. same goes for most of christianity prior to the reform of it. islam needs mass reform if it's going to remain in the western world. [spoiler=this sums up many of the problems]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MD8GSyLaxrI Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
~~~~ Posted June 21, 2016 Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 31 percent believe polygamy should be legal;What's wrong with polygamy? OT: All religions are false. Let's get rid of them all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted June 21, 2016 Author Report Share Posted June 21, 2016 What's wrong with polygamy? OT: All religions are false. Let's get rid of them all.As an deist, I'm fine with that. The difference is, like vla1ne noted other religions have changed. Hinduism got rid of the caste system and some of its more misogynist policies. Christianity has been moving to be more accepting. Etc. Islam is stuck in 1000 AD @Polygamy - Nothing. (Except maybe Custody and Tax Laws) I think even incest should be legal. Just pointing out how different from the average American the Islamic faith is Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted July 22, 2016 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2016 http://edition.cnn.com/videos/tv/2016/07/22/hunt-underway-for-one-or-more-shooters-on-the-run-lead-ripley-live.cnn Munich police:Shooting suspects have Islamist background 2 Shooters are alive, possibly all three Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snatch Steal Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 On the topic of Polygamy, I almost wonder if people only frown upon it because they're societally inclined or jealous. I may be off, but I believe the religious context for monogamy is because men would collect harems of women and that wasn't too cool with the prophets and such. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delibirb Posted July 23, 2016 Report Share Posted July 23, 2016 On the topic of Polygamy, I almost wonder if people only frown upon it because they're societally inclined or jealous. I may be off, but I believe the religious context for monogamy is because men would collect harems of women and that wasn't too cool with the prophets and such.I myself don't have a moral problem with consensual polygamy. Islam kinda is a bad example because they either buy wives or they are more or less traded among families for power. But in a less misogynistic environment, I don't think there would be any non-religious moral reason one might have against fully consensual polygamy. However, polygamy can have some issues in modern society, namely with the financial nightmare of having such a large number of dependencies and insurance paperwork, the real estate problem of large families living in homes that cannot realistically house them, and the inevitable issue of potentially increased spousal abuse cases. All of these things are already difficult to comprehend or manage as it is, it could only get worse. If, in addition to the legalizing of polygamy, systems could be put in place to better handle these problems, I have no qualms with it. But without such systems, I think it is too dangerous to institute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted August 5, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 5, 2016 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-capture-idUSKCN10G0PT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vla1ne Posted August 6, 2016 Report Share Posted August 6, 2016 http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-iraq-capture-idUSKCN10G0PTthat... doesn't make sense to me. over 1900 people vs 190? how in the world did they allow themselves to go down without a struggle? i know, the fighters hag guns and the like, but if even 900 of those people fought back, the fighters would have to at the very least reconsider their attack plan. i don't see how they could allow themselves to be taken out so easily. then again, different upbringings, so i guess different outlook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted August 9, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 9, 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/09/world/asia/quetta-pakistan-blast-hospital.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vla1ne Posted August 9, 2016 Report Share Posted August 9, 2016 Well on the bright side, it wasn't gun violenceholy hell. why bomb the hospital? of all the places they could bomb, they choose the one that actually attempts to help people? well, not that surprisong that they'd still be bombing places though. they are a terrorist organization. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted August 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2016 Well on the bright side, it wasn't gun violenceholy hell. why bomb the hospital? of all the places they could bomb, they choose the one that actually attempts to help people? well, not that surprisong that they'd still be bombing places though. they are a terrorist organization.Hey, atleast terrorism has no religion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aerion Brightflame Posted August 10, 2016 Report Share Posted August 10, 2016 And Islam is not Islamism. It is specifically Islamic Fundamentalism/militancy, and whilst that is a subset of Islam, just as you find violent subsets in any religion, it is still not Islam. So you are right to say that Terrorism has no religion - It follows ideologies, but very rarely a religion as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow Posted August 10, 2016 Report Share Posted August 10, 2016 Hey, atleast terrorism has no religion It's be nice if the words were legible. Anyway this is an extremely biased chart. And doesn't have anything backing it up. Not to mention that there's more than just terrorist attacks that other religions have done to harm/kill/damage people/things/places and so on. It's just a pointless and random "fact" that may not even be entirely true. Not to mention it doesn't even explain what they're counting as a terrorist attack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryusei the Morning Star Posted August 10, 2016 Author Report Share Posted August 10, 2016 It's be nice if the words were legible. Anyway this is an extremely biased chart. And doesn't have anything backing it up. Not to mention that there's more than just terrorist attacks that other religions have done to harm/kill/damage people/things/places and so on. It's just a pointless and random "fact" that may not even be entirely true. Not to mention it doesn't even explain what they're counting as a terrorist attack.There is source under it for a reason. Didn't think you guys wanted me to put the full list of 300+ attacks on here But it's all there for anyone who doubts it's validity or is otherwise interested Just remember, Terrorism has no religion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.