U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-22-2016, 04:29 PM
 
Location: San Francisco
2,371 posts, read 1,501,339 times
Reputation: 3870

Advertisements

Religion is the problem - and of late Islam's (or apparently avowed adherents to the same) being doing a pretty efficient job on the world stage as contender for the worst.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-22-2016, 07:57 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,276,969 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by modernist1 View Post
Religion is the problem - and of late Islam's (or apparently avowed adherents to the same) being doing a pretty efficient job on the world stage as contender for the worst.
It is all a matter of perspective. If you lived in some parts of Africa or Northwest India you would probably believe it was Christians that are the leading contenders. If you were a Theist living in North Korea you would probably believe Atheists are the strongest contenders for the title.

But in the final analysis we need to see each person as an individual and forget our perceptions of what the adherent of a belief or disbelief is like. Every human has the ability to act out of good or out of evil, it all comes down to individual choices.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2016, 04:16 AM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,582,067 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
It is all a matter of perspective. If you lived in some parts of Africa or Northwest India you would probably believe it was Christians that are the leading contenders. If you were a Theist living in North Korea you would probably believe Atheists are the strongest contenders for the title.

But in the final analysis we need to see each person as an individual and forget our perceptions of what the adherent of a belief or disbelief is like. Every human has the ability to act out of good or out of evil, it all comes down to individual choices.
You missed the point.

It has nothing to do with atheism in this case.
The point here is Islam is the contender as the worst religion amongst all Religions in modern time from 100 years ago to the present.

The above can be easily judged objectively to give a reasonable conclusion by using various critical criteria, i.e.

1. Number of incidents involving fatalities since 911 as inspired by verses in the main holy texts.
2. Number of incidents involving violence without fatalities.
3. Human rights against minorities.
4. Other criteria to be advised.

The above are to be compared amongst all the world's main religion.

I don't have the actual statistics but my hunch based on actual news reported by the major News Channel, it is likely Islam would be the worst based on the above criterias.

Here one ready statistics re point 1 for refinement;
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2016, 11:12 AM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,276,969 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Continuum View Post
You missed the point.

It has nothing to do with atheism in this case.
The point here is Islam is the contender as the worst religion amongst all Religions in modern time from 100 years ago to the present.

The above can be easily judged objectively to give a reasonable conclusion by using various critical criteria, i.e.

1. Number of incidents involving fatalities since 911 as inspired by verses in the main holy texts.
2. Number of incidents involving violence without fatalities.
3. Human rights against minorities.
4. Other criteria to be advised.

The above are to be compared amongst all the world's main religion.

I don't have the actual statistics but my hunch based on actual news reported by the major News Channel, it is likely Islam would be the worst based on the above criterias.

Here one ready statistics re point 1 for refinement;
The reality is that non-religious acts contribute the most to violence in the world.

Yes, religious violence does exist and in different parts of the world people will view different religions as being the greatest contender for being the most violent. There does seem to be considerable effort in the west to depict Islam as being the most violent.

Going back to the question as to which religion is the greatest contender for being the worst, in the Western Nations it will probably be unanimous that it is Islam, But the Western Nations do not make up the majority of the world. although the Western world does contain nearly all of the world's Christians.


However in most Muslim and Hindu Nations Christianity is usually seen as being the most violent. Even in some of the nations of Africa that adhere to tribal religions. I am not certain of the Jewish views I find that most Jews are more apt to see specific people and not attach any religious significance to them. I do not know any Jews that will say any religion is evil but do know some that will name specific people instead. I will give the Jews, I personally know, credit for their wisdom in blaming individuals and not their professed religion. Something I wish all people would learn to do.

While the sticker looks impressive it must be remembered it is only measuring what the author labels as terrorist attacks. If one were to be fair and label all violent attacks against others as terrorist attacks it falls far short of the terrorism that occurs in many Western cities. That sticker is covering a 15 year period in that same period How many non-Religious labelled terrorist attacks have occurred? The US alone averages over 14,000 murders annually and has one of the lower murder rates found in the non-Islamic Nations. For the past 3 years we have averaged one mass shooting every week.

To be fair and to show a true representation of humanity one can not separate acts of terrorism into Religious or secular. We humans are violent creatures and secular acts of violence far out number violent acts that can be related to religion. does it really matter if the person who commits an act of terrorism does so for religious or non-religious reasons? I doubt if it makes any difference to the families of those killed. World wide a person is far more likely to be murdered for none religious reasons that any religious reason. I can only find facts for 2012:

Quote:
Some 437,000 people murdered worldwide in 2012, according to new UNODC study

The regional picture

Almost 750 million people live in countries with the highest homicide rates in the world - namely the Americas and Africa - meaning that almost half of all homicide occurs in countries that are home to just 11 per cent of the earth's population. At the opposite end of the spectrum, 3 billion people - mainly in Europe, Asia and Oceania- live in countries where homicide rates are relatively low.

https://www.unodc.org/unodc/en/press...odc-study.html
Have interject a thought here. Nearly 2/3 of the world's Muslims live in Asia, but Asia has one of the lowest homicide rates. Do you realize that if that 2012 figure reflects the annual average that means world wide there were at least 6,555,000 Murders since 9/11 that are not attributed to Muslim terrorists.


When looking at the world wide incidence of violence the numbers in that sticker come close to being statistically insignificant, especially when one views them as being the accumulation of 15 years. They are less than 5 percent the number of violent acts committed in 2012 alone. Yet Muslims make up over 25% of the world's population. Shucks, just to keep on par with the non-Muslim world that sticker would have to be at least 2,000,000

When I say the numbers are "Statistically insignificant" I am not saying they are insignificant in terms of pain, suffering or the importance of the lives wrongly cut short. I am simply pointing out the mathematics of the violence in this world

Food for thought if every terrorist attack by Muslim terrorists had not occurred, it would not make any noticeable mathematical difference in the loss of life to evil violent deeds for the past 15 years. I am not condoning or justifying those acts nor am I saying that us Muslims should not do what we can to prevent future ones from happening. I am stating that the "Islamic Terrorists" are not the major source of violence in the world that the media might lead one to believe. For us in the USA the friendly neighborhood gang member is a much greater threat. Street crimes pose a far greater threat than any Islamic radical for us in the US.

My point being that little sticker does not really show anything, it is an emotional trigger to convince people that Islam is evil.

If I was to put up a sticker showing the number of violent crimes that occur monthly in any Large city, would that give a true image of the average person in that city? I doubt it. That terrorism sticker is like that and does not present an Image of the average practitioner of Islam.

While this tendency of separating acts by Muslims and highlighting them is not racism, it does show bias and perhaps prejudice. The terrorists seem to be achieving their objective of instilling fear, distrust and hatred of Muslims that live in Western Nations. If the terrorist are to reach their goal of dominating the Islamic nations, they must first destroy Islam, and it seems they have found the means to make non-Muslims become the tool to achieve this end.

Islamophobia is not racist, but it is very much hatred and fear of Muslims and results in discrimination against all Muslims. The result is the same even if it does not match the definition of racism.
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2016, 01:17 PM
 
2,072 posts, read 2,151,487 times
Reputation: 1978
Are street gangs blowing up women and children to smithereens in airports? This sound like rationalizing to me. I respect middle eastern culture and the noble religion of Islam, and I know that it is just a minority who are terrorists. But I doubt much of the world will see and perceive Islam the way you hope for, in the west. Not right now at least. And how about all the Muslims that hate Israel, Jews, Christians, Yazidis, Shia's, and/or western culture in general? The hate taught in the madrassas. Hate is a two way street.

May I ask what do Muslims think about suicide bombers who blow up innocent women and children? Will he go to heaven? Does Allah look up on him favorably when he blows the limbs off of women and children deliberately? Does he become a martyr in the eyes of Allah and Muslims of the world?

Last edited by folkguitarist555; 03-23-2016 at 01:27 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2016, 06:20 PM
 
1,601 posts, read 750,908 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
The reality is that non-religious acts contribute the most to violence in the world.

Yes, religious violence does exist and in different parts of the world people will view different religions as being the greatest contender for being the most violent. There does seem to be considerable effort in the west to depict Islam as being the most violent.

Going back to the question as to which religion is the greatest contender for being the worst, in the Western Nations it will probably be unanimous that it is Islam, But the Western Nations do not make up the majority of the world. although the Western world does contain nearly all of the world's Christians.


However in most Muslim and Hindu Nations Christianity is usually seen as being the most violent. Even in some of the nations of Africa that adhere to tribal religions. I am not certain of the Jewish views I find that most Jews are more apt to see specific people and not attach any religious significance to them. I do not know any Jews that will say any religion is evil but do know some that will name specific people instead. I will give the Jews, I personally know, credit for their wisdom in blaming individuals and not their professed religion. Something I wish all people would learn to do.

While the sticker looks impressive it must be remembered it is only measuring what the author labels as terrorist attacks. If one were to be fair and label all violent attacks against others as terrorist attacks it falls far short of the terrorism that occurs in many Western cities. That sticker is covering a 15 year period in that same period How many non-Religious labelled terrorist attacks have occurred? The US alone averages over 14,000 murders annually and has one of the lower murder rates found in the non-Islamic Nations. For the past 3 years we have averaged one mass shooting every week.

To be fair and to show a true representation of humanity one can not separate acts of terrorism into Religious or secular. We humans are violent creatures and secular acts of violence far out number violent acts that can be related to religion. does it really matter if the person who commits an act of terrorism does so for religious or non-religious reasons? I doubt if it makes any difference to the families of those killed. World wide a person is far more likely to be murdered for none religious reasons that any religious reason. I can only find facts for 2012:

Have interject a thought here. Nearly 2/3 of the world's Muslims live in Asia, but Asia has one of the lowest homicide rates. Do you realize that if that 2012 figure reflects the annual average that means world wide there were at least 6,555,000 Murders since 9/11 that are not attributed to Muslim terrorists.


When looking at the world wide incidence of violence the numbers in that sticker come close to being statistically insignificant, especially when one views them as being the accumulation of 15 years. They are less than 5 percent the number of violent acts committed in 2012 alone. Yet Muslims make up over 25% of the world's population. Shucks, just to keep on par with the non-Muslim world that sticker would have to be at least 2,000,000

When I say the numbers are "Statistically insignificant" I am not saying they are insignificant in terms of pain, suffering or the importance of the lives wrongly cut short. I am simply pointing out the mathematics of the violence in this world

Food for thought if every terrorist attack by Muslim terrorists had not occurred, it would not make any noticeable mathematical difference in the loss of life to evil violent deeds for the past 15 years. I am not condoning or justifying those acts nor am I saying that us Muslims should not do what we can to prevent future ones from happening. I am stating that the "Islamic Terrorists" are not the major source of violence in the world that the media might lead one to believe. For us in the USA the friendly neighborhood gang member is a much greater threat. Street crimes pose a far greater threat than any Islamic radical for us in the US.

My point being that little sticker does not really show anything, it is an emotional trigger to convince people that Islam is evil.

If I was to put up a sticker showing the number of violent crimes that occur monthly in any Large city, would that give a true image of the average person in that city? I doubt it. That terrorism sticker is like that and does not present an Image of the average practitioner of Islam.

While this tendency of separating acts by Muslims and highlighting them is not racism, it does show bias and perhaps prejudice. The terrorists seem to be achieving their objective of instilling fear, distrust and hatred of Muslims that live in Western Nations. If the terrorist are to reach their goal of dominating the Islamic nations, they must first destroy Islam, and it seems they have found the means to make non-Muslims become the tool to achieve this end.

Islamophobia is not racist, but it is very much hatred and fear of Muslims and results in discrimination against all Muslims. The result is the same even if it does not match the definition of racism.
A typical attempt to sweep Islamic terrorism under the rug.

Jihad to impose sharia includes much more than violence. Muslims are responsible for most of the wars and civil unrest in the world today. Most especially in southeast Asia, just ask the Burmese and Filipinos.

Technically this is, of course, an argument from non-essentials, and it has been used before. The North American version states, "more Americans die from car accidents in a month than die from terrorism in a decade", or some variation. In every case they attempt to draw a comparison between unprincipled and highly varied causes of death with a very specific, ideologically driven cause of death. They attempt to deny the mind's capacity for discrimination, in our attempt to distinguish sources of danger.

The risk of a child ingesting poison or drowning in a pool is small. That hardly means we should leave poison out on the kitchen table, or keep the pool unfenced. Yet they would have us do precisely that, except the danger is not the millions of poisonous materials or swimming pools, it is millions of Muslims.

Another point: Islam encourages Muslims to engage in taqiyya (lying to mask negative notions about Islam). They are expected to be deceitful to infidels. And the Quran boasts that Allah is the greatest deceiver of them all!

Islam kills more people daily and annually in the name of Islam than ANY other religion on Earth in the name of that religion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-23-2016, 11:50 PM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,582,067 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
The reality is that non-religious acts contribute the most to violence in the world.
This is bad thinking and a straw man.
What is in contention here is not which type of evil acts is the most violent in the World.
Note I have stated before, ALL types of evils and violence must be addressed by humanity.

The topic [relevant to this forum] is;
Which religion is the greatest contender for contributing the worst evil and violence.


Quote:
Yes, religious violence does exist and in different parts of the world people will view different religions as being the greatest contender for being the most violent. There does seem to be considerable effort in the west to depict Islam as being the most violent.

Going back to the question as to which religion is the greatest contender for being the worst, in the Western Nations it will probably be unanimous that it is Islam, But the Western Nations do not make up the majority of the world. although the Western world does contain nearly all of the world's Christians.
Yes, here we are on track and you gave the true and right answer, i.e.
"it will probably be unanimous that it is Islam"

From the above we should find the effective root causes.
My hypothesis lead to two main variable i.e.

1. 20% of Muslims [as with ALL humans] are evil prone.
2. There are significant amounts of evil laden elements in the Quran.
3. Point 1 and 2 combine to manifest real terrible Islam-inspired evils and violence.

Quote:
However in most Muslim and Hindu Nations Christianity is usually seen as being the most violent. Even in some of the nations of Africa that adhere to tribal religions. I am not certain of the Jewish views I find that most Jews are more apt to see specific people and not attach any religious significance to them. I do not know any Jews that will say any religion is evil but do know some that will name specific people instead. I will give the Jews, I personally know, credit for their wisdom in blaming individuals and not their professed religion. Something I wish all people would learn to do.
There are violence and evil committed by Christians and other believers.
However these evils and violence are not inspired by Christianity which has an overriding pacifist maxim, e.g. 'Love your enemies' 'give the other cheek' and overall sentiment of love.
I have not come across Christians killing non-Christians in the name of Jesus or shouting God is Great.

Since there will be 20% of evil prone within Christians, Buddhists, Hindus, Jainists, Taoists, they will be naturally prone to commit evils of various sorts but not directly led by the religions. Thus we need to deal with these evil prone like all other humans but not on the basis of their religious texts.

Quote:
While the sticker looks impressive it must be remembered it is only measuring what the author labels as terrorist attacks. If one were to be fair and label all violent attacks against others as terrorist attacks it falls far short of the terrorism that occurs in many Western cities. That sticker is covering a 15 year period in that same period How many non-Religious labelled terrorist attacks have occurred? The US alone averages over 14,000 murders annually and has one of the lower murder rates found in the non-Islamic Nations. For the past 3 years we have averaged one mass shooting every week.
Note I mentioned the statistics are rough and need refinements.
These are incidents with fatalities which committed by Muslims.
We need to refine this statistics to those that are inspired by the evil laden verses in the Quran.
I have not reviewed each incidents but my assessment based on my hypothesis is a large proportion of these fatal incidents are traceable to the evil laden verses in the Quran.

Btw, the above related to only incidents with fatalities.
There are tons of incidents without fatalities around the world which are also listed in that site but not compiled into any form of statistics. For example the injuring of Malala for promoting education would not be included in the above stats because she was not killed. Another is the kidnapping of 200 Nigerian girls.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2016, 12:38 AM
 
Location: Not-a-Theist
3,440 posts, read 1,582,067 times
Reputation: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodrow LI View Post
To be fair and to show a true representation of humanity one can not separate acts of terrorism into Religious or secular. We humans are violent creatures and secular acts of violence far out number violent acts that can be related to religion. does it really matter if the person who commits an act of terrorism does so for religious or non-religious reasons? I doubt if it makes any difference to the families of those killed. World wide a person is far more likely to be murdered for none religious reasons that any religious reason. I can only find facts for 2012:
As human beings of humanity we cannot ignore ALL acts of evils and violence. As I had mentioned I have a separate project that cover all evils and violence within humanity and how to tackle them.

But as a concerned and effective human being who is competent in problem-solving techniques, the first strategy is to breakdown the whole problems and find similar patterns and commonality within them.
To do this we use the Fishbone Technique where;

Causes are usually grouped into major categories to identify these sources of variation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ishikawa_diagram


The strategy is to group causes into major categories.
We can sort the cause into various major categories but for our purpose it is critical and necessary to sort all types of evil into 1. Secular and 2. Religious as one approach.

I hope you get it on why I sort all evil into the categories above.
The purpose of such categorizing is to ensure efficiency in solving the problems and finding preventive measures.
If we are not efficient in tracing the effective root causes, then we will be barking up the wrong tree and the problem will continue unabated.

I can easily step into your shoes and understand why you make the above suggestions of dealing with the whole lot at one go without the major categories.
The reason is psychological and you don't want your religion to be associated with anything negative. As I have said many time, a believe by default and imperatively must be positively bias towards his own religion otherwise his faith will not work.
On the other hand, the believer must wear the human and humanity hat [be responsible and unselfish] to face reality and accept whatever is the truth of reality.


Quote:
Have interject a thought here. Nearly 2/3 of the world's Muslims live in Asia, but Asia has one of the lowest homicide rates. Do you realize that if that 2012 figure reflects the annual average that means world wide there were at least 6,555,000 Murders since 9/11 that are not attributed to Muslim terrorists.


When looking at the world wide incidence of violence the numbers in that sticker come close to being statistically insignificant, especially when one views them as being the accumulation of 15 years. They are less than 5 percent the number of violent acts committed in 2012 alone. Yet Muslims make up over 25% of the world's population. Shucks, just to keep on par with the non-Muslim world that sticker would have to be at least 2,000,000

When I say the numbers are "Statistically insignificant" I am not saying they are insignificant in terms of pain, suffering or the importance of the lives wrongly cut short. I am simply pointing out the mathematics of the violence in this world

Food for thought if every terrorist attack by Muslim terrorists had not occurred, it would not make any noticeable mathematical difference in the loss of life to evil violent deeds for the past 15 years. I am not condoning or justifying those acts nor am I saying that us Muslims should not do what we can to prevent future ones from happening. I am stating that the "Islamic Terrorists" are not the major source of violence in the world that the media might lead one to believe. For us in the USA the friendly neighborhood gang member is a much greater threat. Street crimes pose a far greater threat than any Islamic radical for us in the US.

My point being that little sticker does not really show anything, it is an emotional trigger to convince people that Islam is evil.

If I was to put up a sticker showing the number of violent crimes that occur monthly in any Large city, would that give a true image of the average person in that city? I doubt it. That terrorism sticker is like that and does not present an Image of the average practitioner of Islam.

While this tendency of separating acts by Muslims and highlighting them is not racism, it does show bias and perhaps prejudice. The terrorists seem to be achieving their objective of instilling fear, distrust and hatred of Muslims that live in Western Nations. If the terrorist are to reach their goal of dominating the Islamic nations, they must first destroy Islam, and it seems they have found the means to make non-Muslims become the tool to achieve this end.
I have answered the above partly re your Asia comparison in another post.

My explanation of why we need to separate acts by Muslims and others is for the sake of efficiency within the principles and strategies of efficient problem solving techniques.

Example:
Suppose a patient has a long list of illness and sufferings.
If he complained to the GP about his illness and start jumping from one complain to another, it will confused the GP.
A good GP will list down all his complains and find patterns to diagnose the types of illness the patient is suffering from. The GP will sort his various illnesses in the relevant category.
Then the GP will prioritize which illness is the most critical and if a specialist [say heart problem] is necessary he will refer the patient to the specialist. The other illness will be attended to accordingly to its priority.
Now if the patient go the specialist [heart] and start complaining randomly about his various illness he will confused the specialist and hinder his own cure. The heart specialist will only deal with his heart condition and nothing else whilst taking account the knowledge of his other ailments.

The above example is applicable to dealing with ALL evil and violence in the world.
To be efficient we need to analyze and categorize them into the major categories.
As with the heart specialist, we are discussing only Islam-inspired evils and violence and not non-Islamic related evils.

Quote:
Islamophobia is not racist, but it is very much hatred and fear of Muslims and results in discrimination against all Muslims. The result is the same even if it does not match the definition of racism.
Islamophobia is literally the irrational fear of Islam.
It has nothing to do with hatred and Muslims.
It also has nothing to do with race.
You need to get your semantics right in this case, otherwise you will be dishonest.
If it is applied to Muslims, then it is 'Muslimophobia'.

What is going on in the world at present is there is are
real fears of Islam
and how its ideology influenced and inspired SOME evil prone Muslims to commit terrible evils and violence plus spread terror around the world.
Since there are real fears of Islam the term 'Islamophobia' cannot be applicable in this case.

The truth of reality is there are real fears of Islam [in part] as supported by the glaring evidence of terrible evils and violence committed by SOME Muslims who are evil prone and are inspired by Islam [in part].

The other truth is there are real hatred and irrational fears of infidels in the Quran.
This is true and literally "infidelophobia" "Kuffarophobia" "kafirophobia" "kafaraphobia"
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2016, 10:19 AM
 
1,601 posts, read 750,908 times
Reputation: 435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wittgenstein's Ghost View Post
I do not believe Islamophobia is inherently racism. I believe many Islamophobes are also racists, and they are often racist against Muslims based on race proxies such as dress and skin color that are shared among certain groups of Muslims. However, that does not mean that Islamophobia is necessarily a racist attitude. Let's imagine a person who believes that the central tenets of Islam are fundamentally false, and that these beliefs are entirely unsubstantiated. Further, let's imagine that this person also believe that any individual who could accept such ridiculous teachings must be ignorant or unintelligent. Regardless of whether such a person is justified in holding such beliefs, these beliefs are not tantamount to racism any more than a person who believes all flat earth proponents are idiots is guilty of racism.

I realize that in practice many people are racist toward Muslims, and they point to such rationalizations as a defense for their racist beliefs. However, these people just so happen to also be actual racists. Acting with prejudice against a person because of the color of their skin or race proxies, such as dress or hair style, is racism. For example, not hiring a person because he or she has an afro haircut is clearly racist, even if the person doing the hiring made it clear that the decision was not based on color of skin. However, beliefs are not proxies for race. Any white, black, middle eastern or Asian person can accept the tenets of Islam as being true. Similarly, any person who shares race proxies with most Muslims can reject the teachings of Islam.

Perhaps "Islamophobia" is not a precise enough term. Maybe "anti-Islamism" and "anti-Muslimism" should be introduced. The problem, however, would seem to remain: A person could look like the stereotypical Muslim as conceived by white westerners, have an "Islamic" name and dress in a manner that non-Muslim people consider to be an Islamic-style pf dress and yet still reject the tenets of Islam. If this person were subjected to prejudicial treatment due to these factors (dress, name, etc.), would it make sense to say this person was a victim of anti-Muslimism? That seems strange considering that such a person isn't actually a Muslim. I think such prejudice is clearly racism, but it's hard for me to say that "Islamophobia," "anti-Islamism" or "anti-Muslimism" are proper terms for the prejudicial treatment a non-Muslim might be subjected to.

What are your thoughts? If you believe Islamophobia is racism, do you extend that to negative attitudes toward religious beliefs in other religions?
Since we know that Islam is an ideology, not a race, the question becomes....should we judge people on their ideologies...on what ideas they hold?

I say yes. This is the most important thing to consider when passing judgement on an individual. Judging on race is wrong. Race is a chance of birth, not something that a person chooses.

Some may question if we should pass judgement on others at all. If we are moral, we must pass judgement ON MORAL ISSUES and IMMORAL BELIEFS and ACTIONS. We must say a murderer is evil and a child rapist is evil and that those who traffic in humans are evil. As Ayn Rand said: "One must never fail to pronounce moral judgment.

Nothing can corrupt and disintegrate a culture or a man’s character as thoroughly as does the precept of moral agnosticism, the idea that one must never pass moral judgment on others, that one must be morally tolerant of anything, that the good consists of never distinguishing good from evil.

It is obvious who profits and who loses by such a precept. It is not justice or equal treatment that you grant to men when you abstain equally from praising men’s virtues and from condemning men’s vices. When your impartial attitude declares, in effect, that neither the good nor the evil may expect anything from you—whom do you betray and whom do you encourage?.......The precept: “Judge not, that ye be not judged” . . . is an abdication of moral responsibility: it is a moral blank check one gives to others in exchange for a moral blank check one expects for oneself."


We must judge Nazis on their ideology. We must judge members of NAMBLA on their ideology. We judge followers and supporters of evil as evil. And we must judge those who are moral as GOOD. The difference between a murderer and someone who protects people from murder is the difference between evil and good.

Is there enough evidence to judge Islam as evil? Of course. The Quran and hadiths are clearly evil. Their source, Muhammed, was clearly an evil man. The history of Islam is evil. What Muslims are doing today is evil, including terrorism, rioting, human rights abuses and all the rest. The root of evil is INITIATION of force against others and Islam promotes that over and over. Tens of millions of people have been slaughtered, enslaved, terrorized, tortured.....all in the name of Islam and it's teachings.

Good people do not choose to follow evil ideologies.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-24-2016, 01:14 PM
 
Location: Logan Township, Minnesota
15,511 posts, read 13,276,969 times
Reputation: 7407
Quote:
Originally Posted by juju33312 View Post
Since we know that Islam is an ideology, not a race, the question becomes....should we judge people on their ideologies...on what ideas they hold?

I say yes. This is the most important thing to consider when passing judgement on an individual. Judging on race is wrong. Race is a chance of birth, not something that a person chooses.

Some may question if we should pass judgement on others at all. If we are moral, we must pass judgement ON MORAL ISSUES and IMMORAL BELIEFS and ACTIONS. We must say a murderer is evil and a child rapist is evil and that those who traffic in humans are evil. As Ayn Rand said: "One must never fail to pronounce moral judgment.

Nothing can corrupt and disintegrate a culture or a man’s character as thoroughly as does the precept of moral agnosticism, the idea that one must never pass moral judgment on others, that one must be morally tolerant of anything, that the good consists of never distinguishing good from evil.

It is obvious who profits and who loses by such a precept. It is not justice or equal treatment that you grant to men when you abstain equally from praising men’s virtues and from condemning men’s vices. When your impartial attitude declares, in effect, that neither the good nor the evil may expect anything from you—whom do you betray and whom do you encourage?.......The precept: “Judge not, that ye be not judged” . . . is an abdication of moral responsibility: it is a moral blank check one gives to others in exchange for a moral blank check one expects for oneself."


We must judge Nazis on their ideology. We must judge members of NAMBLA on their ideology. We judge followers and supporters of evil as evil. And we must judge those who are moral as GOOD. The difference between a murderer and someone who protects people from murder is the difference between evil and good.

Is there enough evidence to judge Islam as evil? Of course. The Quran and hadiths are clearly evil. Their source, Muhammed, was clearly an evil man. The history of Islam is evil. What Muslims are doing today is evil, including terrorism, rioting, human rights abuses and all the rest. The root of evil is INITIATION of force against others and Islam promotes that over and over. Tens of millions of people have been slaughtered, enslaved, terrorized, tortured.....all in the name of Islam and it's teachings.

Good people do not choose to follow evil ideologies.
Good people do not choose to follow evil ideologies

Based upon that comment, is it safe to assume that if a good person chooses to follow an ideology, the ideology is good?

Do you see these as good or evil people

Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan: The Muslim Gandhi | Asia | DW.COM | 06.10.2011

Exhibit: Albanian Muslims saved Jews from Nazis – CNN Belief Blog - CNN.com Blogs

The Muslim Heroes Who Resisted The Paris Terrorists | ThinkProgress

Brussels Taxi Hero Shows How We Stop Terror Attacks - The Daily Beast

Kenyans honor 'hero' Muslim who shielded Christians in attack | Fox News
__________________
When posting as a MOD my posts will be in red

No advertising, no copyrighted material, no personal attacks


MODERATOR OF: Buddhism: Judaism: Paganism:

When in doubt read the TOS MOD LIST FAQ's
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Islam
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top