Jump to content

A Mosque On The Twin Towers Site?


Recommended Posts

this is exactly why islam is such an evil moral belief system. how do you know what's central to islam and what is not? both the moderates and the extremists can justify their actions based on the ambiguous and contradictory text of the koran, the word of their god. so who is right? what's the true interpretation? a belief system that presents the absolute word of a supernatural god that can be logically interpreted in a number of ways, including mass murder of perceived aggressors to god, is completely corrupt. it will lead to both moderates and extremists, and everything in between, and to say that the moderates are the ones who got it right and the extremists are just some crazy people who are putting words in allah's mouth (as you seem to imply) is where you are wrong.you say violence is not central to islam. but many VERY devoted muslims would disagree with you, now and throughout its history. they would tell you that violence against non believers is essential. and they could cite evidence from the koran backing them up. so, can a moral belief system that produces dangerous and destructive extremists, but also many moderates, be called evil as such? i say it can. after all, not everyone in the nazi party was at the helm of a death camp. there were many more moderate nazis who just wanted a strong germany. is still call nazism evil. (and yes, i know there are degrees involved. christianity suffers the same root problem, but is much more moderate overall for a few reasons. however, study what goes on in many of the large muslim dictatorships in the middle east and tell me they cant be related to nazi germany)
If religon breeds a "potential" for evil based on ancient writings you can't separate Christianity from the equation simply because it's "less evil" than the other. If you are suggesting to ban one then you should ban the other. Then again I don't know what you or anyone else is suggesting to do actually do to ban either one. (I'm not for this just making suggestions and asking you to clarify).
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If religon breeds a "potential" for evil based on ancient writings you can't separate Christianity from the equation simply because it's "less evil" than the other. If you are suggesting to ban one then you should ban the other. Then again I don't know what you or anyone else is suggesting to do actually do to ban either one. (I'm not for this just making suggestions and asking you to clarify).
With this logic we should ban America, after all it used to be a slaver country.You forget that the Bible is a collection of books, some of which are history books. During the History of the Jews, they participated in wars that resulted in them killing people. Being commanded by God to carry these specific wars out is not the same as a blanket command declaring the killing of infidels an action with rewards.The more you try to equate Christianity to islam, the more you fool yourself into believing that Islam is not "The Religion of the Sword".
Link to post
Share on other sites
I would just like I would judge someone if they said they were a member of Al Qaeda. Just being a Muslim has not risen to this level yet by an stretch.
I have to grant you that this is true.The question is, 40 years from now will we think the same thing?
Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to grant you that this is true.The question is, 40 years from now will we think the same thing?
And that's what this comes down to.....a lot of you are "projecting" what Muslims in America will become and that seems wildly unfair. Muslims here are not like Muslims in certain parts of Europe and they have almost nothing in common with Muslims from the "scarier" Middle East regimes......that means we should be accomodating but vigilant imo. There is a time and a place to draw a proverbial line in the sand and we are not there yet.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imam Faisal's NYTimes articlehttp://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/08/opinion/08mosque.html?_r=1His Wiki pagehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feisal_Abdul_RaufOne of his books but the Wiki page has a list of his other articles and books.http://www.amazon.com/Whats-Right-Islam-Vi...s/dp/0060750626One of his organizations http://www.asmasociety.org/home/A list of supporters of the above foundation•Carnegie Corporation of New York •Rockefeller Brothers•Rockefeller Philanthropy•Rockefeller Brothers Fund•Global Fund for Women•William & Mary Greve Foundation•The Sister Fund•The Russell Family Foundation •Danny Kaye & Sylvia Fine Foundation•Graham Charitable Foundation•Deak Family Foundation•Henry Luce Foundation•The Elizabeth Foundation•The Ms. Foundation•Hunt AlternativesOne of many rigth wing Republicans that have supported him, along with President Bush and Condoleeza Rice.Walter Isaacson, head of The Aspen Institute, says Rauf "has participated at the Aspen Institute in Muslim-Christian-Jewish working groups looking at ways to promote greater religious tolerance. He has consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism, and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam." (He also helped start the Cordoba Initiative.)So while everyone was going on and on about this guy there was tons of readily available information that really conflicted with all the rhetoric Palin and Beck and company were spewing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
And that's what this comes down to.....a lot of you are "projecting" what Muslims in America will become and that seems wildly unfair. Muslims here are not like Muslims in certain parts of Europe and they have almost nothing in common with Muslims from the "scarier" Middle East regimes......that means we should be accomodating but vigilant imo. There is a time and a place to draw a proverbial line in the sand and we are not there yet.
Maybe not there yet, but not using the examples of European country's current problems reeks of wishful thinking more than open minded accommodations.
Link to post
Share on other sites
You probably won't but hopefully our children will. Hopefully they will be living under the third consecutive athiest American president as well.
Yea...atheist are so accommodating of religious folks.Except throughout history, especially recent history, which you previously were so convinced was important.Besides, after the debacle of this administration, we won't be electing failures for a long time I hope...so there goes any chance of your guys getting in.
Link to post
Share on other sites
Imam Faisal's NYTimes articleOne of many rigth wing Republicans that have supported him, along with President Bush and Condoleeza Rice.Walter Isaacson, head of The Aspen Institute, says Rauf "has participated at the Aspen Institute in Muslim-Christian-Jewish working groups looking at ways to promote greater religious tolerance. He has consistently denounced radical Islam and terrorism, and promoted a moderate and tolerant Islam." (He also helped start the Cordoba Initiative.)So while everyone was going on and on about this guy there was tons of readily available information that really conflicted with all the rhetoric Palin and Beck and company were spewing.
A wolf in sheep's clothing. It's a Biblical thing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
And that's what this comes down to.....a lot of you are "projecting" what Muslims in America will become and that seems wildly unfair. Muslims here are not like Muslims in certain parts of Europe and they have almost nothing in common with Muslims from the "scarier" Middle East regimes......that means we should be accomodating but vigilant imo. There is a time and a place to draw a proverbial line in the sand and we are not there yet.
I think people are missing an important point, which is that "moderate muslims" need not become terrorists to do harm. First, they are spreading an ideology which will lead to some percentage of its new adherents acting violently. To go back to the disease metaphor, they are like carriers; they may not express all the symptoms, but they can infect others who will. Just because someone is not showing the symptoms doesn't mean we shouldn't treat their disease. Second, so-called "moderate" muslims who do not engage in suicide attacks often still support many of backwards values of Islam, such as the unequal status of women. Remember that 40% of British muslims favor the application of sharia law. Forty percent. While the most violent actors are surely a small minority, those who support many of the more distasteful aspects of Islamic culture are not a small minority. Third, so-called "moderate" muslims actually form a culture of support for the people who take the religion more seriously than they do. While the most violent of acts are publicly rejected, the doctrines that support them and surrounding ideologies are cultivated rather than dismantled by the muslim world in general. Now, as for the comparisons with Christianity, keeping in mind that I'd like to get rid of both.... Think of some of the developments Christianity has gone through that Islam has not. For one thing, rejecting the old law of the Old Testament with newer teachings by Jesus relegated much of the more barbaric aspects of the bible into obscurity. Then with the whole protestant reformation, completely changed the centralized power structure of the church. Christian cultures secularized over the last several hundred years, achieving a workable distinction between religious and civil law. The muslim world has simply not gone through the same evolution. The vast majority (if not all) muslim countries have the religion explicitly involved in their legal and civil setup.
Link to post
Share on other sites

From the NY Times article:

Our name, Cordoba, was inspired by the city in Spain where Muslims, Christians and Jews co-existed in the Middle Ages during a period of great cultural enrichment created by Muslims. Our initiative is intended to cultivate understanding among all religions and cultures.
Seriously?? The irony in this is just mind boggling. Cordoba was conquered by a muslim army and they made it into the capital of their frigging caliphate.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are missing an important point, which is that "moderate muslims" need not become terrorists to do harm. First, they are spreading an ideology which will lead to some percentage of its new adherents acting violently. To go back to the disease metaphor, they are like carriers; they may not express all the symptoms, but they can infect others who will. Just because someone is not showing the symptoms doesn't mean we shouldn't treat their disease. Second, so-called "moderate" muslims who do not engage in suicide attacks often still support many of backwards values of Islam, such as the unequal status of women. Remember that 40% of British muslims favor the application of sharia law. Forty percent. While the most violent actors are surely a small minority, those who support many of the more distasteful aspects of Islamic culture are not a small minority. Third, so-called "moderate" muslims actually form a culture of support for the people who take the religion more seriously than they do. While the most violent of acts are publicly rejected, the doctrines that support them and surrounding ideologies are cultivated rather than dismantled by the muslim world in general. Now, as for the comparisons with Christianity, keeping in mind that I'd like to get rid of both.... Think of some of the developments Christianity has gone through that Islam has not. For one thing, rejecting the old law of the Old Testament with newer teachings by Jesus relegated much of the more barbaric aspects of the bible into obscurity. Then with the whole protestant reformation, completely changed the centralized power structure of the church. Christian cultures secularized over the last several hundred years, achieving a workable distinction between religious and civil law. The muslim world has simply not gone through the same evolution. The vast majority (if not all) muslim countries have the religion explicitly involved in their legal and civil setup.
It really must be pointed out here that there is more than one version of Sharia law. Most islamic countries don't practice what is practiced in Saudi Arabia... and are far more progressive in their governence. So if you're thinking that these people want stonings to be an acceptable punishment for certain crimes ... I really sorta doubt it.The article ( and the question) Is incredibly vauge. The only thing I learned is that using the term 'Sharia Law' makes people nervous. Also, they said they wanted it in certain areas... maybe... just maybe... those areas that are predominently islamic?And so what if they want it? I'm sure a good percentage of christians would like cumpulsory prayer in school... who gives a shit?stop putting moderate in quotes, it's douchey.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I think people are missing an important point, which is that "moderate muslims" need not become terrorists to do harm. First, they are spreading an ideology which will lead to some percentage of its new adherents acting violently. To go back to the disease metaphor, they are like carriers; they may not express all the symptoms, but they can infect others who will. Just because someone is not showing the symptoms doesn't mean we shouldn't treat their disease. Second, so-called "moderate" muslims who do not engage in suicide attacks often still support many of backwards values of Islam, such as the unequal status of women. Remember that 40% of British muslims favor the application of sharia law. Forty percent. While the most violent actors are surely a small minority, those who support many of the more distasteful aspects of Islamic culture are not a small minority. Third, so-called "moderate" muslims actually form a culture of support for the people who take the religion more seriously than they do. While the most violent of acts are publicly rejected, the doctrines that support them and surrounding ideologies are cultivated rather than dismantled by the muslim world in general.
Does this opinion drive you toward any specific state policies for Western society? Do you support France's ban on the burqa?
Link to post
Share on other sites
It really must be pointed out here that there is more than one version of Sharia law. Most islamic countries don't practice what is practiced in Saudi Arabia... and are far more progressive in their governence. So if you're thinking that these people want stonings to be an acceptable punishment for certain crimes ... I really sorta doubt it.The article ( and the question) Is incredibly vauge. The only thing I learned is that using the term 'Sharia Law' makes people nervous. Also, they said they wanted it in certain areas... maybe... just maybe... those areas that are predominently islamic?And so what if they want it? I'm sure a good percentage of christians would like cumpulsory prayer in school... who gives a shit?
I give a shit because I don't want my kid to have to pray in school. Any version of civil law which holds citizens to be judged by religious doctrine is problematic.
stop putting moderate in quotes, it's douchey.
It's necessary. People who use the term are begging the question with a label; slapping the label "moderate" on there it makes it sound all benign, when the whole question is about whether or not it is benign.
Does this opinion drive you toward any specific state policies for Western society? Do you support France's ban on the burqa?
The most important thing for us is to maintain the separation of church and state. Christians tend to be lax about these rules because they don't mind when their own religion gets inserted into law or governance, but the separation is really important. We are in a somewhat different position from France or Switzerland given our history of valuing multicultural mixing, so I think its hard for us to understand what they are dealing with. France has laws about which foreign words are accepted in the French language for example. They are cultural protectionists. I don't see a problem with that as long as the cultural practices they are defending are not harmful.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I give a shit because I don't want my kid to have to pray in school. Any version of civil law which holds citizens to be judged by religious doctrine is problematic. It's necessary. People who use the term are begging the question with a label; slapping the label "moderate" on there it makes it sound all benign, when the whole question is about whether or not it is benign. The most important thing for us is to maintain the separation of church and state. Christians tend to be lax about these rules because they don't mind when their own religion gets inserted into law or governance, but the separation is really important. We are in a somewhat different position from France or Switzerland given our history of valuing multicultural mixing, so I think its hard for us to understand what they are dealing with. France has laws about which foreign words are accepted in the French language for example. They are cultural protectionists. I don't see a problem with that as long as the cultural practices they are defending are not harmful.
Maybe I wasn't clear. I was trying to make the point that it doesn't matter if they want it or not, religious laws have no place in secular socities.The qualifier "moderate" becomes necessary when you have people trying to lump all muslims into one big terrorist orginization (not you)What did you think about the rest of what I posted?
Link to post
Share on other sites
What did you think about the rest of what I posted?
I was trying to address that by saying any version of Sharia law is unacceptable, even in regions that are predominantly muslim. Many regions of this country are predominantly Christian; those should not be ruled by Christian law.
Link to post
Share on other sites
I was trying to address that by saying any version of Sharia law is unacceptable, even in regions that are predominantly muslim. Many regions of this country are predominantly Christian; those should not be ruled by Christian law.
Thou shall not kill. Bitch!
Link to post
Share on other sites
And that's what this comes down to.....a lot of you are "projecting" what Muslims in America will become and that seems wildly unfair. Muslims here are not like Muslims in certain parts of Europe and they have almost nothing in common with Muslims from the "scarier" Middle East regimes......that means we should be accomodating but vigilant imo. There is a time and a place to draw a proverbial line in the sand and we are not there yet.
I just wish one of you whack jobs would have defended the Quran burner just as vehemently, in fact to stay intellectually honest you would absolutely have to. Of course you haven't, but then again no one in his right mind would call you intellectually honest.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Announcements


×
×
  • Create New...