Prejudice or Perspicacity? Racist or Realist?

[Bettina]

But it's not about hate. It's about disagreement. I mean' date=' Islam may be hateful or racist, but [i']I'm[/i] not because I point it out. Scots are people. Blacks are people. Gays are people. Islam is a religion. If people define themselves by it, then that's their problem isn't it?

 

I haven't seen anyone address Muslims, but rather Islam. There's a difference.

 

By the way, did you read the quotes I provided from the Kuran? You said if it can be argued that Islam is like the Nazis and the KKK...

 

Exactly.....

 

I am not a racist in any form. I detest people who bash gays and I've stood up for gay rights on this board several times and still do. I would equally detest those who may talk about skin color in a negative way. I have friends of all colors and love them all equally and I have never said that all Muslims are evil.

 

I am of Italian origin, and at night, I play an online multiplayer game with my far away friends who are German, Polish, and a host of others. I just don't feel the same way about Islam.

 

Bettina

[Phi for All]

I see you are seizing on the KKK analogy, having ignored my answer to your Gang analogy. I don't blame you for seeking surer footing.

I don't respond to many of your posts because some seem rhetorical, and often I'm just absorbing what you've said over a longer period, and other times I just have no comment. You might also note that I was responding to what ParanoiA said, not you, so possibly you might be treating everything I say as directed at you. Why should I reference your remarks when replying to ParanoiA?

Yet another criteria with which we many censor ourselves: the level of specificity and detail of the statement. What if a poster makes a conclusory post, e.g. "Islam has a problem" but also has a history of expressing the background behind that opinion?

Then this would be a strawman because that's not really what I'm objecting to.

As a general matter, every person deserves to be judged on his or her own merits. However, at a policy level, sometimes decisions have to be made with respect to groups.

Yes.

Many people like Richard Dawkins are anti-religion, period. They believe that religion in general is unhealthy to our species.

Yes.

If Richard Dawkins could post here (a question you ignored in your rush to talk about the extreme example of the KKK) that there is a problem with all religions, why can't I post about a specific religion that was founded and expanded with violence, does in its text not recognize the separation between church and state and has a recent history of not successfully curtailing it's fringe elements? If I can be prejudiced against religion in general, why not against a particular religion?

I ignored the question because if Richard Dawkins came here to post and dragged each thread about religion off-topic with his opinion that all religions are bad, he would receive the same warnings as anyone else would.

[Bettina]

Here's the whole post:

And here's the whole thread: http://www.scienceforums.net/forums/showthread.php?t=18232&page=2

 

I'm sorry Phi.... but I stand by what I said in that thread. I'm shaking a bit while I type this and I know it will give more ammunition to Severian, Bud, and Tetrahedrite but I personally feel, by what I see today, that the Islamic movement is parallel to the Nazi movement. If we continue to ignore it, its going to kill us.

 

Still shaking...

 

Bettina

[Phi for All]

But it's not about hate. It's about disagreement. I mean, Islam may be hateful or racist, but I'm not because I point it out. Scots are people. Blacks are people. Gays are people. Islam is a religion. If people define themselves by it, then that's their[/i'] problem isn't it?

Does that mean it's OK to make racist remarks about blacks who don't define themselves by being black? And I'm really just talking about SFN here, not trying to make any moral judgements.

I haven't seen anyone address Muslims, but rather Islam. There's a difference.

But when someone posts,

Islam...The devils religion.

doesn't that imply Muslims are devil worshippers? Or at least that they are all of like mind so we should treat them all alike?

By the way, did you read the quotes I provided from the Kuran? You said if it can be argued that Islam is like the Nazis and the KKK...

I did read them. Are they to prove that all Islam and it's followers feel this way and take the words literally? If so, I found some passages from the Bible that pretty much condemn the Jews and the Christians the same way.

[Phi for All]

I'm sorry Phi.... but I stand by what I said in that thread. I'm shaking a bit while I type this and I know it will give more ammunition to Severian' date=' Bud, and Tetrahedrite but I personally feel, by what I see today, that the Islamic movement is parallel to the Nazi movement. If we continue to ignore it, its going to kill us.

 

Still shaking...

 

Bettina[/quote']And I want you to know that I'm using many of your posts here to make a point, not really to single you out for any kind of punishment. The staff has been accused of allowing a double standard to exist with regards to these matters. We've also been accused of showing favoritism, deference to your age and sex, many things which I don't beleive are really relevant.

 

But this particular area stands out to me. I'm not trying to defend Islam so much as I am trying to figure out why Islam is not under the definition of our policies against Prejudicial and Racist Remarks. Frankly, most are arguing this as a freedom of opinion matter. They see censorship only.

 

I'm not here to try to convince you to change your opinion of Islam. I'm here to clarify what should be the basis for Prejudiced / Racist Remarks. If one of your German friends was called a Nazi because he was German you'd defend him. If the remark was posted here at SFN, *I* would defend him too. Is all this simply because you have no friends who are Islamic who can show you they aren't devil-worshippers? If you knew some Islamic people who were pretty cool would you make your posts a bit more tolerant towards them?

[ParanoiA]

Does that mean it's OK to make racist remarks about blacks who don't define themselves by being black? And I'm really just talking about SFN here' date=' not trying to make any moral judgements.

[/quote']

 

That doesn't make any sense. Someone who is black, is literally black whether they define themselves that way or not. When I refer to it, I'm obviously refering to the "people". When I refer to Islam, I'm not obviously refering to Muslims. I'm refering to an ideology; a religion. It's not my fault that an entire continent follows it.

 

If all of the Arab world followed the teachings of the KKK, would we then not be allowed to call that ideology racist or wrong?

 

I understand your dilemma, I really do. I just think the decision is obvious. No one is saying Arabs are wrong, but rather that Islam is wrong. Isn't that different? And how is that racist?

 

 

I did read them. Are they to prove that all Islam and it's followers feel this way and take the words literally? If so, I found some passages from the Bible that pretty much condemn the Jews and the Christians the same way.

 

It is an indication of Islam's racism. No different than the KKK except the KKK has a few thousand members with no power in a country that doesn't agree with them, whereas Islam has about 300 million members that run countries that practice it.

 

I would like to see the passages from the bible that compare to those above. Can you support this claim?

[Sisyphus]

Well, offhand, God tells the Jews in Exodus and Leviticus to engage in total war against the people who were already living in Israel, and to violently repel other religions, leaving no one alive.

[GutZ]

*swears profusely* I was about finished when the window closed on me so I will shorten my reply.

 

My point in posting these following links are not to prove anything to do with what Islam is. They are to merely show that Islam is not regarded as "evil" for alot of people. Suprisingly enough the U.S. President has a few choice words for Islam.

 

Anyway here are some links.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/09/20010917-11.html

 

These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it's important for my fellow Americans to understand that.

 

The English translation is not as eloquent as the original Arabic, but let me quote from the Koran, itself: In the long run, evil in the extreme will be the end of those who do evil. For that they rejected the signs of Allah and held them up to ridicule.

 

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war.

 

When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace. And that's made brothers and sisters out of every race -- out of every race.

 

America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.

~ President Bush

 

http://www.islamonline.net/livedialogue/english/Browse.asp?hGuestID=6x88y0

 

The Qur'an teaches love [not hate] and concern for humankind irrespective of their faith choice. More than 200 verses in the Qur'an address all humankind, not just Muslims [e.g. 4:1; 49:13]. It teaches acceptance of others' right to choose their faith, condemns compulsion in religion and accepts plurality of humankind [though not plurality in ultimate truths]. Please check 2:256; 10:19; 11:118-119. Nowhere in the Qur'an does it say "do not take Jews and Christians for friends" as misquoted or mistranslated [5:52 speaks of protectors not friends and for context see 5:53]. In fact Islam allows more intimate relationship than friendship; some form of interfaith marriage [5:5, see also 30:22 for the nature of marital relationship irrespective of the wife' s faith; Muslim, Jewess or Christian]. Non-Muslims who are co-existing peacefully with Muslims are to be treated like one's parents; justice, kindness, respect and love [60:8-9, note that the Arabic term Tabarroohom comes from Birr, a term used in the Qur'an and Hadeeth to refer to one's relationship with parents!]. Other verses relating to fighting or "killing" refer to those who aggressed against Muslims and mostly [especially in Chapters 8&9 of the Quran] refer to idolatrous Arabs who committed "war crimes" against Muslims.

~ Dr. Jamal Badawi - Director: Islamic Information Foundation

 

Finally a LIST (a very big one) of publications or articles on this whole subject:

 

http://www.nonviolenceinternational.net/islambib_001.htm

 

Take this for what you will, I always thought that the western world was open to looking at things with an open mind. I've shown that many people don't follow the same path from the same religion.

 

Personally I am more worried of anti-Islamic radicalism passed of as the "truth".

 

....Sound familiar?

 

PHI WINS! *high five*

[ParanoiA]

Suprisingly enough the U.S. President has a few choice words for Islam.

 

Why on earth would anybody associate any truth at all with a politician? GWB would sell his own mother if the price was right. As a political leader, the president has to say Islam is cool. Any president would say that whether they believed it or not.

 

 

My point in posting these following links are not to prove anything to do with what Islam is. They are to merely show that Islam is not regarded as "evil" for alot of people.

 

I don't think anyone is under any illusions of what kind of following Islam has. Of course they don't regard it as "evil". Just like white power followers don't think their ideology is evil.

 

And you are right. The western world is more open and this is a perfect example of it.

 

The obvious knee-jerk reaction is to "not condemn Islam". That's what we've been hearing since day one and is the moral of just about every after school special I've seen since I was 7. Believe me, we all get that...

 

But, we're more open than that. We have the capacity to think for ourselves and question things here in the west and that's what we're doing here.

[GutZ]

I don't think anyone is under any illusions of what kind of following Islam has. Of course they don't regard it as "evil". Just like white power followers don't think their ideology is evil.

 

No but if you ask a "White Supremacist" to teach his beliefs he/she will be express racism' date=' because it's the foundation of the belief, thats proven clearly.

 

You've made the assumption that Islam is the same. They are uncomparable. You didn't even express your source when you quoted Versus from The Koran.

 

I just don't understand how you can say something is the truth, yet not have any evidence to prove it.

 

I am not saying either way, because I don't think it's that simple. I am not an expert on the religion either, but I doubt many people here are, so the chance of your information being correct is as good as anyones. I just don't make the assumption that mine is the truth.

 

Why on earth would anybody associate any truth at all with a politician? GWB would sell his own mother if the price was right. As a political leader, the president has to say Islam is cool. Any president would say that whether they believed it or not.

 

I said: "Suprisingly enough the U.S. President has a few choice words for Islam."

 

Nothing more, which means I meant nothing more than that. You assumed I meant that.

[Phi for All]

That doesn't make any sense. Someone who is black, is literally black whether they define themselves that way or not. When I refer to it, I'm obviously refering to the "people". When I refer to Islam, I'm not[/i'] obviously refering to Muslims. I'm refering to an ideology; a religion. It's not my fault that an entire continent follows it.

If all of the Arab world followed the teachings of the KKK, would we then not be allowed to call that ideology racist or wrong?

No one has shown me that they do. If you could, and show me that Islam wants to kill us all as unbelievers, they'll no longer be protected from prejudice. Indeed, it would not *be* prejudice since the whole group has been judged as dangerous to our existence.

I understand your dilemma, I really do. I just think the decision is obvious. No one is saying Arabs are wrong, but rather that Islam is wrong. Isn't that different? And how is that racist?

You see no problem with criticizing the whole ideology and then expecting those who espouse it not to object? Especially when some of the criticism calls for *stopping the spread* of the ideology? I find it ominous.

It is an indication of Islam's racism. No different than the KKK except the KKK has a few thousand members with no power in a country that doesn't agree with them, whereas Islam has about 300 million members that run countries that practice it.

I've heard the message of love from the Quran but never from the KKK. I do appreciate what you consider to be racist indications. As I've stated, I'm willing to be persuaded if someone can show me why all Islam wants non-believers dead.

 

I would like to see the passages from the bible that compare to those above. Can you support this claim?

"And I will set My jealousy against you, that they may deal with you in wrath. They will remove your nose and your ears; and your survivors will fall by the sword. They will take your sons and your daughters; and your survivors will be consumed by the fire." Ezekiel 23:25

 

 

 

"7 For the king trusts in the LORD;

through the unfailing love of the Most High

he will not be shaken.

 

8 Your hand will lay hold on all your enemies;

your right hand will seize your foes.

 

9 At the time of your appearing

you will make them like a fiery furnace.

In his wrath the LORD will swallow them up,

and his fire will consume them.

 

10 You will destroy their descendants from the earth,

their posterity from mankind.

 

11 Though they plot evil against you

and devise wicked schemes, they cannot succeed;

 

12 for you will make them turn their backs

when you aim at them with drawn bow.

 

13 Be exalted, O LORD, in your strength;

we will sing and praise your might." -Psalms 21:7-13

 

 

 

"Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt.

 

Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass." -1 Samuel 15:2-3

 

 

 

22 And he saith unto him, Out of thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did not sow:

 

23 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?

 

24 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and give it to him that hath ten pounds.

 

25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)

 

26 For I say unto you, That unto every one which hath shall be given; and from him that hath not, even that he hath shall be taken away from him.

 

27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

 

Jesus speaking, from Luke 19:22-27

[Bettina]

And I want you to know that I'm using many of your posts here to make a point' date=' not really to single you out for any kind of punishment. The staff has been accused of allowing a double standard to exist with regards to these matters. We've also been accused of showing favoritism, deference to your age and sex, many things which I don't beleive are really relevant.

 

But this particular area stands out to me. I'm not trying to defend Islam so much as I am trying to figure out why Islam is not under the definition of our policies against Prejudicial and Racist Remarks. Frankly, most are arguing this as a freedom of opinion matter. They see censorship only.

 

I'm not here to try to convince you to change your opinion of Islam. I'm here to clarify what should be the basis for Prejudiced / Racist Remarks. If one of your German friends was called a Nazi because he was German you'd defend him. If the remark was posted here at SFN, *I* would defend him too. Is all this simply because you have no friends who are Islamic who can show you they aren't devil-worshippers? If you knew some Islamic people who were pretty cool would you make your posts a bit more tolerant towards them?[/quote']

 

Whew..... I thought my last remark would have got me booted for sure so I'm resting easier now.

 

Yes, I would defend my German friend from being called a Nazi. I would also defend my black, yellow, green and blue friends along with my Israeli friends and my gay and lesbian friends. I have done that in other threads here because I'm not a racist. I don't have any Muslim friends because the only ones I have seen were the two girls in school that didn't talk to anyone. I tried my best to get them involved with my group ob nice people but no dice. All they wanted to talk about was their faith. They even ended up boycotting the prom and writing a letter to the principal. I spoke of all that in another thread.

 

I would like to have some cool Muslim friends and if I did I would defend them like my other friends. But.... not their religion. I will never defend that. Before you comment, just remember I don't defend the Christian bible either and I'm very much a Christian like girl. If you look at some of my very early posts you would see where I had big issues with it and still do.

 

There should not be a policy on SFN to prevent discussing any religion that oppresses its women and children and allows killing in the name of a fictional character. At one time it was Christianity, in my time.... its Islam.

 

Bettina

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

I would like to have some cool Muslim friends and if I did I would defend them like my other friends. But.... not their religion. I will never defend that. Before you comment, just remember I don't defend the Christian bible either and I'm very much a Christian like girl. If you look at some of my very early posts you would see where I had big issues with it and still do.

If you did know some of them very well, you'd know that they can be just as mild-mannered and kind as any other person, even the highly religious ones. I should know, having lived in a region of the country with an abnormally high concentration of them.

[Jim]

I'm still in search of what lines have been drawn by the moderators.

 

Could Victor Davis Hanson's post this article on this forum without censure? Note the bigoted use of the term "Islamists" by this racist who purports to know something about history.

 

Only a reincarnated Chamberlain or Daladier could think that there is no Islamist commonality between the recent hostage-taking of Western telejournalists on the West Bank, Iranian threats to extinguish Israel and end the American presence in the Gulf, terrorist attacks on soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, plans of killing thousands in Britain and Germany, or plots to blow up American airliners in London — as if Japanese fascists, Italian fascists, and German fascists could not have made war in unison against the liberal democracies given their differing agendas and sects, and lack of coordination.

 

And even when the Islamists do not succeed, their threats and rhetoric cripple the West: when Mr. Ahmadinejihad rants about wiping Israel off the face of the map or sending gunboats into the Gulf, he garners a few billion extra in annual petrodollars due to the frenzy of oil speculators. A few foiled terrorists in London still managed to force millions of people into humiliating searches of their carry-on luggage, and cost the West untold millions in lost flights, delays, and inconvenience.

[Jim]

 

I ignored the question because if Richard Dawkins came here to post and dragged each thread about religion off-topic with his opinion that all religions are bad' date=' he would receive the same warnings as anyone else would.[/quote']

 

Now the problem is "dragging each thread about religion off-topic." Let me stipulate that threads should not be dragged off topic and, before this post, I did not realize this was the problem.

 

Assume for a second that comment is on topic. What if someone sincerely believes that religion in general is detrimental to humanity?

 

How do we distinguish between that detriment caused by religion in general vrs that caused by a particular religion?

 

I think you'll have to agree that at some point religions can be fairly subject to criticism.

[Jim]

When should a group be held accountable in some fashion for the actions of its members?

 

If white America sits back for 200 years and doesn’t stop the South from continuing to enslave African Americans, at some point a failure to act can support the use of the word “honky” by blacks. Even those who purport to oppose slavery could rightly be tarred with the same brush.

 

If Islamic radicals drag the planet towards Armageddon and the mainstream Muslim population is more concerned about “persecution” against themselves than they are about the festering underbelly of their own religion, some frank talk is required.

 

We have a collective responsibility to help moderate the radicals in whatever group to which we belong. I am shamed, to a degree, by the Tulsa race riots which occurred before I was born. I am shamed, to a degree, by Abu Ghraib.

 

It is in this sense that I am critical of Muslims. I think they have a responsibility to worry more about the trajectory of their own culture than they do about “persecution” at the hands of cartoonists.

 

The response, "it's not the religion" is as unhelpful as it is fatuous.

[ParanoiA]

I don't think anyone is under any illusions of what kind of following Islam has. Of course they don't regard it as "evil". Just like white power followers don't think their ideology is evil.

No but if you ask a "White Supremacist" to teach his beliefs he/she will be express racism' date=' because it's the foundation of the belief, thats proven clearly.

 

You've made the assumption that Islam is the same. They are uncomparable. You didn't even express your source when you quoted Versus from The Koran.

 

I just don't understand how you can say something is the truth, yet not have any evidence to prove it.

[/quote']

 

Ok, you're misunderstanding me. First, the quotes from the Koran can be googled, which is what I did. I didn't think I needed to provide a source since it's easily proven. I apologize.

 

http://www.hti.umich.edu/k/koran/browse.html

 

Second, what kind of proof do you require? Those lines contain racism. Done deal.

 

Lastly, the truth I've been referring to is the context of censorship in the pursuit of it. That's what I was going on and on about - not allowing genuine debate due to controversial subject matter circumventing the truth.

 

I do believe Islam is racist and I believe I have provided some proof. The Koran is their bible. I do believe it is not to the same degree as the KKK, but in many ways it's worse due to their population and commitment level.

 

And I haven't even mentioned the dead silence among its believers in the face of terror attacks. No outrage. Nothing. Go ahead, ask them if any suicide bomber will burn in hell or be punished according to their religion.

 

This is eerily similar to the attitude of the KKK concerning members violently attacking black folks.

[Bettina]

One more thing about censorship and I know its off topic but look at Kansas. The fact that discussion was very open led to the defeat of the Intellegent Design movement and brought those "impressionable minds" back from the brink of another dark age.

 

Any religion that interferes with basic human rights, the right to exist, or the right to a good education, should be challenged no matter who is insulted by it even if its an SFN member. I'm going to keep trying to do that because no one should suppress what you see.

 

Bee

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

Any religion that interferes with basic human rights, the right to exist, or the right to a good education, should be challenged no matter who is insulted by it even if its an SFN member. I'm going to keep trying to do that because no one should suppress what you see.

And Islam generally does not interfere with those rights. It's the literalists that let it. You're also misunderstanding one basic thing - those are rights to you and your culture. Other cultures have completely different perspectives on what the place of people in society is. If I told you that the ancient Chinese would kill a dead man's wife so she could be with him in his tomb, you'd be appalled, but they found no problem with it. In essence, it is a completely different set of values and morals that they believe in, and judging them based on yours is worthless. They are probably just at appalled at some of our practices.

 

Let's take a step back and remember that their culture is totally different from ours; what is "suffering" to you is not "suffering" to them, and what a "right" is to you is totally different to them. Also remember that you're judging a minority of their religion, and that their religion has been "maturing" 400 years less.

[Pangloss]

Why on earth would anybody associate any truth at all with a politician? GWB would sell his own mother if the price was right. As a political leader, the president has[/i'] to say Islam is cool. Any president would say that whether they believed it or not.

 

I don't believe that. Not only is it in stark contrast with what even Bush's most ardent *detractors* say about him, but it's a dangerous and detrimental stereotype that harms the debate and poisons the political environment of the country.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm with you in having general dissapointment and even contempt for most politicians, but I don't believe that they're all lying, I don't believe that Bush would "sell his own mother if the price was right", and I don't believe that he "has to say Islam is cool".

 

 

 

The obvious knee-jerk reaction is to "not condemn Islam". That's what we've been hearing since day one and is the moral of just about every after school special I've seen since I was 7. Believe me, we all get that...

 

But, we're more open than that. We have the capacity to think for ourselves and question things here in the west and that's what we're doing here.

 

So how about we THINK for ourselves instead of just swapping out one ignorant stereotype for another? Why is "not condoning Islam" wrong just because it's what the establishment says? That's not thinking, that's mere dramatic rejection based on faith.

[Dak]

Any religion that interferes with basic human rights, the right to exist, or the right to a good education, should be challenged no matter who is insulted by it even if its an SFN member. I'm going to keep trying to do that because no one should suppress what you see.

 

It depends on the clarity of your sight.

 

The above includes an inplied presumption that islam is a religeon that intereres with basic human rights, the right to exist etc, and the problem (imo) is that i've never seen this presumption fully and validly supported.

 

Im all for free speach, and the right to discuss matters, even if they may offend, but, again imo, a line has to be drawn as to when to tell someone to support their claims or shut up, reguardless of what they're saying.

 

I have no problem with people expressing derogatory views about christianity, islam, blacks, whites, men, women, gays, whatever (some of those groups i belong to), as long as theyre validly backed up.

 

if they're not... then that's fine too. no one is immune to making mistakes, and mistaking an invalid conclusion for a valid one is a forgivable error.

 

However, when someone has been repeatedly shown that their views are flawed, yet, rather than altering them or demonstrating them not to be flawed, they just repeat them, it starts to get annoying, reguardless of what the oppinion is; and if said oppinion is derogatory to a group, then we're obviously in the area of unsuported predjudice, i.e. racist shit-headery.

 

In principle, the methodology of arriving at a conclusion is more relevent to wether something is unfairly predjudiced than the truthfulness of the conclusion. If i say that 'all nazis are nasty because they molest childeren' even tho i have had it demonstrated to me that most nazis do not molest childeren, then i'm being unfairly predjudiced. Yes, coincidentally, nazis are nasty, but thats not the point. if i'm sticking with flawed logic to support a prejudiced oppinion that i have descided to have, then that is unfairly prejudiced by definition.

[ParanoiA]

If all of the Arab world followed the teachings of the KKK' date=' would we then not be allowed to call that ideology racist or wrong? [/quote']

No one has shown me that they do. If you could, and show me that Islam wants to kill us all as unbelievers, they'll no longer be protected from prejudice. Indeed, it would not *be* prejudice since the whole group has been judged as dangerous to our existence.

 

But that's the point, we have to allow it in order to show you. Remember, we're talking about censoring folks who criticize a religion with a genuine argument - not cheap obscenities.

 

The quotes I picked out were on racism against Jews specifically. These are on all infidels...

 

"8.38" : Say to those who disbelieve, if they desist, that which is past

shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the

ancients has already passed.

 

"8.39" : And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion

should be only for Allah; but if they desist, then surely Allah sees what

they do.

 

"9.5" : So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters

wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in

wait for them in every ambush,then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay

the poor-rate, leave their way free to them;surely Allah is Forgiving,

Merciful.

 

"9.29" : Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor

do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the

religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of

subjection.

 

"9.73" : O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites

and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the

destination.

 

"9.123" : O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).

 

4:89 They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

 

4:91 Ye will find others who desire that they should have security from you, and security from their own folk. So often as they are returned to hostility they are plunged therein. If they keep not aloof from you nor offer you peace nor hold their hands, then take them and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant.

 

9:7 How can there be a treaty with Allah and with His messenger for the idolaters save those with whom ye made a treaty at the Inviolable Place of Worship ? So long as they are true to you, be true to them. Lo! Allah loveth those who keep their duty.

 

33:60 If the hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and the alarmists in the city do not cease, We verily shall urge thee on against them, then they will be your neighbours in it but a little while. Those who oppose Islam will be slain with a fierce slaughter.

33:61 Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter.

 

60:1 O ye who believe! Choose not My enemy and your enemy for allies. Do ye give them friendship when they disbelieve in that truth which hath come unto you, driving out the messenger and you because ye believe in Allah, your Lord ? If ye have come forth to strive in My way and seeking My good pleasure, (show them not friendship). Do ye show friendship unto them in secret, when I am Best Aware of what ye hide and what ye proclaim ? And whosoever doeth it among you, he verily hath strayed from the right way.

 

61:9 He it is Who hath sent His messenger with the guidance and the religion of truth, that He may make it conqueror of all religion however much idolaters may be averse.

 

 

You see no problem with criticizing the whole ideology and then expecting those who espouse it not to object? Especially when some of the criticism calls for *stopping the spread* of the ideology? I find it ominous.

 

I don't expect anyone who follows it not to object. I know I would if I was a Muslim. What's wrong with that? The question should be, is it racist? I don't think so.

 

And the quotes you provided do show evidence of violence, fear mongering, but I didn't see any racism nor call for the equivalent of a holy war - nor wholesale despite of any religion or race. That last one about Jesus sure gave me the creeps though.

 

And for the record, I hold all religion in contempt. All of them are guilty of smear campaigns of one kind or another, because they are fabricated by men. It's aweful because people keep these conflicts going on and on, century after century.

[ParanoiA]

So how about we THINK for ourselves instead of just swapping out one ignorant stereotype for another? Why is "not condoning Islam" wrong just because it's what the establishment says? That's not thinking, that's mere dramatic rejection based on faith.

 

Considering the point of view that Islam may be racist fundamentally is thinking for ourselves. Who's brandishing stereotypes? We're just debating. And we're doing it based on genuine arguments, not broad strokes of ignorance and fear of not being PC.

 

My reference to the establishment message is in reference to the poster who implied we all somehow haven't considered that perhaps we shouldn't judge all of Islam based on extremists. I was making the point that it hadn't escaped us, nor anyone I know. Everybody has received that message loud and clear.

 

And I apologize for being snooty about GWB. I truly believe he's bought and paid for, but then I believe that is the case with virtually all of them. I don't want to deflect the thread, so I'll just say we, the people, get the government we deserve.

[Cap'n Refsmmat]

ParanoiA: You may provide all of those quotes, but you missed one big one. As lucaspa said in another thread:

Now' date=' the quotes are somewhat selective and out of context. For instance, the first site says:

 

"Kill disbelievers wherever you find them. If they attack you, then kil them. Such is the reward of disbelievers. (But if they desist in their unbelief, then don't kill them.) " 2:191-2

 

But if we go back a couple of verses, we get the context:

"Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors. "[/quote']

 

Context rawks.

[Bettina]

And Islam generally does not interfere with those rights. It's the literalists that let it. You're also misunderstanding one basic thing - those are rights to you and your culture. Other cultures have completely different perspectives on what the place of people in society is. If I told you that the ancient Chinese would kill a dead man's wife so she could be with him in his tomb' date=' you'd be appalled, but they found no problem with it. In essence, it is a completely different set of values and morals that they believe in, and judging them based on yours is worthless. They are probably just at appalled at some of our practices.

 

Let's take a step back and remember that their culture is [i']totally[/i] different from ours; what is "suffering" to you is not "suffering" to them, and what a "right" is to you is totally different to them. Also remember that you're judging a minority of their religion, and that their religion has been "maturing" 400 years less.

 

Ask the women dragged out of her house and stoned to death if it was ok because their "culture" allowed it. Ask the women who gets beaten because she accidentally showed her face to another man. That isn't culture, its a violation of basic human rights and as a human being, I refuse to accept it.

 

Islam interferes with those rights and I've shown that over and over again by pre war Afghanistan. I'm not misunderstanding any of it.

 

Bee