Dreamer_87

Hello Wdog,

If you don't understand it (which seems to be the case since you're justifying not knowing much about it) how can you possibly discern between the culture and the religion? And when did I say that 'all religions are equal in the damage they do'? Keith made the claim, I don't agree with it but nevertheless I pointed out that I haven't even once compared Islam as 'better' or 'worse' than any other religion.

First of all, considering you've indirectly admitted to not understanding Islam I doubt you really know much about the laws it imposes - the theory and its application are 2 very different things, that's what I've been trying to establish. I think I should give another example; take the American system of law. The principle and aim and ideal is to acheive perfect justice; does it seem very just or logical to give someone caught smoking cannabis a longer jail term than someone who's guilty of violent crimes, sometimes as severe as rape?? The 2 offences are obviously unequal in the harm they cause but still the lesser offence is given a harsher punishment. Can it be argued, then, that this flaw in logic, this contradiction of the ideal, justifies a condemnation of the system as a whole or worse yet the concept of justice itself?


Hi dangin,

I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with a government controlling the education, I mean from what I understand all over the world the curriculums are created by ministries (that's the translation of the arabic term [i]Wizaara[i], I'm not really sure what they're called in western countries) which are themselves branches of the government. Regardless of all that, there have been many appeals for the school curriculum to be updated and improved, *especially* when it comes to how religion is taught. One good thing is that after 9/11 there's been external pressure on the government so hopefully that will create some positive changes. In many cases the information given is correct but the teachers themselves are in many ways extremists which is another problem that has to be dealt with (for example even the text books say that it is obligatory upon muslims to be just to all humans, be they muslims or otherwise, but many of the teachers attempt to justify things like suicide bombings by stating that the form of retaliation is just). But even so there are some exceptions - for example the day after sept. 11 the first person to denounce the attacks was our religion teacher, in fact he was bold enough to say that he thinks that Osama has directly opposed the teachings of the prophet and predicted that his 'sect' of extremism will cause much harm to muslims and non-muslims alike.

None are more aware of this than the muslims themselves - extremism (or as I like to call it 'anti-islamism') promoted by teachers is a problem that grows continously. But we disagree in that I think the only way to rid the region of it is to teach 'true' Islam, whereas you think removing the religion entirely is the solution.

I agree, and yes, I do have a problem with that.

From what I remember Ibn Warraq is the author of '10 reasons I'm not a muslim'. I haven't read any of his books, though. I'm glad the discussion is becoming more 'concrete' - and speaking of conservative Islam, the same holy book that supposedly inspired the Taliban is the exact same book that supposedly inspired the muslims in Spain, who for 8 centuries ruled Al Andalus, later to be described as the epitome of tolerance (scholars think that one of the main reasons Muslim-ruled Spain became so powerful was the peaceful, just interaction between members of many different faiths) and a glorious place of learning, from which the sciences, ranging from philosophy and mathematics to astronomy and medicine, were debated and learned by students from all over the world, who's contributions helped Christian Europe out of the dark ages and into the renaissance.

I don't think it's fair to search history for any example of a muslim doing wrong then attacking Islam as a 'bad, backward religion' when so much of the good it is directly and indirectly responsible for is intentionally overlooked. I think the reasoning of the argument itself - 'If muslims have done/still do immoral things then the religion itself is to blame' - is faulty, I gave a detailed rebuttal in my other posts.

I've never heard of such texts. From what I know the one copy of the 'Uthmani' Mushaf (ie the manuscript that the caliph Uthman borrowed from Hafsa, the wife of the prophet and daughter of Omar ibn Al Khattab, and created copies from it for the muslims) resides in a museum in Turkey, I'll look for the name and give it to you ASAP.

How to these texts differ from the Koran we have now? Your argument makes the assumption that the texts are part of a 'different version' of the Koran when that hasn't been established.

You've done nothing of the sort

Nice debating with you,
I look forward to your posts!

Best regards,
Dreamer

[ November 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dreamer_87 ]</p>

ImGod

Mine's in English. I see translated texts as the beginning of the next major change to Islam. Different versions of Islam will evolve as different cultures interpret the texts using their own language and cultural biases; similar to the protestant reformation.

“Argument by understanding” is a common argument from religious people. If a person, like me for example, reads a holy text and still doesn't believe it then we must not have understood the true meaning and just need additional guidance.

I don't expect you to obtain a PhD from a christian theological seminary before you are allowed to reject christianity or judge the cultures based on it. The same should apply in each person's dealings with other religions. There are far too many religions available in the world to study them in great detail. That is why people tend to focus on the ones that affect their lives the most.

I’ll give you the fact that I will never experience the quran in the same way you have in terms of language or culture, nor will I experience it in the same way I experienced the bible in my language and culture. However, I’ve studied both enough to draw the same atheist conclusions.

Dreamer_87

Hi Wdog,

For you to single out Mecca and Al Medina is rather odd - why insist on building any non-muslim house of worship or 'infidel institue' in places that have been considered holy and exclusive for the followers of this religion for literally centuries? I wish you'd read Islamic history - which is filled with examples of tolerance and humanity and compassion. read about The Second Caliph of Islam, Omar ibn Al Khattab, who upon conquering Palestine created a treaty in which he promised all non-muslims freedom to have their beliefs and safety 'for their lives and possesions' and protection, or when he actually *bought* land then presented it to the christian community so that they could build a church, or when he punished the son of the prince of Damascus for publically flogging a non-muslim man because he beat him in a horse race, or when he dismissed the prince's arrogance with the maxim every good muslim knows -'Who are you to treat men as your slaves, when God has created all free in their mothers' wombs?'

Considering the current political happenings - the probability of attacking Iraq and replacing the current regime with a U.S. chosen succesor, as well as the possibility of another regime-change happening after that - justifies the fears of a 'second crusade', I think.

And admitting you're 'intolerant' of so large a group of people, many of whom don't even know you let alone mean you ill will, is as backward as it comes, I think.

Nice debating with you,

Best regards,
Dreamer

Primal

Actually Muslims have always been pretty intolerant of atheists and pagans. Even "moderate" muslims are ok with making death threats towards people who dress up like "the prophet". You need to stop taking the religion out of historical conext and stop using fallacious arguments and rivisionist tactics to defend Islam. The fact is most major muslim countries are sexist,intolerant,barbaric,pseudoscientific. You seem to be digging for 1 ruler in the ancient past as a counter-example to all this, and I doubt that this "example" is even accurate.

Anyways nobody has to be an "expert" of Islam to criticize many Islamic practices and beliefs. That's like saying you have to be an expert in Nazism,Stalinism etc. In order to criticize them.

Primal

<a href="http://www.isisforum.com/jihad/subjects.htm" target="_blank">http://www.isisforum.com/jihad/subjects.htm</a>

On the opressive practices of Islam.

Aerik Von

Frightening at the least...

wdog

hi dreamer,

i bring up mecca and and medina because we have no such places. just about anywhere there is room and no zoning restrictions, you can build a mosque. So what would be the punishment for expressing my beliefs in mecca (if I'm allowed in)? death I suppose? oh how tolerant and compassionate muslims are. It doesn't even have to be mecca or medina, try the whole kingdom or Iran.

You may be justified in worrying about Iraq, but religion as the motivation for such things is long gone. You bet I'm intolerant of anyone who wants to take away my freedoms in the name of religion, just as you would be intolerant of christians who would take away your freedoms. BTW I would stand with you if anything like a crusade were attemted by my country. Would you stand with me if muslims attempted to force islamic law on me?

Dreamer_87

Hello everyone,

Sorry for not replying in such a long time, I've been busy with school and Ramadan. I'll try to get back with in-depth replies ASAP

Salaam,

Dreamer

Dreamer_87

Hey again everyone,

Onto the replies!

Seraphim,

I would point you to Lebanon or Syria (which both have very large Christian communities, from what I understand almost 50 percent of the population); I assure you you'll find many churches there, or maybe the synagogues in Algeria?

Though it isn't implicitly said, I believe that since you included the whole Middle East (rather than what wdog did - focus only Mecca or Saudi Arabia) you’re making the assumption that a) the whole of the middle east is Islamic, which is easily demonstrated to be false and not really worth refuting, and b) that all Muslims (or according to you all the Arabs, since the 2 are inseparable apparently) are intolerant.

I’m confident you know the weight of your words, so no need to lash out at how stupid and prejudiced I think both claims are.

(Oops, never mind)

Huh? What about Umayyad Spain? Or Abbasid Iraq? and how exactly do non-muslim contributions discredit the culture and many contributions the muslims have made? Yet another baseless claim.


Thor,

Now that’s just worrying. Not the first time I’ve come across an Anti-immigrants argument though


Answerer,

I agree totally; from what I know I was the first person in my family (I’m referring to the whole family, which in this case is around more than 50 people) who was opposed to suicide bombings. A few debates later my immediate family and many other cousins all agree with me. The same goes for Sept. 11th. There are people who are struggling to make positive change, but people like Seraphim and Thor act as if ‘good person’ and ‘good Muslim’ are mutually exclusive. It’s prejudice like that that I resent.


Gotta go,
Be back soon!
Best Regards,
Dreamer

[ November 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dreamer_87 ]

[ November 09, 2002: Message edited by: Dreamer_87 ]</p>

Dreamer_87

Hindu woman:

And do you think the same hasn’t happened to Muslims? does the fact that some people from group x have been unjust mean that all members of the same group (which is so varied it involves people from almost every culture on earth) are equally immoral? The exact same argument can be given against Hinduism – consider the attacks earlier this year that left hundreds of Muslim men, women and children dead. Does that give me, or anyone else for that matter, the right to claim that Hinduism is a terrorist religion even though I know next to nothing about it? I’m honestly sick of repeating myself, you can imagine how much attitudes like that piss me off.

To your credit, though, you have actually cited verses from the Quran itself. But it doesn’t really help your argument because you managed to overlook the preceding verses of the same Sura (I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you’ve actually read the whole Sura rather than just copied and pasted it), which are the context from which these verses have been extracted and which clarify the argument.

If you read the whole Sura, you would be familiar with these verses:

[9.3] And a proclamation on the day of the Greater Pilgrimage, that Allah and his prophet dissolve any obligations to the Pagans.

The prophet and the Qureysh (considering you’ve quoted the verses, my assumption is that you are familiar with the names and terms so no need to explain) had agreed to a 10-year peace between them on the Sulh of Hudaibiya (‘The peace-treaty of Hudaibiya'). Part of the agreement was that the 2 groups could create alliances with other Arabic tribes, but that if one adversary attacked the second faction or one of its allies then they have the right to retaliate and aid their fellow tribesmen. The Qureysh repeatedly and successfully enticed their allies to wage war, and that is why the treaties were absolved by the Muslims, BUT…

[9.4] (But the treaties are not) dissolved with the pagans with whom ye are allied, and have not failed you in aught, nor aided others against you. So fulfill your engagements with them through the time of their treaty, for Allah loveth the righteous.

It applies only to the first group; fighting those who are at peace with the Muslims and who have in no way broken their treaties is unjustified.

Do you honestly think Saudi sets a perfect example of Islamic Law? For God’s sake women aren’t allowed to drive there, do you think there’s a verse or Hadith that says that as well? The inspiration is from tribal customs in many cases, nothing more nothing less.


Ok, we have a specific counter-argument here. All that’s needed for the debate to progress is a specific example of alleged barbarism that we could discuss.

And no, I'm not a Hadith-denier

Best regards,
Dreamer