Islam, bad religion?

[GagHalfrunt]

But poverty is a gift from god!

And she helped him dole it out in large measure. That's why they made her a saint.

 

[irishScott]

I'd say of all the mainstream religions Islam is probably the most primitive and encourages the most violence.

And yes, I know about the Christian radicals in Africa, the abortion clinic bombings, the Buddhist radicals in Burma, and the actions of some misguided Israelis. All of that combined doesn't compare to violence done in the name of Islam.

 

[SP33Demon]

The issue isn't really about whether or not they condone those sorts of acts. It's always a radical fringe doing that kind of stuff. The interesting question to me is whether in fact the principles of Islam are incompatible with civil liberty.

Wrong, it's not just the radical fringe. Read about the 3 stages of jihad that Koran commands ALL Muslims to do from this link:
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html


Some snippets:

Yet when we turn to 5:32-33 of the Qur’an... we get a surprisingly different picture of killing in Islam:

"For this reason did We prescribe to the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men; and certainly Our apostles came to them with clear arguments, but even after that many of them certainly act extravagantly in the land.

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement."

Two things are worthy of note in this passage. First, the teaching was given “to the children of Israel” (i.e. the Jews). It was not given to Muslims. Second, even if Westernized Muslims want to apply this verse to themselves, the verse obviously permits killing people who spread “mischief in the land.” Indeed, the very next verse commands Muslims to murder, crucify, and dismember those who wage war against Islam and “make mischief” in Muslim lands.
...
Muslims in the West are quick to point to passages such as Qur’an 109:6 (“You shall have your religion and I shall have my religion&#8221 and 2:256 (“There is no compulsion in religion&#8221 as evidence that Islam is a religion of peace. When confronted with harsher passages such as 9:5 (“Slay the idolaters wherever you find them&#8221 and 9:29 (“Fight those who believe not in Allah&#8221, Westernized Muslims interpret these verses in light of the more peaceful teachings of the Qur’an, typically saying something like: “Well, the Qur’an can’t be commanding us to kill unbelievers, since it says that there’s no compulsion in religion.”

Hence, Westernized Muslims pick the verses of the Qur’an they find most attractive, and they use these verses to sanitize the rest of the Qur’an. But is this the correct way to interpret the Qur’an? Unfortunately, the answer is no. The Qur’an presents its own method of interpretation—the Doctrine of Abrogation.

Qur’an 2:106—Whatever verse we shall abrogate, or cause [thee] to forget, we will bring a better than it, or one like unto it. Dost thou not know that God is almighty?

Qur’an 16:101—When We substitute one revelation for another—and God knows best what He reveals (in stages)—they say, “Thou art but a forger”: but most of them understand not.

According to the Qur’an, then, when Muslims are faced with conflicting commands, they aren’t supposed to pick the one they like best. Rather, they are to go to history and see which verse was revealed last. Whichever verse came last is said to abrogate (or cancel) earlier revelations.
...
STAGE THREE—When Muslims establish a majority and achieve political power in an area, they are commanded to engage in offensive Jihad. Hence, once Mecca and Arabia were under Muhammad’s control, he received the call the fight all unbelievers. In Surah 9:29, we read:

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Notice that this verse doesn’t order Muslims to fight oppressors, but to fight those who don’t believe in Islam (including the “People of the Book”—Jews and Christians).

Basically this is why I was saying it's subjective. If a Muslim feels that someone is "waging war" against Allah or his prophet (Muhammed), then that person is to be murdered. Is a cartoon dissing Muhammed supposed to = "waging war"? To these Parisian crazy fucks it is. And no doubt to other Muslims who didn't have the balls to do what their holy book commanded them to do. Then there's the other passages telling them to "slay the idolaters" and to fight non-believers. Any religion ordering its followers to "murder", "crucify", cut off limbs, "slay" is not a religion of peace like many Muslims want you to believe. It's very clear that in stage 3 jihad they are to fight non-believers including Jews and Christians. And "fight" does not mean tickle them either.

 

[justoh]

Christopher Hitchens schools a muslim on free speech: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASpZhGQE7MU

About the danish cartoons but it's very relevant to what just happened. That muslim sounds like a lot of the stupid "liberal" islam apologists/defenders on this board. So irritating.

 

[Brainonska511]

*former punk rock band

They're still a punk rock band. Why would you classify them as "*former"?

 

[Black Octagon]

Wrong, it's not just the radical fringe. Read about the 3 stages of jihad that Koran commands ALL Muslims to do from this link:

http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html





Some snippets:





Basically this is why I was saying it's subjective. If a Muslim feels that someone is "waging war" against Allah or his prophet (Muhammed), then that person is to be murdered. Is a cartoon dissing Muhammed supposed to = "waging war"? To these Parisian crazy fucks it is. And no doubt to other Muslims who didn't have the balls to do what their holy book commanded them to do. Then there's the other passages telling them to "slay the idolaters" and to fight non-believers. Any religion ordering its followers to "murder", "crucify", cut off limbs, "slay" is not a religion of peace like many Muslims want you to believe. It's very clear that in stage 3 jihad they are to fight non-believers including Jews and Christians. And "fight" does not mean tickle them either.

Did you read the links in my post on Page 1? I'm sorry but when it comes to reading the Koran "in context," I'm giving far more credence to Muslim scholars than I am to some white knob on YouTube.

If you think a holy text being 'subjective' is sufficient grounds for criticism then I'm afraid you have to judge violence endorsed in the Christian Bible by the same standard: http://www.thegospelcoalition.org/b...ld-god-command-genocide-in-the-old-testament/

Just like these "crazy fucks" in Paris, you have to have some serious screws loose to read this stuff and truly conclude that Christianity is compatible with genocide. Most normal 'Christians' know that the Ten Commandments take precedence over pretty much any conflicting ethics some crackpot tries to infer from the Old Testament.

In my experiences with Muslims all over the world, the vast majority of them are just like normal Christians. The Koran equivalent of 'thou shalt not kill' overrides any and all of those esoteric 'commands' to kill infidels that Muslim-bashers are all-too-gleeful to cite, context be damned. Yet in your mind these peaceful Muslims just 'don't have the balls' to act as these crazies in Paris did? Come on...that's simply not true.

 

[Muse]

Is it a bad religion? I guess that depends on whether most Muslims are horrified by the events around Charlie Hedbo, or whether they honestly believe that the victims got what they deserved for insulting the Prophet and Islam.

A couple of things are clear: Islam as it is practiced currently inspires a lot of truly awful behavior in its name, and its values (as it is currently practiced) are hostile to ideals of freedom of speech and expression, and equality.

My belief is that the world would be a better place if Islam did not exist.

I won't argue with that. I think you could make a case that all religion is bad if it entails one's abdicating his/her personal responsibility for their own actions. Religions tend to do that, foster that. I suppose some are worse than others, but Islam in the modern era at least, has been the real bad boy in that it's more radical, fanatical, zealous adherents are perpetrating atrocities of all kinds, as noted earlier in the thread.

 

[feralkid]

Wrong, it's not just the radical fringe. Read about the 3 stages of jihad that Koran commands ALL Muslims to do from this link:
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html


Some snippets:


Basically this is why I was saying it's subjective. If a Muslim feels that someone is "waging war" against Allah or his prophet (Muhammed), then that person is to be murdered. Is a cartoon dissing Muhammed supposed to = "waging war"? To these Parisian crazy fucks it is. And no doubt to other Muslims who didn't have the balls to do what their holy book commanded them to do. Then there's the other passages telling them to "slay the idolaters" and to fight non-believers. Any religion ordering its followers to "murder", "crucify", cut off limbs, "slay" is not a religion of peace like many Muslims want you to believe. It's very clear that in stage 3 jihad they are to fight non-believers including Jews and Christians. And "fight" does not mean tickle them either.

Wow, that is one xenophobic trash pile of a website; you don't actually believe that crap, do you?

 

[postmortemIA]