The problem is that a lot of the moderates tolerate or sympathise with the extremists. Living in Bradford I know plenty that wouldn't dream of going to.fight or of killing another human being but at the same time will talk openly about how America deserved 9/11, or that they understand and relate to ISIS and their ideology. Not all of them end up visiting schools or mosques where there are radical preachers but the basic ideology being practiced in Islam just now by the moderates is close enough that it is too easy for people to be radicalized when under the sphere of influence of the extremist preachers. The moderates need to reconsider and admit there's a problem and tackle it. There are already anti Islam demonstrations being held in some countries and the more isolated Islam and Muslims become from others the worse the extremism problem will get.
-
Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara
Paris
- Thread starter Danishfurniturelover
- Start date
The problem is that a lot of the moderates tolerate or sympathise with the extremists. Living in Bradford I know plenty that wouldn't dream of going to.fight or of killing another human being but at the same time will talk openly about how America deserved 9/11, or that they understand and relate to ISIS and their ideology. Not all of them end up visiting schools or mosques where there are radical preachers but the basic ideology being practiced in Islam just now by the moderates is close enough that it is too easy for people to be radicalized when under the sphere of influence of the extremist preachers. The moderates need to reconsider and admit there's a problem and tackle it. There are already anti Islam demonstrations being held in some countries and the more isolated Islam and Muslims become from others the worse the extremism problem will get.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
they all pose equal threat because they all oppose logic and reason, they promote the acceptance of ignorance, this is most dangerous to human progress
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
I might be wrong, but I really don't think the Norther Ireland situation is comparable in scale or intensity to the problems cause by Islam around the globe at this point in time. And again to be clear, terrorism is a very small portion of that. The atrocities committed upon the followers of Islam in the name of that religion is much greater than what it's capable of spreading to us on the outside.
For me both sides of the crusades were on the wrong side of history. The right side of history is the side of secularism, the enlightenment and the scientific revolution. The Christian side of the old battlegrounds is in the process of aligning itself with these much more human based ideals and away from the rule of GHod through messengers on earth, although considerable work obviously remains. Islam overall as a religion is now unfortunately in a very different position. This wasn't always the case, when the enlightenment ideas were being kept alive and breathing in primarily Muslim countries during the dark ages (rough summation) the situation was essentially the opposite. The Arab, Muslim world was at the heart of scientific progress and the ideas so many now hold so highly refined from the ancient Greeks were being upheld there, not in "the west".
I don't know how, but in my opinion the goal must be that the ideals of the enlightenment can spread back into the Muslim world and that issues such as freedom of speech become pillars of stable societies there as they have become here.
More and more people in the west are abandoning Christianity or at least not practising it to the letter.
The troubles in Northern Ireland are less to do with sects of Christianity and more to do with British colonialism which left a country divided and many British settlers living in the north of Ireland where religion just happened to be one of the many differences between north and south and Irish natives and British invaders.
There's another important difference. The violence was mainly directed at bringing about what many saw as a rightful and legitimate goal which was either keeping northern Ireland part of the mother country (for those that had settled from britain) or of liberating it from British rule. It was not about going out to force your religious beliefs and beliefs relating to denying women education, work and self-worth, of renouncing music, pets, reading and understanding and tolerance of other cultures and practices and the renouncing of freedoms of speech and expression for a strict martial and Spartan existence on the rest of the world.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
'Current problem'; is that code for 'a problem that is not on my doorstep or the big BBC news 24 hourly bulletins so no biggie'?
If you were to go and see how religious intolerance works there you would either:
a) count your lucky stars that you are not from there or have any links there and so you can be exempt from all its small-minded religious ridiculousness (much like many would count their lucky stars that they are not under pressure to submit to Al-Quaida inspired pressure to conform to Sharia rule and concepts of 'honour')
b) see similarities to how the cycle of religious t1t-for-tat can work both in a local and a global context and can be applied across the globe, including the current continuation of the Christian-Islamic 'crusades'
We feed this cycle imo by falling for the trap of labelling one religion (who is involved in an age-old battle for regional/global control with another religion) as being more 'barbaric' than the other said religion it is in battle with. Nobody wins in that cycle (at least not you and me: i.e. the average Joe on the street)
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
Do I have to start listing atrocities? It's late at night and I would prefer my dreams to be pleasant.
Some ideals that are important for human progress in my opinion:
-Equality for people, regardless of gender, sexuality, skin colour, religion etc.
-Freedom of speech
-Democracy
-Reason and rationality, included here the scientific method and skepticism.
Whenever I hear of a religious threat to these it's usually based in Islam. Christians still lagging behind on sexuality and gender issues being the main exceptions, along with some scary anti-scientific attitudes spouted primarily by some American Christians with bigger mouths than intellects. The reason I hear of those from Christians more often than from Muslims I think might be because of me being based in the west.
But please, tell me about how these ideals are being upheld better or as well in "Muslim countries" compared to "Christian countries" (hate that term). Or tell me about how these ideals are not important for human progress.
Yes. This is true, at least to an extent.
But right now Islam poses a much greater threat than that posed by the Quakers or the Jainists (the favourite examples of Hitchens and Harris respectively iirc). This might not always have been the case, it might not always be the case. But a recognition of that is pertinent even though the underlying factor of faith being inherently anti-reason is a continued issue with all/most religions.
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
Are you basing this on BBC/CNN/Fox news reports, which are inherently slanted to a Western (i.e. Christian) eye? Do you think the news agencies in Islamic countries would have the same opinion when they report on atrocities carried out by supposedly 'Christian' powers who jus don' shout the equivalent of 'Allah-Akbar' but instead make the sign of he cross or ask for a Priest blessing during a service before a military offensive (as happened before one of the Iraq war offensives)?
Really? What are you basing this on? Have you seen the 'bible belt' preachers and the money they make? Have you visited Northern Ireland? Do we no still have a Pope who gets thousands to attend any one of his 'rallies'?
How did you come to this conclusion? Again, how much of this is from you living amongst Muslim or in a Muslim country, compared to say what is shown on BBC/CNN etc?
This could probably applied to ALL religions; religion is based on 'belief' and 'faith' which is dogma and accepting 'what is'. Islam is no different to Christianity in that regard.
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
It is currently more barbaric. Historically, I don't know. In the future, anyone's guess. But currently Islam is being more barbaric than Christianity.
If you think my views are too much based on "western and Christian" media. Ask yourself why Ayaan Hirsi Ali http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayaan_Hirsi_Ali thinks what she thinks and says what she says about Islam. Are her opinions also only unfairly influenced by western, Christian media? Remember then that the only thing that has stopped her from suffering the same faith as those journalists and cartoonists in Paris is a long lasting and at times intensive police protection.
Baleforce
Arthur Rowe
not in America it isn't
I don't live there so my opinion is obviously biased by available media, but I don't think there has ever been a time where the Christian right had more influence in top level politics
If you go back to the middle ages it isn't possible to say Islam or Christianity is any more violent than the other - the latter had the equivalent of Jihad and martydom in the guise of plenary indulgence for those who fought in the name of Christ - but that was hundreds of years ago, and there's been the Enlightenment since then and Christianity has been roundly emasculated whereas that has never happened in the Islamic world, because the nature of Islam - Last Prophet, Quran the eternal truth revealed to Mohammed, perfect, complete, supposedly the only book man needs to read. Everything written before is negated, nothing written in the future has any relevance. There isn't a hell of a lot of leeway in interpreting that.
Christianity has had to constantly reinvent itself to adjust to new realities, it's a very messy religion, different parts of it written at very different times and by many different people - none of those being Jesus. That's given rise to many interpretations, which is a good thing.
The same isn't true of Islam and there's only a limited number of ways you can interpret the Quran and people waiting for it to somehow go the same path as Christianity, will be waiting a long time. There can't really be an Enlightenment in the Islamic world. A true Muslim can absolutely never accept evolution because it contradicts the Quran.
But the reality is most Muslims are not true Muslims but merely notional ones who were born into it, never read the Quran, go to the mosque once in a while etc. These are not the problem, and generally anyone who makes it to the age of 30 isn't the problem. It's the mixture of a young, disillusioned male who finds meaning and belonging in Islam - it can have a positive effect on his life, for just as easily he can go down another route. And in an increasingly polarized world, there is going to be a rise in the number of these young men.
It's a problem that's not going to go away unfortunately.
Christianity has had to constantly reinvent itself to adjust to new realities, it's a very messy religion, different parts of it written at very different times and by many different people - none of those being Jesus. That's given rise to many interpretations, which is a good thing.
The same isn't true of Islam and there's only a limited number of ways you can interpret the Quran and people waiting for it to somehow go the same path as Christianity, will be waiting a long time. There can't really be an Enlightenment in the Islamic world. A true Muslim can absolutely never accept evolution because it contradicts the Quran.
But the reality is most Muslims are not true Muslims but merely notional ones who were born into it, never read the Quran, go to the mosque once in a while etc. These are not the problem, and generally anyone who makes it to the age of 30 isn't the problem. It's the mixture of a young, disillusioned male who finds meaning and belonging in Islam - it can have a positive effect on his life, for just as easily he can go down another route. And in an increasingly polarized world, there is going to be a rise in the number of these young men.
It's a problem that's not going to go away unfortunately.
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
Christianity is only 'dying' atm because it served its purpose (i.e. to pave the way for Western colonisation and bring about Western Economic expansion). Now that has mostly been achieved the need to spread the religion further and keep up strict adherence to it is no longer necessary.
This would change if the economic dominance of the West (i.e. the old Christian faction) is in REAL danger of being usurped by large parts of the Islamic faction. Hence the ongoing crusades (i.e. Middle Eastern interference and ongoing extra demonization of Islam).
I write 'dying' in the loose sense in that many of Christian background are becoming looser in their adherence to it or outright turning atheist. However, the fallback position for many of these people would be a Christain mindstate/thoughts as that is the pervading culture, even if strict adherence to Christianity is nit present.
The real worry on the Christian side is that large parts of the population who were practising Christians and form part of the 'dying' group actively deflect to Islam and that is why we have the onging situation.
There are extremists in all Religions but the mouthpieces of the old Christian faction want you to never, ever forget about the Extremists in he Islamic factions as they are the biggest threat to their global economic and political dominance.
Unless you want to actively take part in the crusades don't feed the troll as it were...
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
No, not only BBC and CCN reports. Certainly no Fox reports, if it wasn't already clear I would like to point out that I'm not a blabbering idiot.
Again, I'm not saying atrocities have not happened the other way. I thought I was rather clear in my descriptions of what the bigger problems are. I don't see how this changes that.
Yes. Many sources. Yes. Yes. Yes.
Your own description of "Christian" and "Muslim" countries. How many have democracy? How many have equality for women? How many have freedom of the press? How many follow science to a reasonable extent? (hardest one is murky, my bad)
Never lived in a Muslim country. Considered it at one point, now it doesn't look likely, but you never know. Talking to Muslims, sure. Talking to Muslims who should know very well what they're talking about, sure. Talking to ex-Muslims no longer living in Muslim countries. Sure.
Very little of what I think is based on what I see on the BBC and CNN. In general I think the international media are rather poor on overall larger picture stuff like this and overall they're much too accommodating to religious views. As an example: After the Danish cartoon incident the one good choice for the international media was to show the cartoons everywhere. They failed us. Miserably.
But seriously. Go ahead and tell me how I'm wrong in my conclusions. Tell me about how equal Muslim countries are for women compared to the west. Tell me about democracy. Impress me with tales of freedom of speech. I'm waiting.
Yes. And I'm opposed to all religions in a fairly similar way. Certainly the large monotheistic religions. I make no excuses for that.
Do you think this is something bad in all religions?
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
But if one of the heads is about to eat your face off it would be rather strange to be plotting falling paint can traps for one of the other heads...
Not saying divide and conquer. I'm saying resistance to all parts.
No sure. McCarthyism was pretty extreme was it not. After all that's when all the "one nation under GHod" stuff was initiated and even just being an outed atheist or socialist got you on the FBI watch list and stuff.
Atheism is growing "over there", luckily.
Wow... This is some high level conspiracy stuff...
There has been a battle between secularism and Christianity in the west if you haven't noticed. It's been around for a while, and particularly in Europe Christianity has been on the losing front for a while. We're not just all "the other guy" and plotting for your destruction.
What, in your narrative, is the purpose of Islam then?
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
I think that just shows the bias and exposure to the news you and many of us have; understandable, but feeding into the 'crusade' mindstate as intended.
I don't know who this person is or care. What I do know is that there will be people of Islamic faith or otherwise who will label Western/Christian Governments as the most barbaric: based on acts of wards and atrocities carried out in various parts of the world: Iraq, Afghanistan, Diego Garcia, Lebanon, Palestine etc etc. they'll probably also bring in the weapons building/military industry and trade inherent in many parts of the 'West' and then say when all is said and done who has actually dropped the Atomic bomb?
Harsh? Maybe in some people's eyes, but would this be any harsher than saying "Islam is a more barbaric religion than Christianity"?
glorygloryeze
Tom Huddlestone
Struggling to keep up here lol, but how is what I wrote 'high level conspiracy stuff'??
It is clear as day that there is a crusade battle at present between the West (i.e. old Christian faction) and the Islamic factions. It is clear that this is an old ongoing battle.
There is indeed a battle WITHIN Christian circles between secularism and Christianity; but outside of that on a global level there is an ongong battle for hearts and minds between the Christian and Islamic factions. I see it as an MP who has to deal with other political parties at home ("internal politics") vs when he has to fight against possible invaders ("Foreign Policy").
The purpose of Islam is no different to Christianity: to control hearts and minds but under a 'different flag'.
You could say tat Religion is just politics with the word 'GHod' tacked on: most people just follow the religion of their ancestors much like most people will likely vote who their family or local community USUALLY vote for. The difference with religion is the 'GHod' label makes it feel much much further from reproach
braineclipse
Steve Sedgley
As I've said all along, less about terrorism, more about what happens to Muslims in the name of Islam. What are the Christian equivalents to the honour killings? To acid being thrown in the faces of young girls for wishing to go to school? To female genital mutilation? To punishment rapes? To institutionalized discrimination through sharia? There are barbaric practices and I don't see them in any real frequencies from Christians.
You said I wasn't a good source, you said that BBC, CNN and Fox were not good sources and accused me of only using them. I pointed you towards a source that I think is about as impeccable as a source can get on this issue. And your answer is "I don't know who this person is or care" before going down the same path you were already on. But I'm biased. I'm only looking at mainstream western sources? I'm feeding into the intended mindstate? You won't even take the time to quickly examine the views of a named source for an opinion contrary to yours. Because you don't ****ing care! But I'm the one only exposing myself to biased sources?
Now that, my friend, is harsh. For someone who accuses to vehemently about sources and biases... That's real weak.