2 of 2
2
Let's Ban Islam
Posted: 09 May 2006 01:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1076
Joined  2005-12-22

[quote author=“calmooney”]Obviously I’m posting as a “cheeky Brit” :wink: not an American but I thought I’d add my viewpoint anyway for what its worth. I think singling out Islam in the proposed way will only further radicalise muslims across the world.

That’s how terrorism succeeds.  Do as we say or there will be violence.  Do not offend or we will become hostile.

I do believe that freedom of speech is not absolute, but the only speech I think should be banned is incitement to violence. So I’m all in favour of prosecuting the muslims who demonstrated a few months back here in London with signs saying things like “Massacre those who insult Islam”.

I pretty much agree.  I’m not proposing a ban on mere dissent.

[quote author=“razusm”]Islam is currently the only religion that is anathema to logic and reason, those traits that have brought us the wonders of the modern technological age.

While Islamic states are currently technologically lagging behind, historically they were once the most advanced in the world.

Mudfoot, surely if you’re going to teach kids about the harm that Islam can do then they should also be taught about the harm other religions, including Christianity can do? For example, stating that using condoms is immoral while millions die from AIDS.

Yes and no.  Yes, if it were my school alone then I would teach that all religions suck.  No, if it were the government’s schools then I would want them to, at minimum, fulfill the government’s primary role—which is to safeguard its citizens’ rights by protecting civil society domestically.  All major christian, jewish, hindu, buddhist and just about any other religious sects have come to acceptable terms with civil society.  No major Islamic sects have come to acceptable terms with civil society.  Western hippie sufis do not count—nice people, but they don’t seem to have a following outside of western hippie circles.

As to the Palestinians, while I disagree with the militants who kill civilians, I (an atheist) sympathize with the plight Palestinian people as a whole. IMAO what Israel is doing is merely fuelling militancy not solving the problem and one of the main causes of this are the Jewish fundamentalist settlers who believe it is their god-given right to settle in some areas, even though international law says such occupation is illegal. So shouldn’t you also teach kids about the harm that Judaism can do?

Again, I would keep the focus to the specifics—Judaism doesn’t present an imminent threat to civil society in either the US or Great Britain.

[quote author=“mudfoot”]All other Islamic societies are economic basket cases, cruel, and culturally desolte.

Last month I went to Tunisia on holiday and that’s a muslim country, yet it is not an economic basket case nor is it culturally desolate. As for cruel, it is a not a democracy but in my (admittedly limited) experience it certainly didn’t seem oppressive.

You’ve obviously travelled more than I have.  But your example somewhat supports my proposal.  The Tunisian government actively suppresses the Islamists.

[quote author=“mudfoot”]The immigrant populations in Europe take to their old ways of child brides, and murder of locals who speak out against them.

Maybe there are a few cases of this in Eastern Europe? Can you supply examples? But to talk about “the immigrant populations in Europe” as a whole like this is ridiculously OTT.

How about Theo Van Gogh in Holland?  Hirsi Ali under 24x7 guard?

*Holland*

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 May 2006 07:57 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2136
Joined  2006-02-20

mudfoot wrote: “Judaism doesn’t present an imminent threat to civil society in either the US or Great Britain.”

I think what calmooney meant was that the actions of the Jewish fundamentalist settlers is more than a thorn in the side of the Palestinians, and surrounding Islamic countries.  They see this illegal action as being supported economically and militarily by the US and Great Britain.  While supporting Israel, our position on those settlements should be crystal clear to the world.

 Signature 

“The simple fables of the religious of the world have come to seem like tales told to children.”  - Nobel Prize recipient - Francis Crick

“It is time we recognized the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved.” - Sam Harris

Profile
 
 
Posted: 12 May 2006 08:52 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1076
Joined  2005-12-22

[quote author=“unsmoked”]mudfoot wrote: “Judaism doesn’t present an imminent threat to civil society in either the US or Great Britain.”

I think what calmooney meant was that the actions of the Jewish fundamentalist settlers is more than a thorn in the side of the Palestinians, and surrounding Islamic countries.  They see this illegal action as being supported economically and militarily by the US and Great Britain.  While supporting Israel, our position on those settlements should be crystal clear to the world.

There’s nothing in the US constitution forbidding our government from declaring policy like you’re suggesting.  However, there is something in the constitution forbidding the US government from actively engaging Islam as the threat to civil society which it is—and that’s the establishment clause of the first amendment:  ” Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion”.  I do not want to remove that part of the consitution.  Rather, Islam should be exempted from protection—“Mainstream” Islamic theology must accept and embrace the enlightenment principles of separation of power between church and state, inborn “natural” rights of all humans, and limited government.  Until that happens, practice and spread of Islam will inevitably undermine civil society.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 May 2006 07:30 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2136
Joined  2006-02-20

In the Judaism forum, notice the post by hampsteadpete on Jan. 31, 2006 - titled ‘1939’. 

A few days ago I heard Madeleine Albright interviewed.  She said that she thought Bush should have responded in some way to Ahmadinejad’s letter (President of Iran).  Not appeasment in any way, but stating your own position in response to what he said - keeping dialogue open - not letting Islam have the last word - not letting the rest of the world think that you only deal by force and violence.

 Signature 

“The simple fables of the religious of the world have come to seem like tales told to children.”  - Nobel Prize recipient - Francis Crick

“It is time we recognized the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved.” - Sam Harris

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 May 2006 10:07 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1076
Joined  2005-12-22

I’m not sure what you’re getting at, unsmoked.  Are you trying to somehow convince anybody that islam’s xenophobia and murderous teachings are a result of civil war in Israel?

That’s not true.

The barbaric treatment of unbelievers is a central tenet of islam as described ad nauseum in the Koran.  This condition has preceded the civil war in israel by about 1200 years.

Here’s the very first 2 paragraphs of the koran.

[quote author=“The very first 2 paragraphs of the koran”]
This Book is not to be doubted.  It is a guide for the righteous, who believe in the unseen and are steadfast in prayer; who given in alms from what We gave them; who believe in what has been revealed to you and what was revealed before you, and have absolute faith in the life to come.  These are rightly guided by their Lord; these shall surely triumph.

As for the unbelievers, it is the same whether or not you forewarn them; they will not have faith.  God has set a seal upon their hearts and ears; their sight is dimmed and grievous punishment awaits them.

The rest of that book just goes into more detail—very often explicitly gruesome detail about how the believers should treat the rest of humanity.

The root cause of islamic extremism is islam.  How much evidence do you need to see that?

This is the core of that belief system—not just untempered by modernity but explicitly oriented towards destroying modernity

 
[quote author=“Iran’s president”]
Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.

We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point–that is the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: “Do you not want to join them?”

...

Peace only unto those who follow the true path.

 

Yeah—he really ought to have nukes.  His religion fits in nicely in our melting pot.  It’s all because of Israel.  Um, what else.  Yeah—consumerism caused it too.  But not islam—no, islam has nothing to do with islamic dominionism.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 May 2006 10:49 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2136
Joined  2006-02-20

mudfoot: I have no argument with what you’re saying.  Elsewhere I posted a reference to the Time Magazine article by Charles Krauthammer (April 3 issue, page 96) which says it all about Tehran in even stronger language than you or Sam Harris.  A color photo is part of that article and in it you can see a huge poster being held up at a Tehran rally - the poster shows Ahmadinejad speaking into microphones, underneath his image it says, ‘ISRAEL MUST BE WIPED OUT (OF) THE WORLD’.

This is a worldwide conflict, and we want as many allies as possible.  We lose support when things like the Abu Graib atrocities happen, and we lose support when George W. Bush plays the cowboy.  If this Ahmadinejad sends a letter to Bush (which is published worldwide), our allies expect us to respond to it as a civilized, freedom-loving country, with a president who is above all, a reasonable, intelligent man - not a Christian fundamentalist with a gunslinger mentality - not as a medieval Crusader - but as someone who knows how to spell out our position and enter into a strong debate.  This isn’t just for Ahmad’s ears, but would be for the ears of all reasonable Iranians, and for the ears of our allies around the world. 

Whatever A’s letter said, it gave Bush an excellent opportunity to, again, spell out our position to the world - spell out the dangers of fundamentalist extremism and bigotry when in possession of nuclear weapons.

 Signature 

“The simple fables of the religious of the world have come to seem like tales told to children.”  - Nobel Prize recipient - Francis Crick

“It is time we recognized the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved.” - Sam Harris

Profile
 
 
Posted: 14 May 2006 05:54 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  123
Joined  2006-04-19

i think someone should respond to A’s letter, but not bush, unless someone else writes it.  The man cannot even pronounce the word…

“nuclear”

if you have ever heard him speak of this, he says…

nuke - U - lar

for having a college degree, our president is a lousy representation of an educated american, among other things.

i vote for Rice to write a response and help george sign it.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2006 08:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2136
Joined  2006-02-20

[quote author=“stan”]i think someone should respond to A’s letter, but not bush, unless someone else writes it.  The man cannot even pronounce the word…“nuclear”

stan, in my last post, above, that exact thought about ‘nookular’ came to my mind and I made it my last paragraph.  Then I deleted it before submitting the post.  I can imagine all the schoolteachers tearing their hair as students pick up Bush’s pronunciation.

Also, as I wrote the last line (above) - “.  .  . spell out the dangers of fundamentalist extremism when in possession of nuclear weapons,” I thought, “Damn it!  I’m describing Bush!”  However, we know that Ahmid wants nuclear weapons, and we go along with Sam’s assessment that the Islamic brand of fundamentalist extremism is worse than the Christian version.  I vote for Sam to write the letter to A . . . no, Bush wouldn’t sign it.  Rice . . .  I know, Tony Blair!

 Signature 

“The simple fables of the religious of the world have come to seem like tales told to children.”  - Nobel Prize recipient - Francis Crick

“It is time we recognized the boundless narcissism and self-deceit of the saved.” - Sam Harris

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2006 09:17 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1076
Joined  2005-12-22

Nice, full circle back to “but Christians Are Just As Bad As Muslims, and even if they’re not, Bush is stupid”...

Neither Bush nor any other Christian leader of state are advocating total annihilation of a race of people.  Many Islamic rulers are doing so.

The leaders of all major christian, even most “fundamentalist” sects embrace freedom of conscience, rule by law, and civil society.  On the contrary, most Islamic sects wish to impose sharia law globally.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2006 09:55 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  123
Joined  2006-04-19

[quote author=“mudfoot”]
Neither Bush nor any other Christian leader of state are advocating total annihilation of a race of people.  Many Islamic rulers are doing so.
The leaders of all major christian, even most “fundamentalist” sects embrace freedom of conscience, rule by law, and civil society.  On the contrary, most Islamic sects wish to impose sharia law globally.

Whether you’re talking about imposing sharai law or supporting “prophetic traditions that will only find fulfillment once the rivers of blood begin flowing from Jerusalem,” (SH & EOF p. 154) it is all to the same end.  The West of Eden chapter hit home with me since I wondered in the past what was behind, at some level, US politics in the middle east and support for Israel.  It just didn’t make sense to me that the relatively small Jewish population here could have that much clout.  So this makes sense… biblical world view toward the ultimate second coming of christ, and finally, eternal whatever!  As absurd as it seems, why not… along with mountains of absurdity within the teachings of Christianity, Islam, and my heritage, Judaism.  It’s a shame that we have not evolved politically and intellectually beyond the many works of fiction produced by earlier versions of modern man.

It just makes bush want to go nookular.  me too!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 15 May 2006 12:52 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1076
Joined  2005-12-22

[quote author=“stan”][quote author=“mudfoot”]
Neither Bush nor any other Christian leader of state are advocating total annihilation of a race of people.  Many Islamic rulers are doing so.
The leaders of all major christian, even most “fundamentalist” sects embrace freedom of conscience, rule by law, and civil society.  On the contrary, most Islamic sects wish to impose sharia law globally.

Whether you’re talking about imposing sharai law or supporting “prophetic traditions that will only find fulfillment once the rivers of blood begin flowing from Jerusalem,” (SH & EOF p. 154) it is all to the same end.  The West of Eden chapter hit home with me since I wondered in the past what was behind, at some level, US politics in the middle east and support for Israel.  It just didn’t make sense to me that the relatively small Jewish population here could have that much clout.  So this makes sense… biblical world view toward the ultimate second coming of christ, and finally, eternal whatever!  As absurd as it seems, why not… along with mountains of absurdity within the teachings of Christianity, Islam, and my heritage, Judaism.  It’s a shame that we have not evolved politically and intellectually beyond the many works of fiction produced by earlier versions of modern man.

It just makes bush want to go nookular.  me too!

I hope we start getting a better selection of candidates.

But atheists and members of every other group really need to wake up that islam poses a far greater threat to our way of life in the west than any other religious idiocy.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 May 2006 08:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]  
Jr. Member
RankRank
Total Posts:  78
Joined  2005-12-19

FYI/E (Education).

TOP TEN MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT ISLAM

http://www.shianews.com/hi/articles/islam/0000016.php

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 May 2006 11:31 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]  
Member
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  125
Joined  2006-05-15

It’s simple, because their ‘bible’ tells them that all non believers should be converted by whatever means we have to destroy them before they have the power to destroy us, I would think blind freddy could see that.

If I hear one more time from George Bush or anyone else that Islam is basically a peaceful religion I think I’ll be violently ill, I say a little (or a lot) of violence now for a more peaceful world in the long run, surely even so called turning the other cheek christians can see that.

Inncidentally as much as I hate christianity I wouldn’t advocate war against them, christianity has at least evolved a little bit socially with the passing of the centuries and it will die a natural death one day, but the Middle Ages locked Islamists will only understand one thing.

I reckon that once the bombs (even nukes if necessary) started falling in dead set no holds barred ‘wrath of god’ reality they would turn out to be a lot more cowardly than anyone thought, their god would have abandoned them, it would be a fire and brimstone conversion of ‘biblical’ or koranic proportions.

I would declare Islam a banned and proscribed religion from the face of the Earth, I’m an Athiest and don’t support Israel for any religious reasons and their democracy is a bit chaotic but they are a more advanced and enlightened society in the Middle East and would be a huge ally in this endeavour.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2
 
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed