Is Muslim terrorism due to defects in the faith?

Believe said:
Not so much a thought police but a proper separtation of church and state.
Click to expand...

Well, but the person I was replying to was suggesting making laws to prevent talking about violence. You basically can't talk about the Old Testament without covering the incredible violence it describes, so that would be out. The Star Spangled Banner would be out; that's a call to violence as well. In my experience, preventing people from talking about things is difficult and often has the opposite effect than desired.
 
Signal said:
II don't think religious terrorism is based on a distortion of the doctrine. Violence against non-members is the doctrine.

Whether it is in the form of a religious family stigmatizing and excluding a non-religious family member, or religious kids at school bullying the non-religious ones, or a whole state going on crusades, or terrorists placing bombs.
Click to expand...

99% of the Christians and Muslims I know do not think that "violence against non-members is the doctrine." Indeed, after spending four years in a catholic high school, I can tell you that they teach peace and inclusion a lot more than they teach war, separation and exclusion.
 
billvon said:
99% of the Christians and Muslims I know do not think that "violence against non-members is the doctrine." Indeed, after spending four years in a catholic high school, I can tell you that they teach peace and inclusion a lot more than they teach war, separation and exclusion.
Click to expand...

Then you need to find yourself on the other side.
Such as a non-Catholic going to a Catholic high-school.
That's when the lovey-dovey Christians turn into beasts.
 
Signal said:
Then you need to find yourself on the other side.
Such as a non-Catholic going to a Catholic high-school.
That's when the lovey-dovey Christians turn into beasts.
Click to expand...

Hmm. No such problems with Uneal or Sree, two Hindus I knew while I was there.
 
Bottomline: Christians and Muslims teach eternal damnation to everyone who doesn't convert to their religion.
Teaching eternal damnation is not a disposition for peaceful coexistence.
 
Signal said:
Bottomline: Christians and Muslims teach eternal damnation to everyone who doesn't convert to their religion.
Click to expand...

Well, that's what you believe, at least. But believing something, even if you believe it with all your heart, does not make it true.
 
billvon said:
Well, that's what you believe, at least. But believing something, even if you believe it with all your heart, does not make it true.
Click to expand...

No, Christians and Muslims are famous for their religious hospitality and for accepting people of other creeds. :rolleyes:.
 
Signal said:
Bottomline: Christians and Muslims teach eternal damnation to everyone who doesn't convert to their religion.
Teaching eternal damnation is not a disposition for peaceful coexistence.
Click to expand...

He who hath an ear...
 
Signal said:
Bottomline: Christians and Muslims teach eternal damnation to everyone who doesn't convert to their religion.
Teaching eternal damnation is not a disposition for peaceful coexistence.
Click to expand...

Only sort of correct for Roman Catholics, they believe that those people can still be saved, but it is a newer belief ( When I was a teenager they used to say that each other religion would be stacked up inside their own burning coffin in hell, not so much now)

This is actually one of the main reasons that I am not active in any particular religion. I just couldn't imagine God doing that to all the people that didn't even have a chance to KNOW about christianity through out history. Do you think the average Chinese or Indian person knew about Jesus in 500 A.D.? Fuck no.
 
charles brough said:
I think that is all an accurate picture.
It just occurred to me also that if Islam was waging wars in parts of our Christian-Western world, we would find that Christian fundamentalists would be much more militant and disruptive. Under enough Muslim repression, they too would become fanatical enough to plant bombs and take over the passenger planes.

brough
http://civilization-overview.com
Click to expand...

You're on the right track there. Keep digging. Compare whats common between terrorists around the world. Like the Spanish terrorists, and the French terrorists and if you dig deep enough, terrorists in the United States


Bruce Hoffman Inside Terrorism
The pre-eminent authority on the English language, the much-venerated Oxford English Dictionary, is disappointingly unobliging when it comes to providing edification on this subject, its interpretation at once too literal and too historical to be of much contemporary use:

Terrorism: A system of terror. 1. Government by intimidation as directed and carried out by the party in power in France during the revolution of 1789-94; the system of `Terror'. 2. gen. A policy intended to strike with terror those against whom it is adopted; the employment of methods of intimidation; the fact of terrorizing or condition of being terrorized.

These definitions are wholly unsatisfying. Rather than learning what terrorism is, one instead finds, in the first instance, a somewhat potted historical -- and, in respect of the modern accepted usage of the term, a uselessly anachronistic -- description. The second definition offered is only slightly more helpful. While accurately communicating the fear-inducing quality of terrorism, the definition is still so broad as to apply to almost any action that scares (`terrorizes') us. Though an integral part of `terrorism', this definition is still insufficient for the purpose of accurately defining the phenomenon that is today called `terrorism'.

A slightly more satisfying elucidation may be found in the OED's definition of the perpetrator of the act than in its efforts to come to grips with the act itself. In this respect, a `terrorist' is defined thus:

1. As a political term: a. Applied to the Jacobins and their agents and partisans in the French Revolution, esp. to those connected with the Revolutionary tribunals during the `Reign of Terror'. b. Any one who attempts to further his views by a system of coercive intimidation; spec. applied to members of one of the extreme revolutionary societies in Russia.

This is appreciably more helpful. First, it immediately introduces the reader to the notion of terrorism as a political concept. As will be seen, this key characteristic of terrorism is absolutely paramount to understanding its aims, motivations and purposes and critical in distinguishing it from other types of violence.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
786 said:
I recommend watching this presentation to understand terrorism in context:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4HnIyClHEM

He's citing a study funded by the Federal Government. Don't take the conclusions if you don't want, form your own conclusion by the data he presents.
Click to expand...

Excellent presentation. The analysis suggest that Islamic terrorism is like an immune system reaction and the best way to combat it is through relating to the immune system through symbiosis rather than simple presence.
 
Believe said:
Which is a tactic of..... terrorism!!!! and war I suppose as well.
Click to expand...

Only if you mean to kill civilians.

My complaint against Islam isn't restricted to terrorism. I find it a totalitarian ideology that would be abhorrent even if they killed no one.
 
spidergoat said:
Only if you mean to kill civilians.

My complaint against Islam isn't restricted to terrorism. I find it a totalitarian ideology that would be abhorrent even if they killed no one.
Click to expand...

a case of the extremes being wrong..
 
What extreme are you talking about? You aren't free in Islam to not take the scripture seriously.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top