Do not make this a personal feud.
Knock it off.
[ /Moderating ]
Nigeria is now about 50% Muslim, and I doubt has been much
if any less than 40% for last several decades.
The Muslim population is concentrated in the north, but even if
you lived on the coast the whole time there is no excuse for not
learning more about your host country.
Which means it isnt a muslim country.
[Quote=NCDane]
I am sure you do not really believe your own words. The phrase
“limited subset ” is the rhetorical equivalent of “trivial”, and we
are not discussing some trivialities, as you well know.
The right of apostasy is a foundation of religious freedom, and religious
freedom is as important as any freedom, is it not? I view murdering
apostates for the exercise of such freedom as a moral transgression of
the utmost gravity, how about you? Poll results indicate that immoral
homicidal predisposition characterizes about half the Muslims of the
world, several 100s million adults. Trivialization of such numbers is
bizarre, or to put it less nicely, it is…well, never mind for now.
Adultery is a much less attractive defendant, since it usually involves
culpable breach of trust. However, I do not think it should be criminalized,
and I have little doubt you would agree with me. Therefore making it
a capital crime is really off the deep end, right? And since there are
sure to be 100s of millions of transgressors in the world (hell, there might
be a billion of them) it will not really do to mischaracterize the issue by
calling it a “limited subset”, will it?
[/Quote]
Excellent counterargument, except for the trivial fact that none of the above points describe any position I’ve taken in this thread. In any event, I’ve said all I feel is worth saying on this particular subject. Do carry on.
I wish you would let the Muslim Brotherhoodknow that.
**“The Islamic ummah,” it says, referring to the supranational community of Muslims, “can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by Allah, as the most exalted nation among men, as the leaders of humanity.”
Elsewhere, it exhorts Muslims, “Know your status, and believe firmly that you are the masters of the world, even if your enemies desire your degradation.”
**
What are the odds that Christians will be set upon for their religious beliefs in Egypt and how will that change if the Islamic Brotherhood takes over?
Isn’t it possible that the problem is both the Islam and the social/cultural disruptions? That either one alone results in actions that are more benign, but when you have the two together we get the the worst kinds of actions of radical Islam?
Uh. How is that different than any nation/identity that seeks to gain power in the world?
The US is pretty darn committed to defending it’s hegemonic power, which we mythologize as being the rightful product of our democratic traditional. We don’t call our president “the leader of the free world” because we are comfortable taking a backseat. Every time you hear the talk about “China is going to take over,” that is the echos of us trying to maintain our status as the recognized leaders of the world.
As for China, it makes no bones about longing for the days when China was the “most exalted nation” and would like it’s turn at being a superpower, an idea that is at least partially based on the idea that Chinese culture is naturally superior. China’s modern national mythos is about moving past the “100 years of humiliation” when China’s imperialist enemies forced them into degradation into an age where China is again a leader.
Christianity, I’m sure, is full of explanations as to why they should really rule the world. It’s standard stuff for religion…or really any system of thought. Both Communism and Democracy try to make arguments for why they should rule the world. This is like saying “OMGZ the Democrats want to take over the US Government!!!” Of course if you think your way is right then you are gong to think the world is better off doing things your way.
None of this says anything about doing anything bad to Christians (or anyone else.) There is absolutely no reference to violence or force. The best way to convince someone that your way of doing things is awesome is to be awesome. They may well be hoping that the Islamic community becomes so attractive and appealing that people naturally gravitate towards it. They could very well be counting on earning the respect and devotion of people.
When we talk about wanting everyone to respect human rights and recognize their universality, does that mean we want to chop off the heads of everyone who lives in a dictatorship? When we talk about the superiority of the free market system, does that mean we want to ban communist thought?
In fact, let’s try this again with some words that are as inerently scary as “Muslim”
The Rotary Club can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by it’s founders, as the most exalted service club among men, as the leaders of humanity
The neo-pagan community can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by Gaia, as the most exalted religious practice movement among men, as the leaders of humanity
]The civil rights movement can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by Dr, Martin Luther King, as the most exalted political movement among men, as the leaders of humanity
The Catholic Church can regain its power and be liberated and assume its rightful position which was intended by God, as the most exalted nation among men, as the leaders of humanity
I’m shaking in my boots.
Every knee shall bow and every tongue proclaim that Jesus Christ is Lord.
OMG how long until the Christians start breaking people’s kneecaps and cutting out their tongues!
I’m not aware of any Christian group making a statement regarding a caliphate state or terrorist activities toward that goal. I am aware of just the opposite.
The people on American Airlines flight 11 were shaking in their boots.
The people on United Airlines flight 175 were shaking in their boots.
The people on American Airlines flight 77 were shaking in their boots.
The people on United Airlines flight 93 were shaking in their boots.
The people on Northwest flight 253 were shaking in their boots.
The people on American Airline flight 63 were shaking in their boots.
The people at Ft Hood were shaking in their boots.
The people shot at by beltway sniper were shaking in their boots.
The people on the USS Cole were shaking in their boots.
The people in the US Embassies in Kenya, Tanzania, and Lebanon were shaking in their boots.
Well, if they were shaking in their boots about the Muslim Brotherhood, they were unfortunately looking the wrong way.
I would agree that a confluence of Fundamentalist Islam and social/cultural disruptions will almost certainly lead to violence.
The problem in these threads, however, is that a number of people prefer to omit the adjective “Fundamentalist” from the equation, (and often to ignore the aspect of social/cultural disruptions), and simply rant on about “evuul Islam.” That is pointless, since it does not match the facts, and silly, since it ain’t going to happen.
Really? Can’t think of a single trans-national religious political structure (sounds scarier in Arabic, I’ll give you that) that has a word meaning “universal” right in their name that functions in a state-like capacity providing social services (schools, hospitals, etc.) and guiding people’s personal and political opinions?
I’ll give you that they rarely engage in terrorism, but really there isn’t much need for terrorism when you have serious pull on legit states.
Though certain organized groups of their followers certainly have…
Look at the nutty groups living out in Michigan and similar places. And that’s in America, a country where white Christian males have generations of peace and prosperity unparalleled in human history. Nobody retricting their rights, imposing dictators on them, invading them, occupying them militarily etc. Have a Muslim superpower impose a dictator in the White House fifty or more years ago, have them build military bases all over America, have them kill or imprison large numbers of Americans, occasionally invade restive parts of America etc., then you’d see the same kind of insurgent/terrorist/whatever groups springing up in America. Some of them may be Christian-inspired, like the Pat Robertson Brigades or the Jerry Falwell Army, or they may have secular inspiration. You’d get a similar split to how Muslim groups have split between the secular and the religious over the years.
That’s nonsense. You are projecting your prejudice on other posters. It is not necessary to spell out “fundamentalist” in every sentence or every post. It’s understood. This has been addressed repeatedly in other threads. Islamic terrorism <=> Islam.
As for social/cultural influences on the violence, there are large blocks of Christians in the Mid East as well as immigrants in Europe who do not exhibit the violence inherent in fundamentalist Islam. Since nobody would assume a lack of bigotry or narrow mindedness in fundamentalist Christians there must be some other reason for the lack of comparable violence.
I agree that people in the media are conflating democracy and human rights. The reason we have a Bill of Rights was so that the majority could not impose laws violating the basic human rights of a minority (we got to that slavery thing eventually…). Democracy doesn’t guarantee freedom without those rights.
It seems to me that the Muslims want to run their country by Sharia law.
I am sorry, but I think this type of law should be wiped off the face of the planet. Hopefully this is not what Egypt wants. It does seem that many in the PC/leftist crowd (I am probably there to some extent) tend to ignore the very militant nature of Islam. I tend to choose the lesser of the two evils, but honestly I am pretty split on the issue.
I would feel horrible for supporting a cause which ultimately leads to innocent people being persecuted, but at the same time I do not want to support a dictatorship. Is it possible for me to just not choose sides and condemn the atrocities either side commit?
I think Egypt should have a true democracy, but I also think that all the people of Egypt deserve the same human rights we enjoy here. I hope they get both.
This PDF describes a lengthy current telephone survey of opinions in Cairo and Alexandria.
Incidentally, for whatever it’s worth, WINEP has a reputation as a very right-wing & pro-Israel institute.