Obama has made several speeches, to the effect tha Islam is a force for peace in the world. Angela Merkel has made similar speeches, claiming that Islam is part of Germany now.
My question: if you look at the situation objectively, does Islam offer anything to the West? It seems to me, that Islam is a religion that is not able to acknowledge other philosophies, and in Islam, the government is part of the religion.
So, does the religion offer anything that the present Western culture lacks?
The same thing could be said of pretty much any religion at some point in its history.
Well, for starters, if you define Europe as part of Western culture, it’s been part of Western culture for over a thousand years. Same if you define as part of Western culture “Judeo-Christian culture”.
Second, I would say pretty much what all religions offer. Some feel it’s something they need. Some don’t.
It is absolutely essential to keep in mind, and almost universally forgotten as soon as it’s learned, that no major religion is represented by any one person, faction or operant creed.
List all outspoken “Christians” from Pope Francis down to Fred Phelps. Done? Now tell me “what Christianity brings to the modern world.” In maybe 100 words.
Even modern Judaism has a wide range of facets, both internal divisions and the splits across Zionism… and they are only bound together a bit more than the other majors because of a long history of common oppression.
Well, the aqueducts, better sanitation and medicine and education and irrigation and public health and roads and a freshwater system and baths and public order…
Oh, sorry, that was the Romans.
Multiple wives …
Islam offers nothing today to the Western intellectual tradition. Back in the 700s, Islam may have broken new ground intellectually and been of use to Europe, but the Islamic golden age of the Abbasid caliphate is centuries past and meaningful Islamic intellectual inquiry is dead. Moreover, the West and the Islamic world have grown apart on so many different values and ideas that reconciliation or multiculturalism is all but impossible. The Muslim world doesn’t accept concepts like feminism, secular government, human rights or democracy, and indeed several Muslim states are ruled under a reactionary Wahhabi mindset.
Muslims aren’t Europeans and aren’t part of the West. It is tragic, in a Shakespearean sense, that the West’s own sensibilities and values will lead to its extinction under a morass of third-world immigration and radical Islam.
And those newcomers did their best to undo all that.
Funny, but I think we’re talking present-tense here. And as Islam, once the cradle of intellectual progress, seems to have shut everything down around 1500 BCE, I’d say, “not a lot.” So it if can go back to being a fairly benign force for socializing and peace instead of a goal for a horrific retro-future, that’d be good.
Tell that to Turkey. They don’t seem to have gotten the memo.
First off, some Muslims are Europeans. Even if you’re ignoring recent Muslim immigrants to Europe and their families, there have been large Muslim communities in Europe for centuries…Kosovo, Albania, Bosnia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Chechnya, the Volga Tatars, the Crimean Tatars, the Azeris, etc. And most of these groups are either indigenous peoples or came to the area in the 12th-16th centuries. They’re not recent arrivals. So to say “Muslims aren’t European” is kind of a nonsensical statement.
And when you say “The Muslim world doesn’t accept concepts like feminism, secular government, human rights or democracy”, that’s just not true. There are democratic states with majority Muslim populations, there are are states with majority Muslim populations that have secular governments (most of them, actually), and there are Muslim feminists and Muslims concerned about human rights. So the statement just isn’t backed up by the evidence.
But who wants multiple mothers-in-law? 
Here in the USA, if you put a cross in a public park or a Star of David on a memorial, or let the government fund a small number of religious schools, then certain persons start getting the vapors and fainting at the encroachment of theocracy. If we applied the same standard to the Islamic world, I imagine we would find a lot more theocracies. While we were nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan, both countries wrote constitutions explicitly stating a unique role for Islam.
Justice Anthony Kennedy and many others assure us that there’s no possible reason to not give gay couples marriage licenses, other than religious bigotry. How many Islamic countries give marriage licenses to gay couples? How many even allow gay sex?
There are Muslims concerned about human rights; okay, but is their definition of human rights as good as America’s or Europe’s. Would we benefit from switching to the Islamic understanding of human rights?
The Bible is easily the biggest contributor to the English language of any book, whether it’s idioms, well known parables, allusions, or poetry. I’m not even sure what would be close – Shakespeare, maybe? So I bristle when my fellow atheists try to say it’s useless. Extra irony points if they unknowingly use a Biblical phrase while doing so.
I’m ignorant of the Koran. Never read it, seen some selected quotes but usually by someone with an axe to grind (either for or against). Does it have interesting phrases or parables to offer the English language? Can anyone name parts of the Koran worth reading from that perspective?
List of female Muslim heads of state, 20th & 21st Centuries only, and excluding royalty:
Atifete Jahjaga - President of Kosovo
Benazir Bhutto - Prime Minister of Pakistan
Khaleda Zia - Prime Minister of Bangladesh
Megawati Sukarnoputri - President of Indonesia
Sheikh Hasina Wazed - Prime Minister of Bangladesh
Tansu Ciller - Prime Minister of Turkey
List of female American heads of state, any century:
… let me get back to you next year.
Human rights are *human *rights. They know no colour nor creed. That’s sort of the point.
Tell that to the Albanian and Bosnian Muslims.
To be fair, until very recently Islam was not allowed a voice in Turkish government. In Egypt that is still the case.
Secularism is maintained through military force, not the liberal democratic ideals of the faithful populace.
Christian nations that have explicit state religions, or favor a specific religion through law:
Argentina
Costa Rica
Liechtenstein
Malta
Monaco
Vatican City (duh)
Andorra
Dominican Republic
El Salvador
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Poland
Spain
Greece
Georgia (the other one)
Bulgaria
England
Denmark
Iceland
Norway
Finland
Sweden
Tonga
Tuvalu
Scotland
Granted, none of those are theocracies like Iran. But then again, neither are Afghanistan or Iraq.
Did you know that in Iran, the state fully funds sex change operations for any citizen that feels they need one? Their record on gay rights is, of course, appalling, but even in Iran, the subject isn’t as black and white as you’d like it to be. And gay sex was illegal (if not often enforced) in several states in the US up until 2003, when the Supreme Court struck down sodomy laws in Lawrence v. Texas. In the decision, three of our most learned and wise justices saw absolutely no problem with criminalizing homosexuality.
There is no one “Islamic” understanding of human rights, any more than there’s a single “Christian” understanding of human rights, or even a single “American” understanding of human rights. Many Muslim states have extremely poor histories of civil rights. Many non-Muslim states have extremely poor histories of civil rights, too. Including us. Jim Crow ended in the US in living memory, and our over-all record is still pretty shaky. When we compare our conception of civil rights to the so-called “Muslim” conception of civil rights, it would be good to remember that we have only had the high seat on the subject for a very short amount of time, and temper our contempt for these other countries accordingly.
“Several”? Out of the 60 plus countries in the World that could be called “Muslim” the only one I can say for sure is ruled by Salafis is Saudi Arabia and possibly Sudan(theocracy but not sure if it could be called Salafist). I suppose you could consider a few of the Emirates though that would be a stretch. Afghanistan under the Taliban was an example but that was the past(at least for now) and Iran is a theocracy but certainly not a Salafist one.
That is simply racist claptrap and not even terribly original racist claptrap. The Know-Nothings of the 19th Century said the same about the Irish and people in the early 20th Century said the same about Southern and a Eastern Europeans.
They were wrong and so are you.