So there’s this thread on Reddit about this Pew survey from 2010 that apparently means that 84% of Egyptians think death is the proper response to one who leaves Islam, and of course that means that Islam is a violent, evil religion and thank God the responses aren’t being PC etc etc.
I wouldn’t want to engage those people, especially not there, for obvious reasons. But what this brought to mind was, what do those people generally want to DO about their beliefs re: Islam? Go to war? Even if they were right, there are other factors at play. Ban Islam in the United States? Good luck with that. Have Islam categorized as a cult, not a religion? Ditto. Racially profile the hell out of anyone with brown skin and/or an Arabic sounding name? The problems there are obvious. Cut off diplomatic ties with Islamic countries? That’s the sanest possible reaction I can think of, and even then there are other issues at stake. So now what?
Related issue: given that a person has the beliefs described in my first paragraph, are they any more or less acceptable depending on what their answer to my question in my second paragraph is, or is it all equally abhorrent?
Continue to remind everyone that Mohammed was a murderer, a thief, a slaver, and a war mongering psychopath. Point out that he was Allahs direct representative on earth, that he explicitly stated gods will at gods command. Therefor the Muslim god too is a murdering psychopath who supports slavery and the oppression of women.
Remind them of this, everytime someone, anyone, says that Islam is a religion of peace.
… With the intended and hoped-for result that X will happen. What is X? That Islam will just go away eventually if it’s insulted enough? That’s kinda naive.
you have not seen his style of interaction across all subjects.
Why we need another thread to see repitition of stereotypes and half informed ideas I do not udnerstand. The result is not going to be different from the current ones.
For now, we do nothing except hope that Islam goes through an enlightenment the way the West did.
However if a true clash of civilizations occurs, Islam will go the way of Shinto. We’d do what MacArthur did, declare that the war was caused by “state Islam”, ban it, and without state power, plus the discreditation caused by starting a war that brought about the faith’s near destruction would cause it to wither away.
There’s really no point in worrying about such things because there’s no real plan. The natural flow of history tends to work these things out in a pretty predictable way. Cultures that have visions of world domination without the power to back up such dreams either fade away or die in a blaze of glory.
And honestly, I’d hoped to get an answer to my question. It’s one thing to repeat stereotypes; it’s another thing to expect others to care. I want to know what the people with those beliefs hope to accomplish, what they’re working towards. Sure, it’s more obvious in some cases than others, but I’d like to know. This is part of the reason I asked that second question in my OP.
So far, only #5 even comes close, although it does make me wonder what the point of screaming at the top of your lungs about Mohammed being a murderer does anybody if that’s what you’re hoping to have happen. (Then again, I haven’t seen adaher do that, so maybe that’s the point.)
Of course we muslims do not consider any of this characterisations about the qulaity of the Prophet to be true so it is only going to have an effect on us like that of the efect on bystanders those strange american extremist sects that stand on street corners screaming at others about sin…
A shrill recitation like this probably also will not effect those interested in the islamic religion and might convert as it also will have a similar effect as those sidewalk screamers… A Sufi presentatoin will stand in the stark contrast to this.
mais voila, I can see from the christian threads your approach at least has a consistency… I am sure it is just as convincing to the christians.
So, Orthodox Judaism has gone through an enlightenment and they no longer have wackos and they now treat women equitably and all that? So, fundamentalist Christianity has gone through an enlightenment and they no longer have wackos and they now treat women equitably and all that?
I think the best one can hope for in any religion is that the fundamentalist wackos get marginalized, not that they don’t exist…and in fact even dominate in certain places.
It’s a lot of different motivations, of course. But I think a big part of it is just people speaking their minds on a subject they believe to be taboo. They think it’s somehow bold and brave to say negative things about Islam. It makes them feel good to think they are speaking truth to power.
by this I suppose one has to mean “I do not know anything about hte history of the Islamic religion development and so I am going to be make simplistic assumptions using some european developments as the model although there is not any real similarity.”
this is extremely ill informed and shows zero understanding… there is no such thing outside of the Shia Iranian twelver case -a tiny minority of the overall islamic faith and not even the majority of the shia.
Yes a faith utterly unconnected with the state will whither away based on a badly informed analogy to an entirely different case…
See this is why this thread is just going to be a sterile repetition of stereotypes. All the plans and all the analysis will be based on some narrow stereotyped bases based essentially off of the Iran and the Saudi arabia, and have no understanding or learning about the wider islamic history and even current governments or the recent political history that has framed the muslim populations 20e and 21e centuries experience with secular government.
since they will start off with assumptions that have no foundation in the real political history, and with silly, superficial stereotypes, nothing of utility will come out.
And we will have a discussion looking like the other two threads.
That should go well when attempting to negotiate with majority Muslim countries. it should also be a way to increase the peace and prosperity of people in our country who live near Muslims.
Good job.
Since the only people who routinely use the phrase “religion of peace” are Islamophobes, that does not appear to be much of an issue as it will be just preaching to the choir.
Oh, I’m well aware of the other varieties of government that part of the world has produced: Pan-Arabism, Arab socialism, and military juntas. At some point we need to see some pluralistic societies emerge. Hopefully in our lifetimes, but more likely a few centuries from now.
yah, about that. The proverbial “they” have nukes. If it plays out to a world war the winners will be non-denominational cockroaches.
To the op, since the religion is in fact structured as an all encompassing social/political force it has to be addressed as such. The only country remotely successful in that respect is Turkey. The secular state controls religious instruction in school and through the State Directorate of Religious Affairs. Therein lies the power to control content.
Maybe not invading Muslim countries, killing hundreds of thousands and leaving a total mess behind could also help. Folks tend to get upset, and even start with crazy talk like saying the invaders, led by a born again Christian President, is the problem not them.