Islamic law already says that rape and murder are wrong. This would change nothing in the Islamic world.
What is your solution to the problem (which is stipulated to by the premise of the thread?)
The best I can see is constructive engagement with Islamic moderates, and a low-scale cultural offensive, rewarding non-violent regimes. This would also work best if we stop demonizing the entire religion, and focus on “othering” only the extremists. Economic leverage against extremist regimes is also a good tactic (which we’re currently using. Funny, that.)
The premise of the thread is that you and Robert123 are correct. Repeating your claims about how correct you are does nothing to address the question of the OP.
In this thread, I have no campaign to “reform the image of Islam.” I simply want people who believe it needs to be reformed to produce a serious proposal for how to do this. Hurling insults at people simply fails for reasons i have pointed out and for which neither of you have provided any genuine challenge.
Robert123 finally began making the claim that insults had worked against Fundamentalist Christianity–while ignoring the fact that it has steadily grown in power in the U.S. in the last 40 years, and without providing evidence for how it has been ridiculed–and has made no effort to show how his great plan would actually be accomplished.
Yes! Exactly the same way I treat anybody! If I meet a guy who turns out to be Jewish…or Catholic…or Latter Day Saints…or Atheist… To begin with, I don’t bring up the subject of religion; I prefer to wait until someone else does.
If he’s aggressive about it, I pretty much walk away. But that’s true of just about anyone. I had a co-worker who was all gaga about chemtrails. After a while, I started making excuses not to chat with him any longer. He wasn’t any fun to talk with!
You haven’t refuted anything Tom, you have refused to acknowledge basic facts of history and the basic truth about Islamic orthodoxy, preferring instead to use your power as a moderator to limit their inclusion in the discussion.
I have acknowledged that there are no easy solutions. I acknowledge that open criticism of Islamic scripture and traditions is a minefield which could have unintended consequences, driving people deeper into the insular communities than spawn the extremists. You have failed to grasp that your method, pretending that Islamic scripture and tradition doesn’t contain these brutalities, is also a minefield.
Also, the whole idea of characterizing the position of those critical of Islam as thinking that is is simplistically “evil” poisons the well. Violent, yes. Evil? This isn’t star wars.
That is a valid concern, but refusing to acknowledge the realities about Islamic scripture and traditions, refusing to acknowledge that the man Muslims are taught to emulate as the model of perfect behavior was a slave owning rapist, plays right into the hands of the Islamists who marginalize and dominate and persecute the free thinkers who emerge from their communities. There are no potent solutions without major downsides, to realize this and still act is simply the adult thing to do, rather than apologize and dither and play the part of the good tolerant boy fending off the evil bigots.
People in Muslim countries are not monolithic Tom. The same Iraq that gives us ISIS gives us Faisal Saeed Al Mutar. The same Pakistan that gives us the Taliban gives us Kunwar Khuldune and Pervez Hoodbhoy. ISIS and the Taliban are going to dismiss what we say, no matter what it is. Those of us who are rational, progressive, and critical of orthodoxy, owe it to those brave souls in and from these nations and communities to recognize their voices and ally with them, rather than marginalize them and side with the extremists by adding to the accusations that their critiques are the products of hatred and bigotry.
No it is not. It might not be a good solution, but it is a proposed solution. Your censorship is an attempt to limit criticism of Islam and it’s prophet because you recognize the language as inflammatory.
I mentioned my thoughts on what a solution might look like inpost #80. But it is a monumental problem, and I don’t have any better single answer to it than I do to how we are going to colonize Mars or stop desertification or any other giant problem.
What criteria do you base that on? What does a person or group have to accept in order to be moderate? What about allowing women to sing in public? Because ISNA is one group regularly engaged with as ‘moderate’.
I agree with othering the extremists, but I disagree with many on the minimum standards of what is required of members of the human race to escape the extremist label.
By economic leverage you mean buying all of their oil and selling them gobs of weapons?
No, The USA “gave us” ISIS. It is a product of imperial conquest, every bit as much as was ObL and al-Queada. Directly, it is a product of injustice born in squalid, illegitimate Iraqi detention camps: that is US detention camps containing Iraqi Muslims in Iraq.
That is a slippery slope. In many long lasting conflicts you will find that both sides are firmly convinced that their own position is that of justice. Their “righteous anger” at the perceived injustices committed by their opponents tends to be a major factor preventing a resolution of the conflict.
No, it doesn’t. Just the opposite - it tells the extremists “We agree with your interpretation of Islam, and agree with you that the moderates are not following Islam as it was meant to be followed”, which doesn’t support the position of the moderates, it undercuts them!
It’s not. What it’s supposed to do is show that certain people, who are already against Islam because, well, because it’s Islam, can console themselves. You make a grave mistake when you think that those certain people care even a whit about those people they think are suffering under the religion.
