Tomndebb, you say:
[QUOTE=intention]
So on the one hand you say that reform can only come from within and on the other hand your suggestion to make that happen is to publicly attack Islam, condemning it for the actions of some groups within it. That should work well. I know that when people attack Christianity for its various foibles, the Christians have, traditionally, leaped into councils to cast out the offending parts of their dogmas.
[/QUOTE]
Actually, the mainstream Christians have done a good job of distancing themselves from the actions of people like the abortion clinic bombers.
The mainstream Muslims, on the other hand, have said very little about the actions of say the Iranians … and I understand that, because if I lived in Iran, I wouldn’t say much either. In general, the actions of the suicide murderers and the cartoon murderers and their ilk seem to be either celebrated or ignored by Muslims … which is in very clear contrast to the Christian situation. So no, they are not alike, your comparison fails badly when looked at closely.
I am not condemning the actions of some groups within Islam. I am condemning the “satanic verses”, those parts of Islam that are emphasized by those groups. These are the verses that require that the faithful must impose horrible punishments on people who have done awful things … awful things like leaving the religion, or insulting the Prophet.
For example, Jesus never said that if you leave the religion you should be either killed, or a hand and a foot chopped off on alternate sides of your body.
Mohammed did say that. The people who practice that are not just making it up. They are doing exactly what Mohammed told them to do. That’s the difference between the religions. Jesus said forgive your enemies. Mohammed said kill them or cut their hands and feet off. It is not a weird interpretation of some obscure verse. It is a clear commandment to the faithful, one which is followed to this day.
I say that for Islam to renounce its violent parts, it first must recognize that those violent parts are a part of Islam itself, just as are the peaceful parts. Although at some point it may have been done by Christians, chopping alternate hands and feet is not a part of Christianity itself. However, it is a part of Islam itself. That’s the difference.
Your denial that those violent parts are anything more than an aberration is not the path to reform. To reform, as Alcoholics Anonymous knows, you first must admit that you have a problem. If you keep denying that you are an alcoholic, you have no chance of a sober life.
You keep saying that the problem is that a few crazy sects have a violent point of view. But that’s a shallow view.
I, on the other hand, hold that the trouble goes much deeper. I hold that the problem is that Mohammed had a violent point of view, and that point of view is shown in a host of places in the Koran, the Hadiths, and Sharia Law. The injunction to chop off hands is not some weird idea that the Iranians came up with. It has been a part of Islam since day one. It was ordered by Muhammed. That’s why it is observed in many very different and distant parts of the world, from Arabia to Aceh.
As long as Islam keeps up its ridiculous claim to be the Religion of Peace™, it will never actually become a Religion of Peace. That’s what denying a problem does. It prevents forward motion.
So you can keep up your denial that the problem is deep within Islam itself, Tomndebb. You can keep insisting that it’s just a few nuts misunderstanding the true Islam … but I doubt that the victims of the violent aspects of Islam will thank you for it.
PS - I note that you still haven’t found the balls to answer my question above, nor to explain how it is a “have you stopped beating your wife” kind of question as you claim. I answer your questions. You, on the other hand, continue to dodge the hard issues and spread peanut butter over the cracks in your claims. Color me unsurprised …