-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Muslim fury at pope jihad comments
- Thread starter Lucky Forward
- Start date
- Status
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
Remedy said:
the thing is that you dont see a few thousand christians, jews, buddhists, bahai, etc. 'going mad' when someone speaks bad about them..
thats why people are having issues with this.
yes, we realize that islam in itself is fine.. and there are plenty of mulsims that are peace loving and all that.. but there is a huge problem of growing extremes in the religion.
Groder Mullet
Member
Ill Saint said:
And what would that argument be?
Let's face it. To many muslim nations, islam, is what christianity was to european nations during the dark ages. Illeteracy, fanatism and poverty is religion's best friend and as long as muslim nations have these problems they'll never get out of this. But I agree with the muslims' on one matter. Christianity isn't any better. Bible/christianity is just as hateful and thousand's of crime against humanity have been commited on its name too.
To sum up: Religion must die (especially the three based on the jewish mythology -they're the worst imo).
To sum up: Religion must die (especially the three based on the jewish mythology -they're the worst imo).
Instigator
Banned
Groder Mullet said:
That the conservative leader of a religious movement may not be the most reasonable person around.
Frankfurter
Member
Ajax said:
But why? Yes, millions have died in the name of the church, but not because religion in itself is bad, but because certain people search for ways to get people to believe that they should do bad things.
Musashi Wins!
FLAWLESS VICTOLY!
Ill Saint said:
You're starving us.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
Frankfurter said:
Weird, it works fine for me. Try typing in "problem of evil" in the search bar and see if it pops up for you then.
EDIT: Ok weird, now the article isn't there, despite appearing as the first entry in Google if you type "Problem of evil" there. Maybe someone doesn't want us to see it...
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Funky Papa said:
O RLY? Another oversimplication. People can revise al-andalus all they want (see Andrew Bostom's tirade) in order to hate Muslims, but there are facts you cannot change. You can eliminate them from a work (or try to), but you can't change them and their availability.
Religion bashers at their finest here. Well, at least there's some equality, Christianity gets a lot of bashing too. At the former boards that I used to visit, it used to be all Islam, no Christianity.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
Frankfurter said:
This is a common argument, but if it's true, does it really free religion itself from responsibility? Whether religion is directly causing the bad acts, or whether it's just providing an excuse to cause the bad acts is irrelevant. Either way, the bad acts are happening because of the presence of faith.
I don't think there's a single person in this thread who thinks all of the world's Muslims are bad. What many people do think is that Islam, the religion, causes more than its fair share of violent extremism, and if it's not kept under control, causes a threat to civilized society. I think the guy in your avatar, Ataturk, might agree with me (and his de-Islamization of Turkish society is why he's one of my personal heroes).
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
Sorry. No. There are quite a few chronicles from both sides narrating what happened during that time. Moors were not better than Christians during the middle ages in Spain by any means, and and mass conversions were methods to avoid practical slavery or biggotry of the highest scale when not a matter of life or death. Apparently moors didn't invade the Iberian Peninsula either, its inhabitants just invited them for a party and stayed there because of our fine wines.The Stealth Fox said:
Having said that I'm out of this thread. I don't have the slightest intention of talking about the history of my country with someone who obviously doesn't know squat about WTF is he talking about. Have fun with your agenda.
Frankfurter
Member
Chairman Yang said:Weird, it works fine for me. Try typing in "problem of evil" in the search bar and see if it pops up for you then.
EDIT: Ok weird, now the article isn't there, despite appearing as the first entry in Google if you type "Problem of evil" there. Maybe someone doesn't want us to see it...
Perhaps the CIA
I really don't see why religion should be responsible for acts that happened it its name although they basically did the complete opposite of what the religion says.
And just btw. it's not like all bad things happen with the religion in mind, if it wouldn't be made for religion it would be made for sth. else. Just look at Hitler or Stalin for example.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Funky Papa said:
Why do you assume I know nothing? If you can bring academic citations... I'd be happy to discuss this with you on the issue of whether Islam was responsible for all of these acts. I'm sure you'll be willing to discuss the accounts of Maimonedes. Al-Andalus is a complex issue. Different groups of people (Almohads, for example) did different things.If you want to vaguely generalize, at least specify what era you are talking about. You can generalize all you want, it means nothing to me, but unless you spout vague facts, I can't honestly decide. I have no doubt that there were forced conversions, but I want to know WHO did them. Because I can get documentation on what the Maliki Jurists of al-andalus thought what should happen, and the difference between what DID happen.
Plus, I think this'll be a learning experience for me in that I can actually understand what other people think and see where they can get their facts from.
Remember, the issue is whether Islam is responsible for everything bad that happened in Spain.
Under Yang's logic, any Muslim that does a bad thing shows the inherent deficiency of the religion, and I will never agree with this logic, because there's no way to prove this.
Edit: Haha, as a matter of fact, I'm actually reading some articles on JSTOR about the development of Muslim sufism in that particular region.
WARCOCK said:I think your understating the point. Think about it by taking the children and converting them to islam you are effectively cutting the bloodline right then and there. Also keep in mind the ottoman's armies were huge. So wait since the turks didnt attempt to convert the armenians killing them is ALRIGHT? I actually rather stay clear from that subject in order not to offend anyone. And to say there wasnt any attempt at all to conversion really undermines the fact that there is such animosity towards the people you just mentioned and the Turkish people for other reasons... such as conquering their land(I.e armenians,greeks etc.) I really gave up to be honest, i dont care about home anymore and ill be happy relegating my nationalism to even the US
My uncles fought during the lebanese civil war and for what, 20 years later it seems like we are back to step one. Its just a gigantic quagmire,i hate it. The end.
Hyperbole much?
As for the rest, that's all fine and dandy yet how is that proof that conversion to Islam was forced?
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
The Stealth Fox said:
um.. Maimonedes was jewish.
Mr.Ressetti
Member
" Assalamu alaikom wa rahmat Allah wa barakatuh " is the islamic greeting which prays for peace to you.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
quadriplegicjon said:
Oh, I know this. I thought he wanted to discuss the Islamic rule of andalusian spain in general. What specific religion is he wanting to talk about? The relation of Christians to Muslim and Andalusion spain? As I said, it needs to be specified.
Edit: And yes, I'm aware of various Christian sources and Arabic sources in al-Andalus.
Particle Physicist
between a quark and a baryon
The Stealth Fox said:
i see.. im a bit tired and didnt actually read your whole post before responding.
Kapsama said:
i thought he was listing muslim rulers.. my bad..
anyway, its too bad jews and muslims cant seem to live in peace with each other like in those times. its really sad considering how they are basically cousins.
Funky Papa
FUNK-Y-PPA-4
I see, now it's time to point out the other side's wrongdoings to validate something, even if I already implied that Christians were not exactly kind during the middle ages.Kapsama said:
Now I am *definitely* not touching this thread, this time for real.
Osama would be laughing his head off reading a thread like this. The amount of mistrust and ill-feeling which has spirralled out of control within both the West and the Islamic world over the last few years is mind-boggling. This is what the terrorists always wanted, and sadly we are all playing into their hands...
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-andalus#Non-Muslims_.28Dhimmi.29_under_the_Caliphate
There is considerable debate on this topic, and both sides use it to back political and social agendas. This is why I hate it when people try to use this against us.
The problem with the word 'tolerance' is that it's all relative.
People need to stop politicizing history. I don't have anything to gain from this, whether al-andalus is tolerant or not, I simply don't care because it has nothing to do with what I believe in (that is, my voluntary choice of Islam).
There is considerable debate on this topic, and both sides use it to back political and social agendas. This is why I hate it when people try to use this against us.
The problem with the word 'tolerance' is that it's all relative.
People need to stop politicizing history. I don't have anything to gain from this, whether al-andalus is tolerant or not, I simply don't care because it has nothing to do with what I believe in (that is, my voluntary choice of Islam).
so you're saying rise/existence of radicalism in countries like afghanistan, palestine, iran has nothing to the with recent complex political/sociological issues (such as imperialistic invasions, oil politics, powerty,etc) but they are direct result of the faith itself?!?Chairman Yang said:
well ideological extremism, no matter what kind it is, (religious, nationalistic, class based, etc) is a threat to civilization and needs to be dealt with extreme care.As i said before i believe putting 1.3billion ppl into this one generic backwards/barbaric category, portraying their faith as a fundamentally problematic and constantly agitating them is not a good way to do that. And also ataturk didn't de-islamized the turkish society, he secularized it.Chairman Yang said:
razorman said:
sad but true
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
<nu>faust said:
Nope, that's not what I'm saying. The other factors you mentioned are certainly important, but I think the evidence points to the fact that:
1. There seems to be a direct correlation between the religiosity of Islamic societies and their success (economic, political, social, etc.)
2. Islam seems to radicalize and exacerbate conflicts that might have not been as strong without the presence of a religion to unify and legitimize those conflicts.
In other words, I think many of the problems in the Muslim world, while not caused directly by Islam, would not have occurred (or been smaller problems) without the presence of Islam.
<nu>faust said:
I don't know where you're getting this idea that people are lumping 1.3 billion Muslims in the same category.
As for portraying the Islamic faith as fundamentally flawed, I think that's an important step. Just as Communism, Fascism, Christianity, and any number of other ideologies were criticized (and good came out of that criticism) I think Islam should similarly be criticized. Just because a lot of people believe in an ideology (and I doubt 1.3 billion people actually believe in Islam, despite being raised in societies that often force them to call themselves Muslims), doesn't make that ideology correct or immune from criticism. Trying to force political correctness on people and shielding any idea from rational, open discussion is a bad thing, IMO.
<nu>faust said:
I think the two go hand-in-hand. Ultimately, I think Turkey is a less Islamic society than most other Muslim countries, and is a more civilized, admirable country as a result.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
Kapsama said:
What a weird false dichotomy. The Islamic world (and Islamic Spain, in particular) either forcibly converted all non-Muslims or was completely peaceful and never put pressure on anybody to convert? I think people who believe either extreme aren't looking at the facts objectively.
Chairman Yang
if he talks about books, you better damn well listen
The Stealth Fox said:
I don't think that's the issue at all. The real issue is whether Islam was responsible for SOME of the bad things that happened in Spain. I think the answer for any reasonable person (Muslim or non-Muslim) is yes.
The Stealth Fox said:
That's not really my logic. My view is that if Islamic societies have a lot more evil than non-Islamic societies, and all other factors (economic, political, etc.) have been taken into account and controlled for, then that's evidence that Islam itself may be responsible for that evil.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chairman Yang said:
Well, first of all, you'd have to define what 'bad' is. Second of all, you'd have to define what Islam is, because there are various strains of thought of what people think Islam is. For example, there are some ridiculously naive academics think that Ibn Khaldun's line of thinking as displayed in the Muqaddimah is against traditional, core Islamic beliefs. Any orthodox person who has read his works and has read his biography knows that this is an absurd notion. From this, we can learn that these academics do not define the orthodoxy as lets say, an orthodox Muslim does. So whose definition is right? Well, I say, everything needs to be backed by primary evidence. I think my view of the orthodoxy has the backing of primary sources, including hadith, and the 4 schools of thought in Islam.
I don't care what you think Islam did. There is what is right in Islam, and then there is what is wrong in Islam. These need to be defined before undertaking such a task on whether "Islam" is responsible for such tasks.
Well, that's incredibly hard to prove. But your logic did inititally come off as as that. You seem quite insistent that when people do bad things and they are Muslim, it is because of them being Muslim that they did those bad things. There are people who do try to act in the name of Islam, but they have a particular strain of thought that might not represent the orthodoxy.
The problem lies within its definition of terms. My conception of Islam is not the same as let's say, a Moorish ruler. We would have to judge every decision made relative to Islamic doctrine, and as a result, we would have to define what Islam is before we execute such a task of trying to see what was "Islamic" and what was not.
And when defining what's good and what's bad, we then ultimately come down to the issue of morality. Who defines it, what defines it, and what is it exactly? This is the central issue of every one of these debates when trying to state a claim about Islam. And then this gets into philosophical debate, a very interesting subject that I am very into, especially academically.
PhoenixDark
Banned
I heard a nun got gunned down because of these comments? What the hell. I'm Catholic, but I can't see how anyone could kill a ****ing nun. And over some stupid comment taken out of context too? Wow.
Boards of Canada
Member
Simpler times, simpler minds. Fascinating what we hold on to.
Remedy said:
I agree with this post. I'm a Christian, but I do feel that Muslims are often unfairly treated. For example, put the "God hates fags" and the abortion clinic bombing breed of Christians on television constantly, and one can easily come away with a false image of Christianity. Now, putting the extreme Muslims who use their scripture to justify violence may be doing Muslims in general a similar disservice.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
Chairman Yang said:
Correlation is not causation. Second of all, you're going to have to demonstrate to me that all factors are particularly controlled and that you can isolate Islam as the sole causer of such things. I'm not a big fan of speculative claims, I like verifiable things.
First of all, how can I your first statement (in the quoted portion). It's really hard to prove that an ideology caused something, especially when it's been documented to have good effects in certain circumstances. Societies that have practicing Muslims are DIVERSE. That's because we're human. Humans act differently in different circumstances. You'd have to rpove a CONSISTENT phenomenon (that is, be able to control all the other factors, while attempting to demonstrate that it is SOLELY, that is, SOLELY Islam that caused this). And this is an incredible task, because we don't have video tapes of the 1400 years of Muslim rule. This is why I don't like these claims, they are unverifiable and operate on a selectivity of evidenece. I do debate a lot, and I tend to avoid such general claims because they mean absolutely nothing.
As for your second statement, it is your opinion. And I'm not a fan of "If X didn't exist, Y wouldn't happen" style of reasoning. If people didn't exist, then there would be no conflict. So hey everybody, let's just kill ourselves! If planes didn't exist, then there'd be no 9/11 (this analogy is much more subtle than you think it is, i may elaborate on it later).
I honestly don't know how anyone can verify these claims. Do you have any statistical evidence to back this up? That increasing religiosity leads to extremism and poverty?
All of this is theoretical. It doesn't mean anything to me. I need actual substance.
Well nothing is immune from criticism. It is whether that criticism is VALID is the question. And I'm so used to these Communism and Fascism comparisons, but ideological criticisms and comparisons in the end really do absolutely nothing to establish the "flaws" of Islam as a religious institution. What is the criteria we use in order to determine whether an ideology is fundamentally flawed? Are they subjective or objective?
Turkey is a subject to debate. But you do sound awfully a lot like Bernard Lewis and his views on Turkey.
Either way, I have respect for you as a person, but I practically disagree with you on every aspect.
The Stealth Fox
Junior Member
I just think the topic is too general for any legitimate debate to take place. If you want to discuss these issues further, Yang, you can always just PM me.
This neither the time nor the place for a topic about "Is Islam problematic?" We should discuss issues pertinent to angry Muslims getting mad about being insulted by their religion.
This neither the time nor the place for a topic about "Is Islam problematic?" We should discuss issues pertinent to angry Muslims getting mad about being insulted by their religion.
Ajax said:
And we can say that atheism is just as "hateful" as these religions if we, in a biased manner, select a few examples from History, namely Mao and Stalin.
It's people themselves that determine how any philosophy will be used... Just as many hate-based cultures can be crafted utilizing ideas such as "survival of the fittest." So then, just as it is unfair to judge a person who happens to be atheist based on things another person who happened to be atheist did (for example, Stalin), it is just as unfair to judge theists based on what some extremists are doing who have their own personal interpretations of the philosophies held therein.
As you can see from my first post, there were of course exceptions, but most of the time conversions and especially massconversions happened on a voluntary basis.Chairman Yang said:
No one forced the Turks moving into the Middle East to become Muslim.
No one forced the Turkics of Central Asia to become Muslim.
No one forced the Bosnians to become Muslim.
No one forced North & Sub Saharan Africans to become Muslim, most leaders in the latter region chose Islam over Christianity due to the allowed practise of polygamy.
No one forced Indonesians to become Muslim, that area wasn't even conquered by Muslims.
And just look @ the subjects of Islamic empires. Muslim Spain? Thriving Jewish & Christian communities. Ottoman Empire? Cultures and ethnicities that kept their religions for up to 700 years. Mughal India? With a few notable exceptions there were no forced conversions there either. Thus only a small part of "desis" are Muslim.
A local mosque here got severely vandalized and attacked today.
I'm sure there's thousands of others across the country in which the same thing happened, but the media seems intent on focusing on Churches in the west bank. Both sides are suffering. When this shit happens, tensions, suspicious, and abuses against muslims rise. I've got nothing but extreme hate for those 'Imams' and Muslim religious leaders that respond with enticing violence and revenge. They're destroying their own cause and making millions of muslims around the world suffer. And regardless of what people here may believe, those individuals you see protesting and burning efigees are an extreme minority of the muslim population. The fact that they always get headlines is no coincidence. Its exciting and it makes waves. A muslim giving a rational response to the pope's statement wouldn't quite have the same impact.
How sickening.
I'm sure there's thousands of others across the country in which the same thing happened, but the media seems intent on focusing on Churches in the west bank. Both sides are suffering. When this shit happens, tensions, suspicious, and abuses against muslims rise. I've got nothing but extreme hate for those 'Imams' and Muslim religious leaders that respond with enticing violence and revenge. They're destroying their own cause and making millions of muslims around the world suffer. And regardless of what people here may believe, those individuals you see protesting and burning efigees are an extreme minority of the muslim population. The fact that they always get headlines is no coincidence. Its exciting and it makes waves. A muslim giving a rational response to the pope's statement wouldn't quite have the same impact.
How sickening.
- Status