Violence is not a cornerstone of Islam. It's like accusing Christians of being militant because we crusaded. Religions are typically peaceful organizations that have militant leaders who take it to far.
Printable View
Violence is not a cornerstone of Islam. It's like accusing Christians of being militant because we crusaded. Religions are typically peaceful organizations that have militant leaders who take it to far.
So you are saying the Muhammed was a peaceful man who wanted to spread the word of god, but got a little carried away with the robbing, raping, and murdering aspect of his "spiritual" life? Anyway, like I said, there will always be violent "muslim" insurgencies. As you mentioned about the Catholics (which by the way did their little crusade thing over a thousand years after christ's death) I'm not too worried about them. The worse their leaders do these days is bung stretching with the boys. Don't worry, I'll keep an eye out for these "militant christians". But to be honest with you, I'm a little more worried about the guys yelling Allah Akbar. They seem to be doing that a lot lately.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
MM, you fall into the trap that religions are basically the same - and ergo all want peace. The reality of all religions is that they are right and all others are wrong, but they are lenient enough to forgive the others ('til now, again). It is true that violence may not be a cornerstone of Islam or Christianity, but both were born upon it. With Christianity it was more a matter of the one winning determining what Christianity meant - versus Islam having the (accept Allah or die - pretty persuasive arguement in my book, especially to a desert people) spilt after the initial (39th profit) leader died.Quote:
Originally Posted by Marshal Murat
Now, that is an over simplification - but, reality is that religion in general is a trap. It justifies the killing of those that don't believe as one does and justifies it by excusing those committing the breaking of the first rule of (many) their commandment.
Regardless, it doesnot answer the question being posed - though it was presented in a prejudicial manner.
Point is, a religion becomes an event only to those that accept it as their reality of how to live their life, conduct it, and expand their religion. If anyone challanges their beliefs they automatically become their enemy.
Seriously, wtf was Bush thinking? Except, they were his enemy because they didn't accept Christ as their saviour. I, jest not.
There is not, nor ever has been anything peaceful about religion. It has always been a matter (as in all things) that those that win make their religion for everyone within their power the same.
Thems the facts.:book:
If I may be excused for moving the discussion away from stretched bungholes for a moment (thanks for the image, Dave), there's a really good article about current counterinsurgency operations in Iraq at the Small Wars Journal. Required reading if you want to get a grip on what's going on.
The "terrain" we are clearing is human terrain, not physical terrain. It is about marginalizing al Qa’ida, Shi’a extremist militias, and the other terrorist groups from the population they prey on. This is why claims that “80% of AQ leadership have fled” don’t overly disturb us: the aim is not to kill every last AQ leader, but rather to drive them off the population and keep them off, so that we can work with the community to prevent their return.
This is not some sort of kind-hearted, soft approach, as some fire-breathing polemicists have claimed (funnily enough, those who urge us to “just kill more bad guys” usually do so from a safe distance). It is not about being “nice” to the population and hoping they will somehow see us as the “good guys” and stop supporting insurgents. On the contrary, it is based on a hard-headed recognition of certain basic facts.
Nice to see someone has actually read a counterinsurgency manual. The comments on the article are just as informative:
This is modern war. We can no longer produce [a desired outcome] in a nuclear flash. Now it takes years and years of a slow, hard slog. You say that you don't like wars like that? Well, neither do we. The military personnel who would actually PREFER to grind through something counterinsurgency style rather than blast the enemy, plant your flag in his eye socket, and declare victory, are few and far between, if they exist at all. I'm not one of them. But what I, and my comrades here at the Small Wars Journal are, are professionals who know that you cant always get what you want.
So you're saying christianity was spread through peace? The people who resisted was not tortured and killed?Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Christianity was spread through the sword 90% of the time. Same as Islam.
Today, there are muslims spreading hate, and there are christians spreading hate. But there are also both christians and muslims doing the opposite, and they're both in the majority, fortunately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by HoreTore
More accurately, Christianity spread despite the (Roman) sword.
Islam was forged through violent slaughter.
Not this supremacist garbage again.
what supremacist garbage? :help:
Que PJ for starters.
Oh come on Watchman that isn't fair , I bet you couldn't find many examples of Christianity spreading by people being offered the choice of convert or die .Quote:
Que PJ for starters.
Whatever next eh , you are probably going to claim that christians dug up bodies and burnt them in a public dispay of love singing about gods greatness because the deceased had died following the wrong religeon .
Get with the program will you , christians don't do them sort of things , its only muslims .
Now then Furunculus , you had a question I believe ?
I'm really more concerned with the blatantly biased and tendentious undertones of the "Islam is an evil cult" line of reasoning. Because it basically boils down to their religion being worse than our religion for no other reason than them having done the exact same stuff everyone always does in comparable circumstances.
Double standards essentially.
Well, when the First Baptist Church of Westboro starts flying planes into the buildings of the US, then I'll worry about the "double standard".Quote:
Originally Posted by Watchman
After they had gained the power of the emperor, they started to spread it "through violent slaughter".Quote:
Originally Posted by PanzerJager
Islam and christianity is similar there, they were peaceful until they gained power(in arabia and the roman empire respectively), then they turned to slaughter.
Didn't you have those merry abortion-clinic bombers at some point ? I understand the Irish have some problems with comparable wonks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Anyway, in the case you missed it, I was referring to the historical perspective and particularly the glaring lack thereof in certain circles.
In fairness, we have had an ongoing problem with homegrown wackos blowing things up. Eric Rudolph, Tim McVeigh, James Copp, the Army of God, and every mouth-breathing wacko who plans to act on The Turner Diaries.Quote:
Originally Posted by Devastatin Dave
Ah the wonderful world of Dave , people who murder in the name of religeon are only people who murder in the name of religeon if they fly airplanes into buildings in the US...yep that makes sense .Quote:
Well, when the First Baptist Church of Westboro starts flying planes into the buildings of the US, then I'll worry about the "double standard".
Doesn't the US of A these days also host honest-to-God ecoterrists ? I think I read something along those lines in one of those quaint US cop mags our premiere bookstore stocks...
“I bet you couldn't find many examples of Christianity spreading by people being offered the choice of convert or die”: Saxons by Charlemagne, Albigeois, Cathares, in South France, Aztecs, Incas and other South Amerindians, just these represent millions of poeple…
Never bet when you speak about religions, espacially the monotheistic ones...:laugh4:
As I like to point out, the technically pacifist Buddhists have over the millenia engaged in their quota of more-or-less religiously inspired violence as well. Take the Ikko-ikki for one; pretty much the Japanese version of the German Peasants' War.
Brenus you win the bet :2thumbsup: care to name a few more ?Quote:
Never bet when you speak about religions, espacially the monotheistic ones...
Or how about the part about digging up and burning corpses for not being christian ?~;)
Conversation started out OK, then took a U-turn into the dark woods of religion-bashing. Therefore, thread is preemptively closed, before posters step over the line again, and get into trouble.
Thanks for all contributions. :bow: