"Islam vs Islamists"

[Crazed Rabbit]

A film commissioned by PBS in America, then dropped due to political pressure and not aired on PBS.

I was lucky to stumble upon it whilst flicking through TV an hour and a half ago.

A very interesting, though sadly short (only an hour long, left me wanting more, which is good).

The main point about the Islamic community in the US is that the vast majority are moderate, but the voice of the community is controlled by organizations that favor sharia law and an Islamic state - islamists. So the voice of the moderates does not exist. And it seems that a significant fraction at least view the world through a islamist lens.

In Europe, they showed several moderate Muslims who had to receive constant police protection for speaking out against extremists. It also seemed that the leaders of the communities were more radical than in the US, stronger supporters of sharia law and Islamic states, and that the Muslim communities, though not advocators of violence, were more likely to support sharia law in their countries. They also focused on the radical, violent extremists who threatened death for daring to participate in the democratic process.

Thoughts?

Crazed Rabbit

[Watchman]

It's always the zealots who shout the loudest ? What next, the Sahara is dry ?

[AntiochusIII]

Put it another way, most "moderate" Muslims don't care, and in many ways they shouldn't. An extremist Islamist considers himself first and foremost a Muslim; it is his life's duty to do whatever it takes for the Cause. A moderate Muslim doesn't go around his daily life keeping in mind his religion all the time. He doesn't necessarily actively go out and search for Islamic organizations he can join, participate, and spew out rhetoric on.

The disproportionate voice is the result.

I do agree with you however that there is indeed a problem with these organizations "improperly" interfering with the lives of the people they're supposed to represent, and get away with it. I wish the governments would do a better job of preventing these kinds of repression from happening, though they usually either "placate" the wrong people the wrong way or pursue repressive populist measures that discriminate unnecessarily all the time.

Moreover, another angle of this antagonism can be seen in another thread around here, that one where the OP poster talked about his experience with the prejudices of his family. One finds a surprisingly high number of examples of ordinary "Westerners" who hold prejudices against Middle Easterners. I'd not be surprised if that provokes a kind of response from the "Muslims."

[Crazed Rabbit]

It's always the zealots who shout the loudest ? What next, the Sahara is dry ?

No, it's only the zealots who are shouting. And even in the USA it is only the Islamists who have a voice in politics.

Given the ever increasing amount of people they represent and what they preach, you'd think that be somewhat relevant.

The film also focused on the organizer of the tour of the Danish cartoons through the middle east, which as you know featured many cartoons not in the Danish paper. The organizer, a Muslim living in Europe, spoke of the need for dialog and tolerance to the western press, and then incited hatred and outrage in the middle east.

CR

[DemonArchangel]

Such a large proportion of humanity can't all possibly be monsters. Then who's the bogeyman here? The radicals are insane, to be sure, but what's the root cause of their radicalism?

[Whacker]

The radicals are insane, to be sure, but what's the root cause of their radicalism?

Ignorance and intolerance.

[The Wizard]

Wille zur Macht.

[Fragony]

Such a large proportion of humanity can't all possibly be monsters. Then who's the bogeyman here? The radicals are insane, to be sure, but what's the root cause of their radicalism?

What is closest at hand, identity. They identify more with them then they do with us, done by force or gentle pressure. Problem is multiculture, or bipopular culture because that is where we are.

[HoreTore]

No, it's only the zealots who are shouting. And even in the USA it is only the Islamists who have a voice in politics.

Given the ever increasing amount of people they represent and what they preach, you'd think that be somewhat relevant.

It's not that way here, at least. Can't say I've heard much from these supposed radicals. The rest join the established political parties here, and so have no need to preach about "moderate islam", they're busy preaching their party's politics.

[Viking]

Poor countries with poor educational systems breeds fanatism and bigotry.

[Navaros]

Rather than Islam vs. Islamists, it's more accurately stated like:

Koran-believing Muslims vs. non-Koran-believing Muslims who cherrypick which particular verses of the Koran they want to believe in, pretend the rest does not exist, and then call themselves Muslims anyways.

Poor countries with poor educational systems breeds fanatism and bigotry.

And what do rich countries with rich educational systems breed? Secular humanism and all the ills which ruin society that brings with it. Including legalized genocide of children via "abortion", rampant fornication and promiscuity & STDs, broken homes, hatred of God, all possible manner of crimes and immorality etc. etc.

All things that at least the Muslim world doesn't have to anywhere near such an extent as the "enlightened societies" do. Therefore, it's not like the "enlightened societies" are any better or have any moral highground.

As for breeding bigotry, based on the replies in this thread - which are standard far for any discussion of Muslims with convictions who believe in the Koran - it is quite evident that "enlightened societies" also breed bigotry. Look at all the new (and some old, which are newly applied to Koran-believing Muslims) bigoted words that have been fabricated in recent years and adopted the commonly understood context for the sake of slurring Muslims who actually believe in the Koran. Muslims who believe in the Koran are called "fanatics", "Islamists", "extremists", "radicals", "terrorists" (I realize terrorist fits in some cases where it is used, but not most) etc. etc. All hateful, bigoted words which attempt to mock Muslim beliefs and impose that their beliefs are wrong and secular humanism is right. The only ones who are not slurred with these bad words are ones who believe little to none of the Koran. That's bigotry in action.

The Koran is not a "moderate" book, therefore the phrase "moderate Muslim" is pretty much an oxmoron. "Moderate Muslim" is basically just code words for "Muslim who does not really take the Koran seriously and instead adheres mostly to the secular humanism agenda (which runs contrary to the content of the Koran) of 'enlightened society'."

[Ice]

And what do rich countries with rich educational systems breed? Secular humanism and all the ills which ruin society that brings with it.

Yes, logic and reason tends to do that.

Including legalized genocide of children via "abortion"

,

I don't recall be taught in school that abortion was good. I also take issue in what you call a "child".

rampant fornication and promiscuity & STDs

Actually, health classes usually teach the opposite. They stress not having sex is is the only sure way to prevent pregnancies and STDS. They do give information if you need to have sex, to make it as safe as it could be.

broken homes

Ah, so this exists nowhere else in the world?

, hatred of God

Hating god(s) and not believing in some story that was passed down over thousands of years isn't really the same.

all possible manner of crimes and immorality etc. etc.

Rofl. Enough said there.

It's late, but I have issues with your entire argument. However, I will address this.

In other words, your argument doesn't really hold water. Nothing new though. This is typical Nav trying to shove his religious views down other's throats.

[Tribesman]

In other words, your argument doesn't really hold water. Nothing new though. This is typical Nav trying to shove his religious views down other's throats.

Its OK ice , Nav has done with his pretending to be a radical fundamentalist "Christian" since he found it too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the bible , now he is pretending to be a radical fundamentlist "Muslim" , it will only last until he finds that it is too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the Koran .
So any bets on which flavour of radical fundamentalism he will move onto next ? Scientology perhaps ?

[Navaros]

In other words, your argument doesn't really hold water. Nothing new though. This is typical Nav trying to shove his religious views down other's throats.

Its OK ice , Nav has done with his pretending to be a radical fundamentalist "Christian" since he found it too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the bible , now he is pretending to be a radical fundamentlist "Muslim" , it will only last until he finds that it is too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the Koran .
So any bets on which flavour of radical fundamentalism he will move onto next ? Scientology perhaps ?

In reply to Ice: More like I'm putting up dissent against secular humanist society which tries to shove it's views down everyone's throats, and labels anyone who doesn't agree with the secular humanist agenda with slur words such as the ones used in the original post, ie: "Islamist". The TV program and ideas described in the OP are manifestations of that.

In reply to Tribes: I've never pretended anything, I resent that remark quite a bit. Nor am I pretending to be a Muslim. I'm not a Muslim. However, I respect the conviction and belief in morality that is present in Muslims and their societies. And anyone else who has conviction and stands up for morality and moral societies; although that is not very many in modern times. Conviction and morality are admirable traits that are worthy of respect and honor.

[Tribesman]

Conviction and morality are admirable traits that are worthy of respect and honor.

bollox , not when the conviction and morality is fundamentally flawed as is the case with radical fundamentalists who (contrary to your assertions about it being modrerate cherrypicking passages and tenets of faith) only cherrypick the craziest passages due to them being absolute nuts .

[DemonArchangel]

In reply to Ice: More like I'm putting up dissent against secular humanist society which tries to shove it's views down everyone's throats, and labels anyone who doesn't agree with the secular humanist agenda with slur words such as the ones used in the original post, ie: "Islamist". The TV program and ideas described in the OP are manifestations of that.

Oh gee, I'm sure you consider advocating suicide bombing, terrorism, random kidnapping/decapitation, killing of innocent civilians regardless of guilt, more or less random stoning of people, "honor" killings, female genital mutilation and other activities in that vein as HIGHLY moral.

It's not my business what you do with your body, and it shouldn't be yours what I do with mine, but to stand up for suicide bombings and the like is utterly reprehensible, and certainly shows your respect for morals and human life.

[Husar]

Aren't we all a bit nuts?

[CrossLOPER]

Its OK ice , Nav has done with his pretending to be a radical fundamentalist "Christian" since he found it too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the bible , now he is pretending to be a radical fundamentlist "Muslim" , it will only last until he finds that it is too hard due to the contradictory nature of some passages in the Koran .
So any bets on which flavour of radical fundamentalism he will move onto next ? Scientology perhaps ?

I thought he became Jewish...

[Banquo's Ghost]

Once again, I need to remind members that insulting others, no matter how we disagree with their positions, is not welcome in this forum.

[Tribesman]

Once again, I need to remind members that insulting others, no matter how we disagree with their positions, is not welcome in this forum.

Come off it , the views posted are insulting to both Christians and Muslims as well as being insulting to to those who follow no faith .
In fact they are insulting to anyone who isn't crazy fundamentalist .

[Whacker]

Come off it , the views posted are insulting to both Christians and Muslims as well as being insulting to to those who follow no faith .
In fact they are insulting to anyone who isn't crazy fundamentalist .

Hell has frozen over officially, I finally agree w/Tribes on something.

[CrossLOPER]

I'm going to try to approach this without "shoving my beliefs down your throat".

Rather than Islam vs. Islamists, it's more accurately stated like:

Koran-believing Muslims vs. non-Koran-believing Muslims who cherrypick which particular verses of the Koran they want to believe in, pretend the rest does not exist, and then call themselves Muslims anyways.

That's called "interpretation". Some people interpret that God wants you to go to soldiers funerals and damn them to Hell for fighting for a country with gays in it.. Others don't.

And what do rich countries with rich educational systems breed? Secular humanism and all the ills which ruin society that brings with it. Including legalized genocide of children via "abortion",

Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of an ethnic, religious or national group. Not going further than that.

rampant fornication and promiscuity & STDs,broken homes, hatred of God, all possible manner of crimes and immorality etc. etc.

Not unique to "secular" societies.

All things that at least the Muslim world doesn't have to anywhere near such an extent as the "enlightened societies" do. Therefore, it's not like the "enlightened societies" are any better or have any moral highground.

I don't think that societies as a whole are being denounced.

As for breeding bigotry, based on the replies in this thread - which are standard far for any discussion of Muslims with convictions who believe in the Koran - it is quite evident that "enlightened societies" also breed bigotry.

Wow. I actually find this argument sound. However, I don't think anyone here denies this.

Look at all the new (and some old, which are newly applied to Koran-believing Muslims) bigoted words that have been fabricated in recent years and adopted the commonly understood context for the sake of slurring Muslims who actually believe in the Koran. Muslims who believe in the Koran are called "fanatics", "Islamists", "extremists", "radicals", "terrorists" (I realize terrorist fits in some cases where it is used, but not most) etc. etc. All hateful, bigoted words which attempt to mock Muslim beliefs and impose that their beliefs are wrong and secular humanism is right. The only ones who are not slurred with these bad words are ones who believe little to none of the Koran. That's bigotry in action.

I think most people just have a problem with the whole "suicide bombing random civilians is OK" thing. This does not apply solely to "Islamists", in the sense of atrocities, but the point remains.

The Koran is not a "moderate" book, therefore the phrase "moderate Muslim" is pretty much an oxmoron. "Moderate Muslim" is basically just code words for "Muslim who does not really take the Koran seriously and instead adheres mostly to the secular humanism agenda (which runs contrary to the content of the Koran) of 'enlightened society'."

I think this could be approached in much the same way you approach the Christian religion. You don't stone gays and adulterers and you don't beat slaves.

[Ronin]

Come off it , the views posted are insulting to both Christians and Muslims as well as being insulting to to those who follow no faith .
In fact they are insulting to anyone who isn't crazy fundamentalist .

agreed....if we can´t post a reply were you say white is white and black is black we´re going in a very bad direction here....

all the message warnings I ever received have been relating to replies to Navarros posts....I mean no insult to the man but when he posts something that 99.9% of the backroom goes against simple reason I don´t see how calling him out on it is "insulting".....I´d be insulting my own intelligence if I said nothing.

defending personal feelings is one things...but putting them over common sense if one step too far.

[Viking]

Rather than Islam vs. Islamists, it's more accurately stated like:

Koran-believing Muslims vs. non-Koran-believing Muslims who cherrypick which particular verses of the Koran they want to believe in, pretend the rest does not exist, and then call themselves Muslims anyways.



And what do rich countries with rich educational systems breed? Secular humanism and all the ills which ruin society that brings with it. Including legalized genocide of children via "abortion", rampant fornication and promiscuity & STDs, broken homes, hatred of God, all possible manner of crimes and immorality etc. etc.

All things that at least the Muslim world doesn't have to anywhere near such an extent as the "enlightened societies" do. Therefore, it's not like the "enlightened societies" are any better or have any moral highground.

As for breeding bigotry, based on the replies in this thread - which are standard far for any discussion of Muslims with convictions who believe in the Koran - it is quite evident that "enlightened societies" also breed bigotry. Look at all the new (and some old, which are newly applied to Koran-believing Muslims) bigoted words that have been fabricated in recent years and adopted the commonly understood context for the sake of slurring Muslims who actually believe in the Koran. Muslims who believe in the Koran are called "fanatics", "Islamists", "extremists", "radicals", "terrorists" (I realize terrorist fits in some cases where it is used, but not most) etc. etc. All hateful, bigoted words which attempt to mock Muslim beliefs and impose that their beliefs are wrong and secular humanism is right. The only ones who are not slurred with these bad words are ones who believe little to none of the Koran. That's bigotry in action.

The Koran is not a "moderate" book, therefore the phrase "moderate Muslim" is pretty much an oxmoron. "Moderate Muslim" is basically just code words for "Muslim who does not really take the Koran seriously and instead adheres mostly to the secular humanism agenda (which runs contrary to the content of the Koran) of 'enlightened society'."

Enlightment in its true meaning is never a bad thing, logically only shady agendas oppose it.

[Banquo's Ghost]

Come off it , the views posted are insulting to both Christians and Muslims as well as being insulting to to those who follow no faith .
In fact they are insulting to anyone who isn't crazy fundamentalist .

agreed....if we can´t post a reply were you say white is white and black is black we´re going in a very bad direction here....

all the message warnings I ever received have been relating to replies to Navarros posts....I mean no insult to the man but when he posts something that 99.9% of the backroom goes against simple reason I don´t see how calling him out on it is "insulting".....I´d be insulting my own intelligence if I said nothing.

defending personal feelings is one things...but putting them over common sense if one step too far.

To be clear:

I did not say that you cannot challenge views that you find wrong.

What I will not allow are insults against the patron you disagree with.

Acceptable examples:

"Your views are wrong and this is why."

"I find your opinions insulting and this is why."

Unacceptable examples:

"It takes a special breed to be as insane as x"

"You are a retard and demonstrate the inadequacy of education in x."

I'm pretty sure you gentlemen know the difference, which is why I tire of reminding you every third thread.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Rather than Islam vs. Islamists, it's more accurately stated like:

Koran-believing Muslims vs. non-Koran-believing Muslims who cherrypick which particular verses of the Koran they want to believe in, pretend the rest does not exist, and then call themselves Muslims anyways.

Isn't that exactly what you have done with the Bible though? You didn't like the NT message of forgiveness so you rejected Jesus and kept the OT which allows you to harang people for being sinners.