Good things about Islam?
- Thread starter wwpetcemetery
- Start date
dougyfresh1616
Member
Devokan-
You have a point about terroristic tactics being used by larger, more powerful countries. I was mainly thinking in terms of actual armed conflict. I will have to consider what you say further.
I don't know if I would define terrorism as "new war" per se however. Certainly the mode has changed somewhat with the advent of global media, however, a quick peak theough history has shown that the intent and process has appeared throughout the history of warfare. I mean, look at Hannibal. While on his way through Italy, he effectively slaughtered the first Roman town that offered resistance- an act that he knew would affect how other towns reacted to him. How far away is that from what we are considering now?
Anyway, at this point we might just be argueing semantics, so I will stop and go get ready for class.
You have a point about terroristic tactics being used by larger, more powerful countries. I was mainly thinking in terms of actual armed conflict. I will have to consider what you say further.
I don't know if I would define terrorism as "new war" per se however. Certainly the mode has changed somewhat with the advent of global media, however, a quick peak theough history has shown that the intent and process has appeared throughout the history of warfare. I mean, look at Hannibal. While on his way through Italy, he effectively slaughtered the first Roman town that offered resistance- an act that he knew would affect how other towns reacted to him. How far away is that from what we are considering now?
Anyway, at this point we might just be argueing semantics, so I will stop and go get ready for class.
Hmm, that explains why she asked about the life insurance and then mumbled something about me being worth more dead than alive.....
Or the time I passed out form blood loss at the top of the stairs and she said she was tempted (but just for a moment) to give me a little push....
Or the time I passed out form blood loss at the top of the stairs and she said she was tempted (but just for a moment) to give me a little push....
bballgurlis
Member
Islam, at it's core, is really no different than any other religion. It's the people that want to control other people that twist the Koran (Bible, Torah, etc) to get their point across that dirty up the religion.
My wife's family are the sweetest people that you've ever met. Well educated, middle class, down to earth people. Heavily involved in enviromentalism, women's rights, conservationism. You can't paint all Muslims with the same brush.
My wife's family are the sweetest people that you've ever met. Well educated, middle class, down to earth people. Heavily involved in enviromentalism, women's rights, conservationism. You can't paint all Muslims with the same brush.
KillerBeeFanny
New member
WARNING: common sense is threatening to break out in this thread once more!
HenryJensen
New member
I'd really like for you to indicate where I or other posters here have been doing that.
You and Tekken are currently the ones who keep stating that 911 was driven by Religion. Ditto the London and Spain bombings. You're the one that stated that the only way suicide bombing made sense was in the context of a belief in an afterlife.
I'm pretty sure the rest of us have said, "yes, religion is involved" -- but it's not the sole factor. And many of us have been dropping scholarly references to support our point. You and Tekken continue down the "my proof is my logic and how we feel, and how dare anyone try and suggest we may not have enough knowledge to make an informed decision on this."
I'm not trying to be snarky. I am suggesting that your accusing us of a simplistic arguement that we're not making.
- Matt
You and Tekken are currently the ones who keep stating that 911 was driven by Religion. Ditto the London and Spain bombings. You're the one that stated that the only way suicide bombing made sense was in the context of a belief in an afterlife.
I'm pretty sure the rest of us have said, "yes, religion is involved" -- but it's not the sole factor. And many of us have been dropping scholarly references to support our point. You and Tekken continue down the "my proof is my logic and how we feel, and how dare anyone try and suggest we may not have enough knowledge to make an informed decision on this."
I'm not trying to be snarky. I am suggesting that your accusing us of a simplistic arguement that we're not making.
- Matt
I cant honestly remember.
I would have to look it up, and I cant actually be bothered to put myself out for you since you seem to have anti muslim agenda.
Like I said before it easy to quote out of context with the pretext of spreading religous and racial hatred, it is harder to learn and understand, that takes effort and inteligence.
I strongly suggest you research the context yourself, you might learn something
May Allah guide you to the truth
I would have to look it up, and I cant actually be bothered to put myself out for you since you seem to have anti muslim agenda.
Like I said before it easy to quote out of context with the pretext of spreading religous and racial hatred, it is harder to learn and understand, that takes effort and inteligence.
I strongly suggest you research the context yourself, you might learn something
May Allah guide you to the truth
elkduckdog20
New member
so what argument are you making exactly? so far its been very much "blame every socio-economic factor i can touch. not religion" do you agree or disagree that a belief in afterlife is required for a suicide bombing? i think you'd almost have to.
so if you cant' remember how are you going to tell him hes got it wrong? again, given the directness of that quote, its hard to take anything out of context. Anti-muslim agenda? no not quite, i think more over trying to show whats in plain view, there are bad ideas being promoted. you can very readily get the extremeist world view from the koran and the bible, otherwise, we wouldn't be seeing it spread so quickly. Anti-organized religion? yeah, Anti-irrationality? you bet. anti-terrorist. now thats the important one.
but thats about all you're doing, is saying "you suck your argument is crap blah!" would you like to maybe show me what it is you disagree with? how or why you think that? again, i ask you to form your own cognitive counter-argument, maybe even quote someone else if need be, that might work better than saying "you suck blah!" and following me from thread to thread.
and yes, your religious affiliation is important, you've yet to claim one, and it would probably clarify your argumenative position if you did. so feel free to disclose that relevant info any time you wish.....
so if you cant' remember how are you going to tell him hes got it wrong? again, given the directness of that quote, its hard to take anything out of context. Anti-muslim agenda? no not quite, i think more over trying to show whats in plain view, there are bad ideas being promoted. you can very readily get the extremeist world view from the koran and the bible, otherwise, we wouldn't be seeing it spread so quickly. Anti-organized religion? yeah, Anti-irrationality? you bet. anti-terrorist. now thats the important one.
but thats about all you're doing, is saying "you suck your argument is crap blah!" would you like to maybe show me what it is you disagree with? how or why you think that? again, i ask you to form your own cognitive counter-argument, maybe even quote someone else if need be, that might work better than saying "you suck blah!" and following me from thread to thread.
and yes, your religious affiliation is important, you've yet to claim one, and it would probably clarify your argumenative position if you did. so feel free to disclose that relevant info any time you wish.....
vaibhavrohal
New member
Tekkengod,
You've had very little if anything of relevance to add throughout this entire thread. Again you're working out your own issues via a thread that encompasses a broader spectrum of issues that you seem to be able to understand or are really able to repsond to.
Go back and read the original post and look carefully at the quesiton that was asked. Then go and look at the vast majority of the historically accurate infomation that I've posted - and what has your response been to any of it?
Not much of anything coherent or accurate.
You've had several thousand words worth of historically accurate information from credible sources to comment on... much of it by qualified and internationally respected academics on the subject... yet you seem to think that responding with retarded one liners is an arguement.
Wake up.
You haven't even got an arguement that is germain to the original question. But you don't seem to be able to understand that.
The whole point is... if you want to use the new words you're learning and be able to discuss the issues it helps if you stay on topic and drop your pathetic attitude. It simply marks you as a dimwit with a snarl. Nothing new about that in online forums.
Perhaps you could actually respond to some of the content in the thread - that is if you even bothered to read it. Maybe you could give us your take on the piece on Orientalism by Edward Said.
Perhaps you could explain in accurate terms why socio-economic factors are such a lesser influence than religion in this whole issue. Knock yourself out and back that up with some sort of credible, historically accurate evidence supporting it.
Do something... anything... but your generic soapbox stance is by this point long since stale and sorely off topic. Either learn how to respond with comments germain to the thread or go back to living your wannabe rebel lifestyle in the religion forum with your goofy ass sidekicks.
You've had very little if anything of relevance to add throughout this entire thread. Again you're working out your own issues via a thread that encompasses a broader spectrum of issues that you seem to be able to understand or are really able to repsond to.
Go back and read the original post and look carefully at the quesiton that was asked. Then go and look at the vast majority of the historically accurate infomation that I've posted - and what has your response been to any of it?
Not much of anything coherent or accurate.
You've had several thousand words worth of historically accurate information from credible sources to comment on... much of it by qualified and internationally respected academics on the subject... yet you seem to think that responding with retarded one liners is an arguement.
Wake up.
You haven't even got an arguement that is germain to the original question. But you don't seem to be able to understand that.
The whole point is... if you want to use the new words you're learning and be able to discuss the issues it helps if you stay on topic and drop your pathetic attitude. It simply marks you as a dimwit with a snarl. Nothing new about that in online forums.
Perhaps you could actually respond to some of the content in the thread - that is if you even bothered to read it. Maybe you could give us your take on the piece on Orientalism by Edward Said.
Perhaps you could explain in accurate terms why socio-economic factors are such a lesser influence than religion in this whole issue. Knock yourself out and back that up with some sort of credible, historically accurate evidence supporting it.
Do something... anything... but your generic soapbox stance is by this point long since stale and sorely off topic. Either learn how to respond with comments germain to the thread or go back to living your wannabe rebel lifestyle in the religion forum with your goofy ass sidekicks.
CowardlyLion
New member
God -- can your read or are you SO ideolgoically blinded that you conciously ignroe the contents of my post:
Note above:
1. I factor relgion
2. I bring proof of non-reglious groups (Communist/Socialist) and relgious groups that don't have a specific belief in an afterlife (Shinto Japanese Suicide Bombers/Kamazees).
Oh and did you miss this one from Homer.
Hmmm more purely nonreglious suicide bombers. And the Tamil tigers also point to both nationalism and a group fighting a percieved "occupation." Hmmm other patterns emerging.
But I guess you didn't read those. Cause you sure are not responding to them.As far as:Hmm... Boy, I guess I really haven't been specific in previous posts. Oh wait, yes I have. let's see:
So son, let's review:
1. I do account for religion. I suggest further (and back up with evidence) that it's a factor but not the only one. I even present evidence to suggest WHY you can't take reglion as the primary factor -- numerous times.
2. You disregard anything that runs counter to your intentionally ignorant world view and announce it's all about religion and the rest of us are denying that.
3. I present all of this evidence to counter that.
4. You present your intentional ignorance by again ignoring the facts in front of you and saying that all of us are denying the religious role.
Basically, here's the deal. You are no where near as smart as Rush Libmaugh, Sean Hannity, and other are telling you that you are. Either that or your just intellectually lazy and willfully ignorant. Or you just can't read. Either way, the debate train left a while ago and clearly you never made it on it. So please feel free to jump on the ideology train. Here's the update from the flight deck:
*kisht* this is your captain speaking, everyone look out to the right hand side and wave at the "islamofascist train" that is on a parrellel track to us. *kisht*
In otherwords, hello pot, this is the "islamofascist" (I know you recognize that phrase because you hear it on the radio and foxnews) kettle calling -- you're black.
My recommendations - actually read the posts that you're responding to. Actually read a critical work of analysis on the middle east. Chances you will do either -- next to nothing.
Either way, how bout you not try posting until you can bring some actual evidence to support your views to the table.
- Matt
ps. feel free to attack my spelling and gammer -- cause that's currently the only leg you have to stand on.
Note above:
1. I factor relgion
2. I bring proof of non-reglious groups (Communist/Socialist) and relgious groups that don't have a specific belief in an afterlife (Shinto Japanese Suicide Bombers/Kamazees).
Oh and did you miss this one from Homer.
Hmmm more purely nonreglious suicide bombers. And the Tamil tigers also point to both nationalism and a group fighting a percieved "occupation." Hmmm other patterns emerging.
But I guess you didn't read those. Cause you sure are not responding to them.As far as:Hmm... Boy, I guess I really haven't been specific in previous posts. Oh wait, yes I have. let's see:
So son, let's review:
1. I do account for religion. I suggest further (and back up with evidence) that it's a factor but not the only one. I even present evidence to suggest WHY you can't take reglion as the primary factor -- numerous times.
2. You disregard anything that runs counter to your intentionally ignorant world view and announce it's all about religion and the rest of us are denying that.
3. I present all of this evidence to counter that.
4. You present your intentional ignorance by again ignoring the facts in front of you and saying that all of us are denying the religious role.
Basically, here's the deal. You are no where near as smart as Rush Libmaugh, Sean Hannity, and other are telling you that you are. Either that or your just intellectually lazy and willfully ignorant. Or you just can't read. Either way, the debate train left a while ago and clearly you never made it on it. So please feel free to jump on the ideology train. Here's the update from the flight deck:
*kisht* this is your captain speaking, everyone look out to the right hand side and wave at the "islamofascist train" that is on a parrellel track to us. *kisht*
In otherwords, hello pot, this is the "islamofascist" (I know you recognize that phrase because you hear it on the radio and foxnews) kettle calling -- you're black.
My recommendations - actually read the posts that you're responding to. Actually read a critical work of analysis on the middle east. Chances you will do either -- next to nothing.
Either way, how bout you not try posting until you can bring some actual evidence to support your views to the table.
- Matt
ps. feel free to attack my spelling and gammer -- cause that's currently the only leg you have to stand on.
thesweetest
New member
i would agree with that. My view of the problem within the Muslim world is that too many of the radicals using Islam to justify their action do not study and interpret, rather follow a literal interpretation of the text and then claim to speak for all of Islam.
The silence coming from the rest of the Muslim world gives everybody else the impression that it is indeed the fanatics hold the widely accepted view.
Moderate Islam needs to denounce the extremists. Loudly. Unequivoquely.
The problem with translations is that you have to be very carefull in choosing wich translation. You need a translation that was intended for followers of that faith who struggle with the original language.
The silence coming from the rest of the Muslim world gives everybody else the impression that it is indeed the fanatics hold the widely accepted view.
Moderate Islam needs to denounce the extremists. Loudly. Unequivoquely.
The problem with translations is that you have to be very carefull in choosing wich translation. You need a translation that was intended for followers of that faith who struggle with the original language.
i think there is something is the religion about not revealing the sins of others and there is something about it is for Allah to judge what is in mens hearts and who is a good muslim etc not man, however i dont have all the details to hand.
true but its a translation is a good start.
I was recommended this one http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/
the copy I have also has extensive commenteries to the text, which is really very usefull.
true but its a translation is a good start.
I was recommended this one http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/
the copy I have also has extensive commenteries to the text, which is really very usefull.
bemoretee24
New member
Everything is not about politics, just as everything is not about religion. Just because some events in the past were about politics does not mean there are not conflicts in which religion is at the heart of the dispute.
I’m purely interested. You’re quick to participate in these discussions on religion so I would just like to know your position… for example, do you believe in God etc? I cant see any reason why you would be hesitant to reveal this.
Yes, it is physically possible, but, the fact someone can do both of these acts does not mean you going to find every depressed person contemplating suicide carrying out a suicide bombing. Pretty much everyone could fire a gun, and pretty much everyone can cause violence, yet everyone is not of the mental disposition required to be capable of going on a randomly killing spree.
Suicide bombing is about conveying a message. You have to be of a serious state of mind to want to make a statement by blowing yourself up.
I mean what I said… Even if a soldier is willing to fight to the death you don’t get him saying: “we love death more than the infidel loves life.” You do however get terrorists carrying out suicide attacks in the name of Allah saying this. Additionally, suicide bombers intend to die, whereas while soldiers may be willing to die, they nearly all would perfer not to.
Yes, but I’ve not done this. I acknowledge the political influence. Remember, I agreed politics is usually the motivation in planning an attack. However one must look at the individual cases before saying whether religion is or isn’t the bigger factor, and when looking at Iraq, I hold that it is more of an influence than people admit to.
I don’t think no one can deny religion is at the core of the political differences. Both sides obtain their world view from their respective religions, which in turn shapes their political views…
I’m purely interested. You’re quick to participate in these discussions on religion so I would just like to know your position… for example, do you believe in God etc? I cant see any reason why you would be hesitant to reveal this.
Yes, it is physically possible, but, the fact someone can do both of these acts does not mean you going to find every depressed person contemplating suicide carrying out a suicide bombing. Pretty much everyone could fire a gun, and pretty much everyone can cause violence, yet everyone is not of the mental disposition required to be capable of going on a randomly killing spree.
Suicide bombing is about conveying a message. You have to be of a serious state of mind to want to make a statement by blowing yourself up.
I mean what I said… Even if a soldier is willing to fight to the death you don’t get him saying: “we love death more than the infidel loves life.” You do however get terrorists carrying out suicide attacks in the name of Allah saying this. Additionally, suicide bombers intend to die, whereas while soldiers may be willing to die, they nearly all would perfer not to.
Yes, but I’ve not done this. I acknowledge the political influence. Remember, I agreed politics is usually the motivation in planning an attack. However one must look at the individual cases before saying whether religion is or isn’t the bigger factor, and when looking at Iraq, I hold that it is more of an influence than people admit to.
I don’t think no one can deny religion is at the core of the political differences. Both sides obtain their world view from their respective religions, which in turn shapes their political views…
AlexisInfectious®
Active member
I mean generally, in society. Many people simply will not admit to the bad things of religion, such as that one can use the Koran to justify some terrible actions. The response many people give is that this isn’t real Islam, but rather a ‘hijacked’ version. Some people tend to place religion has far down the list of causes/influences of conflicts in an attempt to make it insignificant. I disagree with this as how one views reality is significantly, if not entirely derived from ones [religious] beliefs. Hence religion can never not be a big factor, even if it isn’t directly obvious. Our beliefs influence every single thing we do. (This is why I will also question why people believe what they believe). Our religious beliefs also separate us from being merely human beings, thus creating differences. So while I completely agree that the political state of the world is the key motivating factor, I hold that the reason for these political differences is again rooted in our perception of reality.
Mistystars
New member
If you can’t remember how can you say it is out of context? Or do you hold any passage that conveys violence to be out of context be default?
As for an anti-Muslim agenda… no, I’m merely pointing out something which I can virtually guarantee has been read by the terrorists who carry out is content.
As for an anti-Muslim agenda… no, I’m merely pointing out something which I can virtually guarantee has been read by the terrorists who carry out is content.
FUZZYlWUZZYWUZANEWF
New member
Ok, Homer, provide proof that religion is the primary motivation in the current Middle East conflict.