Political correctness, anyone?

[gladius]

But I have to disagree with the "most intolerant" part of the post.

I have to disagree with you here, since I personaly know people who were not Muslims and live in the Middle East.

You live in Europe so you probably dont see it as much. But ask most ordinary citizens of majority Muslim country they will tell you that they are not treated and do not have their rights on equal status as Muslim citizens.

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform. I'm saying that there are enough bad ones (tens of millions or even more) who see to it that life is hard for the non-Muslims citizens who live in their country.

I wanted to point out that IMO most of the immigrants from the Arab world and the Islamic world that come to Europe are way more extremist than their counterparts back home.

You are right to a certain point. I don't know if they are more extremist, but they are the extremist that the governments over there dislike and they all go to Europe to escape.


The Moor's Last Laugh
Radical Islam finds a haven in Europe.
BY FOUAD AJAMI

"The whole Arab world was dangerous for me. I went to London." The words are those of an Egyptian Islamist, Yasser Sirri. In London, Sirri runs an Islamic "observation center" and agitates against the despotism of Hosni Mubarak...

Sirri was not working in a vacuum. The geography of Islam--and of the Islamic imagination--has shifted in recent years. The faith has become portable. Muslims who fled their countries brought Islam with them. Men came into bilad al kufr (the lands of unbelief), but a new breed of Islamists radicalized the faith there, in the midst of the kafir (unbeliever).

The new lands were owed scant loyalty, if any, and political-religious radicals savored the space afforded them by Western civil society. But they resented the logic of assimilation. They denied their sisters and daughters the right to mix with "strangers." You would have thought that the pluralism and tumult of this open European world would spawn a version of the faith to match it. But precisely the opposite happened. In bilad al kufr, the faith became sharpened for battle. We know that life in Hamburg--and the kind of Islam that Hamburg made possible--was decisive in the evolution of Mohammed Atta, who led the "death pilots" of Sept. 11...

http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110004879


Alot of the Muslim is Europe are actually following a more hard-line radical version of Islam. They do this to insulate themselves from European culture. Since their culture surrounding is an extreme one from that of their homeland, they have to be even more extreme themselves to keep thie beliefs. First time I realized this but it absolutely makes sense from their point of view.

 

[Stu]

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform. I'm saying that there are enough bad ones (tens of millions or even more) who see to it that life is hard for the non-Muslims citizens who live in their country.

I dont think its particularly fair you portray Muslim people as bad unless they reform. The view sounds as though your denouncing the religion and its followers as a whole, until they relinquish their beliefs..

While the issue is whether we should allow religious symbols in schools, previous posts have stretched the argument into tollerating the muslim religion in society at all. But what right does one culture calling itself democratic and allowing western religions to flourish in all radical forms have to ban or even speak out against those of the muslim world? We should treat the law as being culturally neutral, no matter what the case.

 

[gladius]

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform. I'm saying that there are enough bad ones (tens of millions or even more) who see to it that life is hard for the non-Muslims citizens who live in their country.

I dont think its particularly fair you portray Muslim people as bad unless they reform. The view sounds as though your denouncing the religion and its followers as a whole, until they relinquish their beliefs..

First of all I was talking about the conditions for most non-Muslims in Muslim coutries. BTW when did I say the Muslims need to relinquish their beliefs, nor did I lump them into one category, you are putting words in my mouth and adding non-facts, and the facts you dont pay attention to.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that life is not so easy for non-Muslim people who live in Muslim countries.

To you maybe the persecution of these people is good, to those being persecuted its bad.

I dont know if you see your own irony in that you advocate tolerance for those who are intolerant.

While the issue is whether we should allow religious symbols in schools, previous posts have stretched the argument into tollerating the muslim religion in society at all. But what right does one culture calling itself democratic and allowing western religions to flourish in all radical forms have to ban or even speak out against those of the muslim world? We should treat the law as being culturally neutral, no matter what the case.

How many terrorist acts have been done in the past few years for name of Islam compared to the Western religions even in all its radical forms?

How many please?

What's the ratio?

Clearly there is a problem here. Maybe somehow you dont see this.

 

[Stu]

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform. So I guess you are a ultra-rightist after all..

As for the 'putting words in my mouth comment', I quote myself just so you can read it again for what it is:

In response to you saying

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform.

I said

I dont think its particularly fair you portray Muslim people as bad unless they reform. The view sounds as though your denouncing the religion and its followers as a whole, until they relinquish their beliefs..

You portray a two dimensional circumstance wherein muslims are good if they reform, and bad if they dont.

Despite accusing me of mixing your words, you make your own stint about me disrespecting the plight of non-muslims in islamic states.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that life is not so easy for non-Muslim people who live in Muslim countries.

To you maybe the persecution of these people is good, to those being persecuted its bad.

I dont know if you see your own irony in that you advocate tolerance for those who are intolerant.

I never mentioned any such sentiments. Nor do I withold them. Don't take swipes just for your own ego's sake.

As for your perspective that Islamic religion is responsible for terrorism, I direct you to the centuries of violence in northern ireland, which of course any literate knows of. Of course theres also the little matter of the Spanish Inquisition, the most brutal group of the reformist era who tortured the sins out of poor souls accross Europe. Theres the Chinese and Japanese Buddhist fantatics of the 17-20th Centuries against converts, who became quite adept of mass beheadings and burning of churches. Theres the bombings and execution being performed right up to this day by radical groups in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and central asia in the name of Islam and Christianity.

So if you can be bothered go aheadand do a ratio of the number of conflicts, deaths, or injustice performed in the name of Islam compared to that of Christianity or others. Your misinformed, and I would encourage you to argue with facts instead of engrained political falacy.

 

[gladius]

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform. So I guess you are a ultra-rightist after all..

I'm not ultra-rightist, just merely rightist, and unlike you have common sense and is educated in the facts.

As for the 'putting words in my mouth comment', I quote myself just so you can read it again for what it is:

In response to you saying

I'm not saying all Muslims are bad, in fact there are those who want reform.

This is exactly what I said, and it is exactly the circumstnce going on in the Muslim world right now. A fact which you are totaly oblivious to. You make it as I was saying they are all bad.

There is a faction of Moderate Muslims who want to guide Islam into a more tolerant way of thinking one capable of dealing with the modern world, of which includes making peace with Israel, and the fair treatment of non-Muslims and women.

There is another faction of radical fundamentalist who want to keep it as it was in the 15th century, they are very intolerant of non-Muslims and absolutely hate Israel and want to see it destroyed, and they are very sympatethic to the terrorist. And are also the same one who make life hard for the non-Mulsims living in their country. According to your reasoning we should let them be and keep them going as is.

Do yourself a favor and educate yourself with something other than left-wing PC propaganda. Better yet get a real education.

I said

I dont think its particularly fair you portray Muslim people as bad unless they reform. The view sounds as though your denouncing the religion and its followers as a whole, until they relinquish their beliefs..

So you mean reliquishing their beliefs about supporting those killing innocent people in the name of Allah, ...that's a bad thing, to you apparently so.

You portray a two dimensional circumstance wherein muslims are good if they reform, and bad if they dont.

Your misleading comments make it as if I'm saying they should convert to another religion, when the case is there are those in the Muslim world that denounce alot of the radicalism such as sympathy for terrorist acts in the name of Allah, and the treatemant of non-Muslim (the very point I was adressing), which by the way, doesn't make them any less Muslim.

Your mentality comes from some self-absored totaly ignorant PC left-wing fantasy thinking. You are completely ignorant of the dynamics going on in the Muslim world regarding their views of the world as it regards to their religion. And yout trying to lecture me, please.

Ive been studying Islam and in its various forms and manifestations, including history and writings, as well as the mentality surround it, for around four years now, so please spare me your uneducated garbage.

Despite accusing me of mixing your words, you make your own stint about me disrespecting the plight of non-muslims in islamic states.

This plight of non-muslims in islamic states was the very fact I was addressing, and I gave an example of.

This is the very thing that you attacked by taking my statement and putting your wanna-be intelectual PC garbage comments trying to disregard it and making it something else.

(If you want I could even show the quotes like you did previously, but right now I'll save us the time)

You seem to be ignoring the fact that life is not so easy for non-Muslim people who live in Muslim countries.

To you maybe the persecution of these people is good, to those being persecuted its bad.

I dont know if you see your own irony in that you advocate tolerance for those who are intolerant.

I never mentioned any such sentiments. Nor do I withold them. Don't take swipes just for your own ego's sake.

You are saying you dont, but by simply defending Islam wholesale this is exactly what you are doing. So no I'm not taking a swipe for my own ego sake, I'm am simply putting into words what your actions are doing. Perhaps it is your own bloated ego (through being uneducated about the facts) that made you take such a misguided swipe at me in the first place.

In your ignorance you support Islam as is, even with all the bad that goes on for the sake of PC.

As for your perspective that Islamic religion is responsible for terrorism, I direct you to the centuries of violence in northern ireland, which of course any literate knows of. Of course theres also the little matter of the Spanish Inquisition, the most brutal group of the reformist era who tortured the sins out of poor souls accross Europe. Theres the Chinese and Japanese Buddhist fantatics of the 17-20th Centuries against converts, who became quite adept of mass beheadings and burning of churches. Theres the bombings and execution being performed right up to this day by radical groups in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and central asia in the name of Islam and Christianity.

So if you can be bothered go aheadand do a ratio of the number of conflicts, deaths, or injustice performed in the name of Islam compared to that of Christianity or others. Your misinformed, and I would encourage you to argue with facts instead of engrained political falacy.

Your lame examples are from decades and even centuries ago. The actions taken were already done.

What we are (in case maybe you are still living in a fantasy) is in the NOW. The present time.

Maybe people who are actually in the present (as in NOW) are merely being cautious because there is believe it or not, a real probelm here that needs to be addressed, when it comes to Islam.

The ones you mentioned about in Indonesia were spurred on by Islamic radical groups like Laskars Jihad who raised fighters to wage jihad against the Christians living there. Again you prove your ignorance on this subject. Not to mention it only points to the fact that there is indeed a problem within the Muslim religion, one which in fact adresses that non-Muslims in Muslim countries are not treated well, as I was saying originally.

If people are just simply ultra-right or bigots like you want everyone to believe. How come for the most part they do not come against Buddisim, or Hinduism, some of which have the same populations in some Western countries as do Muslims? Please answer me this before we go on. I would like to know.

 

[Redneck]

This is coming a little late, but this thread is locked until further notice.


gladius and Stu, personal attacks are not permitted on these forums.