Another act of violence has been perpetrated by "ally" Afghan National Army troop(s) against U.S. soldiers. It sounds like these people really don't want our help and would rather see their country deteriorate into chaos. Kinda makes you wonder if we should waste our time. The link below has the full story.
http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2012/02/23/Afghan-soldier-kills-2-US-soldiers/UPI-66781330001572/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTell me, which Surah of the Quran this verse comes from:
ReplyDeleteBut those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.
Trick question: the verse in question is Luke 19:27. Islam is not unique in possessing holy writings advocating violence against non-believers.
Further, Islam is not unique in acting on violent religious beliefs. During the Middle Ages, the Islamic world was a relative bastion of tolerance compared to the Christian world. Jews, Muslims, and Christians lived side by side. Sure, non-Muslims were not equal citizens, but they enjoyed a great deal of autonomy and relative freedom.
The Christian Church, on the other hand, was enforcing Canon law throughout Europe, torturing Jews and engaging in the Crusades. During the Crusades Muslims, Jews AND Byzantine Christians were slaughtered for their beliefs.
Now, in modern times, the West is more developed than the East. This is the real impetus behind radical Islam. Any religion can be used to justify violence if that is what someone really wants to do.
Muslims aren't the only ones perpetrating terror. Remember this guy?:http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Norway_massacre&redirect=no
How about these two fine young men?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oklahoma_city_bombing
I have a friend from law school who is a devout Muslim. He spends every work day defending the U.S. Constitution as an Assistant Public Defender. There are plenty of "Christians" that would like to impose their religious beliefs, as law, on the rest of us. It's just that Christian Canon law doesn't have a scary name like Sharia.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI only brought up the Norway and OK City incidents as examples to show that terror isn't limited to Islamic jihadists, I didn't intend to argue that they were Christian holy warriors.
ReplyDeleteAs far as textual order of the Koran vs. the Bible, we're talking apples and oranges. The Bible is arranged chronologically, the Koran is not.
To say that other religions don't have problems with violence is to ignore history (including much much more recent than the Crusades). But, just to keep things simple, lets limit it to Christianity's greatest hits (bearing in mind that I am a devout, church going, Jesus-loving Christian).
Violence committed in the name of Christ:
-the Crusades (everybody knows the background here)
-the Inquisition (red hot pokers anyone?)
-conquest of the Americas (slavery for Christianity, a fair trade)
-Marian persecutions (Catholic or bust, literally)
-Elizabethan persecutions (Anglican or bust, literally)
-Massacre at Matanzas Inlet (got to represent the FL)
-Salem Witch Trials (thou wilt not suffer a witch to live)
And lest you think violence in Christ's name is ancient history:
-KKK- a self professed white Protestant movement
-Balkan Wars (forced impregnation of Muslim women by Orthodox Serb men, Srebrenica, etc.)
But, you know, other than those couple of little things (and I know I'm forgetting a few), Christianity hasn't had any issues with violence.
Also, funny how Islam was not an issue for the United States in the decades prior to the rise of Islamic radicalism.
People will justify their heinous behavior through religion so long as a)religion exists and b)they are motivated to commit heinous behavior
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSalient Points:
Delete1) Don't forget, at the same time, Americans were pointing to the Bible to justify slavery as well.
2) The British were doing the same thing that the Barbary pirates were. As I am sure you know, this was a casus belli for the War of 1812, although you never hear about the British "terrorists."
3) The Koran actually commands Muslims to protect "People of the Book," such as Christians and Jews. Much of the quoted "sword" texts of the Koran were written in the context of ongoing battles betweens Muslims and pagan Arab tribes. One of Mohammed's best friends, whom he spoke highly of, was a Christian.
4)Historically, Muslims were largely responsible for the protection of Jews from Christians (see Spanish Inquisition).
5)Christian on Muslim "terror" didn't end 400 years ago. Persecution of Muslims in the Balkans didn't end until about a decade ago.
5)(a) What about these people? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutaree
or these guys
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord%27s_Resistance_Army
remember this guy?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Robert_Rudolph
They would all tell you that the Bible commands them to engage in these actions, and of course, none of this took place 400 years ago.
5)(b) Another favorite of mine was the Jonestown massacre. What a lovely event that was (a murdered Congressman and countless children). Of course this was a fringe Christian/socialist group, kinda like radical Muslims are a fringe Islamic/fascist group.
6) If we are doing the math, calculate how many individuals were responsible for the attacks you cite then divide that by the 1.6 Billion Muslims throughout the world. Sucks to be lumped in with a few bad apples. It would be kind of like saying that all Americans want to slaughter Muslim civilians because a few rogue U.S. soldiers have done so.
7) Once again, Islamic terrorism is bad. A minute percentage of Muslims engage in it. The great majority of Muslims do not engage in this behavior, just like the great majority of conservative Christians do not resort to violence.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1)I'm sure the ACLU would be getting involved if we were talking about the U.S., where the First Amendment applies, and not Afghanistan, a foreign country (although our government's interest in the area seems to indicate otherwise).
ReplyDelete2)What is the "best" Muslim appears to be based on your own interpretation, not any consensus of religious or secular scholars.
3)"When Islamic terrorists kill in the name of their allah, what do you see in the muslim world? - - [crickets]"
This is an inaccurate but common belief amongst Americans. See the below link.
http://groups.colgate.edu/aarislam/response.htm#Expressions of grief and sympathy in the Arab and Muslim world:
4)Funny how the Mujahadeen were "freedom fighters" who needed our material support when they were fighting the Soviets, but when we fight them they are "terrorists."
5)Ever notice how, for the most part, "the Muslim world" is comprised of former European colonies? Kind of like non-Muslim places like Rwanda and Sierra Leone. I'm sure there's no link with violence though...
6)"Actions - goes to actions"
I agree actions should be most important. You cite a poll that measures beliefs, not actions in accordance thereof. Once again, what percentage of Muslims engage in terroristic actions?
7)"mohammad, Islam's lone, self proclaimed prophet and Allah's singular voice"
I'm not Muslim, but I know for a fact that this is not what most (any?) Muslims believe. Muslims believe that Mohammed was the last in a long line of prophets including Adam, Abraham, Moses and Jesus. It appears that your interpretation of the Koran is quite different from that of actual Muslims.
8)"Could imagine if 26% of Christians believed it was perfectly justified to bomb abortion clinics? The press would have gone crazy denouncing this"
I'm not aware of any such polls. Christians aren't generally lumped together with radicals the way Muslims are.
9)"Islamic militants, radicals, al-Qaida, extremists, jihadists, fundamentalists, or whatever you want to call them today, are in fact “good” Muslims, not bad ones. The jihadists haven't corrupted Islam, hijacked their religion, nor interpreted it incorrectly, and therefore they aren't radicals or extremists...as far as the koran and mohammad are concerned."
I agree that this is your interpretation. I think that many devout Muslims would resent it being imposed upon them.
Further thoughts:
My personal experience (and that of my family) with Muslims is that they are nonviolent, caring and that they do not conform to the stereotypes.
The blog software treated your post about the Crusades as spam, so I just saw it. I will leave it at this. I don't think that any reasonable historian can defend the Crusades as justified in whole (check out the Siege of Constantinople if in doubt). If that's not enough, check out what the Crusaders did to all the Jews that the horrible, violent Muslims were allowing to live in Jerusalem. Spoiler alert: the Crusaders slaughtered every Jew they could find in Jerusalem (you know for their "allah" [Arabic Christians also use this term BTW, it's just Arabic for "God"])
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete