Gaming4 mins ago
Muslims
55 Answers
So what do you think should be done about the Muslims?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
AOG,
Once again I've confused you with my post, because I've not made myself clear. A tiny minority of White males are football hooligans and child molesters. However, whenever you see a report about football violence or the latest child sex murder, it's always a White male between the ages of 18 and 45. My point is that you cannot brand all White men like this simply because they're White men.
The same is equally true about black men (knife-weilding muggers) or Asian men (terrorists).
Do you see my point now?
Not sure how else I can clarify it...
Once again I've confused you with my post, because I've not made myself clear. A tiny minority of White males are football hooligans and child molesters. However, whenever you see a report about football violence or the latest child sex murder, it's always a White male between the ages of 18 and 45. My point is that you cannot brand all White men like this simply because they're White men.
The same is equally true about black men (knife-weilding muggers) or Asian men (terrorists).
Do you see my point now?
Not sure how else I can clarify it...
SP1814 – Your arguments would hold some water if this discussion was about race. Once again, a question about religion has been side-tracked into a discussion about race.
Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with race.
Your statement, “It's like asking "How should we treat White men", based on the actions of football hooligans or paedophiles.” is simply wrong. To use the well known analogy, you're attempting to compare apples with oranges.
What you have done (with some success) is to side-track this discussion by comparing two very different groups to conclude that it's folly to generalise about a racial group based on the actions of a few individuals.
If this were a discussion about race, then I would agree with you. But it isn't is it? It's a debate about the nature of religion with specific reference to the Islamic faith.
To reiterate – Islam is not a race. It is a religion and as such, your arguments to date on this thread are invalid.
Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with race.
Your statement, “It's like asking "How should we treat White men", based on the actions of football hooligans or paedophiles.” is simply wrong. To use the well known analogy, you're attempting to compare apples with oranges.
What you have done (with some success) is to side-track this discussion by comparing two very different groups to conclude that it's folly to generalise about a racial group based on the actions of a few individuals.
If this were a discussion about race, then I would agree with you. But it isn't is it? It's a debate about the nature of religion with specific reference to the Islamic faith.
To reiterate – Islam is not a race. It is a religion and as such, your arguments to date on this thread are invalid.
Continued....
The question really is – are Islamic fundamentalists truly representative of their religion or are they just cranks who have misunderstood the true message of Allah?
I believe that the the so-called fundamentalists are interpreting the Koran correctly. It's an exceptionally intolerant religious text and those who have read it and understand it all agree that there are a great many things which are simply not permitted in Islam...
Homosexuality – absolutely not, in fact death to all the gays (be they male or female)
Apostasy – Err, no. Death again.
Artistic depictions of Allah or Mohammed – again, Muslims don't have a sense of humour about that as recent events have shown.
I shall stop there as this could become a very, very long list.
However, many Muslims in the UK regard themselves as 'moderates'. In truth, what this means is that they have to jump through logical (and illogical) hoops in order to justify a polar opposite position to what's actually written in the Koran. This basically means that they're failing to follow their religion properly in an attempt to integrate with secular western societies for whatever reason.
This conscious deceit is mirrored in other religions too – many followers of the Christian church in this country will happily tell you that homosexuality is no longer a sin. How they reach that conclusion is a mystery to me because it specifically states in the Bible that to commit this act is a mortal sin.
The question really is – are Islamic fundamentalists truly representative of their religion or are they just cranks who have misunderstood the true message of Allah?
I believe that the the so-called fundamentalists are interpreting the Koran correctly. It's an exceptionally intolerant religious text and those who have read it and understand it all agree that there are a great many things which are simply not permitted in Islam...
Homosexuality – absolutely not, in fact death to all the gays (be they male or female)
Apostasy – Err, no. Death again.
Artistic depictions of Allah or Mohammed – again, Muslims don't have a sense of humour about that as recent events have shown.
I shall stop there as this could become a very, very long list.
However, many Muslims in the UK regard themselves as 'moderates'. In truth, what this means is that they have to jump through logical (and illogical) hoops in order to justify a polar opposite position to what's actually written in the Koran. This basically means that they're failing to follow their religion properly in an attempt to integrate with secular western societies for whatever reason.
This conscious deceit is mirrored in other religions too – many followers of the Christian church in this country will happily tell you that homosexuality is no longer a sin. How they reach that conclusion is a mystery to me because it specifically states in the Bible that to commit this act is a mortal sin.
Continued.
The question, “So what do you think should be done about the Muslims?” is a deliberately inflammatory question and has rightly provoked a lively reaction.
I would suggest that everyone should learn as much as possible about Islam – specifically about it's aims, goals and punishments for not adhering to the Islamic faith.
Islam is the enemy of anyone who isn't a Muslim. Just as Christianity is the enemy to all who are not Christians. Both of these religions have proven to be imperialistic in nature and much blood has been spilt in their names.
The old maxim, 'know your enemy' is relevant here.
The question, “So what do you think should be done about the Muslims?” is a deliberately inflammatory question and has rightly provoked a lively reaction.
I would suggest that everyone should learn as much as possible about Islam – specifically about it's aims, goals and punishments for not adhering to the Islamic faith.
Islam is the enemy of anyone who isn't a Muslim. Just as Christianity is the enemy to all who are not Christians. Both of these religions have proven to be imperialistic in nature and much blood has been spilt in their names.
The old maxim, 'know your enemy' is relevant here.
I had a feeling the catholic school debate would be brought up by someone!
I went to a catholic school (in the west of scotland, albalass!) and some of my best friends were people from the local nondenominational.
The whole "what school did you go to?" thing is dead and gone in the majority of the country. I started uni this year and no one knew I'd went to a catholic school until it came up in conversation one night after knwoing everyone for 3 months.
Even though I went to a catholic school, I've chosen not to practice the religion but I can safely say that my school was better than both the other two non-denominational schools where I live because cahtolic schools promote the ethics and morals that the government want schools to anyway.
I hate when people who haven't been to a catholic school use the term 'brain-washed'. I've had people astounded by the fact that we didn't say prayers every day, some even beleieved we prayed at the start of every class. 90% of the time you couldn't tell it was a catholic school because you don't have religion pushed down your throat, it's the ethics and moralilty you learn that shouldn't just be held by religious people but by all of society.
albalass
I went to a catholic school (in the west of scotland, albalass!) and some of my best friends were people from the local nondenominational.
The whole "what school did you go to?" thing is dead and gone in the majority of the country. I started uni this year and no one knew I'd went to a catholic school until it came up in conversation one night after knwoing everyone for 3 months.
Even though I went to a catholic school, I've chosen not to practice the religion but I can safely say that my school was better than both the other two non-denominational schools where I live because cahtolic schools promote the ethics and morals that the government want schools to anyway.
I hate when people who haven't been to a catholic school use the term 'brain-washed'. I've had people astounded by the fact that we didn't say prayers every day, some even beleieved we prayed at the start of every class. 90% of the time you couldn't tell it was a catholic school because you don't have religion pushed down your throat, it's the ethics and moralilty you learn that shouldn't just be held by religious people but by all of society.
albalass
If I were to make women who attend my club use a seperate entrance and dress diferently then I would be prosecuted under the sexual discrimination laws yet the muslims can freely do this at their places of worship or are the race discrimination laws more important than the sex ones? If I go into a garage or bank with a crash helmet on I will not be served unless I remove it, if I go in with a muslim head dress on showing just my eyes then they will kiss my elbow and welcome me with open arms. Its no wonder that people get upset by the special treatment they get when we are supposed to promote equality. omid djalili is a fantastic comedien and probably one of the funiest men on tv at the moment but what would happen if a white man did the same routine? he would be banned from tv and probably prosecuted, the female iranian comedien openly says that she can get away with it because she is beige!! again a fantastic comedien but this is not equality
If Westerners tried to march through a town or city in an Arabic country they would be arrested and locked up, so why should these so called British Muslims be allowed to march against the war in their country's,,in the streets of the UK?
If they feel that that strong about the war, why don't they go home and support their people there, we don't want them, they use our benefit system which they cant get anywhere else and do nothing for the good of the country that feeds them.
If they feel that that strong about the war, why don't they go home and support their people there, we don't want them, they use our benefit system which they cant get anywhere else and do nothing for the good of the country that feeds them.
Hometownglory -
I was not suggesting that you've been brain-washed because you went to a Catholic school.
I make the distinction between Christianity and the Christians; Islam and Muslims.
The terms 'Islam' and 'Muslims' and 'Christianity' and 'Christians' are often used interchangeably even though they describe two very different things. I have been guilty of this as much as anyone, however...
Islam is the religion. It is the texts, the practices and the laws.
Muslims are the people to enact the laws and adhere to the practices.
Christianity is the religion. It is the texts, the practices and the laws.
Christians are the people to enact the laws and adhere to the practices.
I mention this because of your comments and because the original question was, “So what do you think should be done about the Muslims?”
My answer would be “Nothing”. The Muslims are just people who believe in a particular thing. I have nothing whatsoever against Muslims because they are simply people who follow the Islamic faith that they're been indoctrinated into. It's not their fault that they've had religion rammed down their collective throats by their parents, friends, colleagues, etc. If I'd been subjected that that kind of upbringing, I'd probably be a Muslim too.
I was not suggesting that you've been brain-washed because you went to a Catholic school.
I make the distinction between Christianity and the Christians; Islam and Muslims.
The terms 'Islam' and 'Muslims' and 'Christianity' and 'Christians' are often used interchangeably even though they describe two very different things. I have been guilty of this as much as anyone, however...
Islam is the religion. It is the texts, the practices and the laws.
Muslims are the people to enact the laws and adhere to the practices.
Christianity is the religion. It is the texts, the practices and the laws.
Christians are the people to enact the laws and adhere to the practices.
I mention this because of your comments and because the original question was, “So what do you think should be done about the Muslims?”
My answer would be “Nothing”. The Muslims are just people who believe in a particular thing. I have nothing whatsoever against Muslims because they are simply people who follow the Islamic faith that they're been indoctrinated into. It's not their fault that they've had religion rammed down their collective throats by their parents, friends, colleagues, etc. If I'd been subjected that that kind of upbringing, I'd probably be a Muslim too.
birdie1971
I think it's unfair to specifically identify the intolerances of Islam against homosexuality for criticism, because ALL religions are pretty intolerant.
For instance, in the Bible:
`And a man who lieth with a male as one lieth with a woman; abomination both of them have done; they are certainly put to death; their blood [is] on them.
Leviticus 20:13
And that's not just a one-off...
The appearance of their faces witnessed against them, And their sin, as Sodom, they declared, They have not hidden! Wo to their soul, For they have done to themselves evil.
Isaiah 3:9
..who the righteous judgment of God having known — that those practising such things are worthy of death — not only do them, but also have delight with those practising them.
Romans 1:32
And with a male thou dost not lie as one lieth with a woman; abomination it [is].
Leviticus 18:22
I think it's unfair to specifically identify the intolerances of Islam against homosexuality for criticism, because ALL religions are pretty intolerant.
For instance, in the Bible:
`And a man who lieth with a male as one lieth with a woman; abomination both of them have done; they are certainly put to death; their blood [is] on them.
Leviticus 20:13
And that's not just a one-off...
The appearance of their faces witnessed against them, And their sin, as Sodom, they declared, They have not hidden! Wo to their soul, For they have done to themselves evil.
Isaiah 3:9
..who the righteous judgment of God having known — that those practising such things are worthy of death — not only do them, but also have delight with those practising them.
Romans 1:32
And with a male thou dost not lie as one lieth with a woman; abomination it [is].
Leviticus 18:22
birdie1971
The reason I chose my analogy, and I think it still fits, is because it's the question of lumping everyone together because of the actions of a few.
Another analogy which I believe would fit would be "So what do you think should be done about the Women?" based on the fact that there are a number of girls who go out every Friday, get bladdered and pee in the street, or "So what do you think should be done about the gays?" based on the fact that some gay men go around having unprotected unsafe sex.
And with regards to the moderate Muslims in this (and many other countries), they simply interpret the texts of the Koran in the same way the Christians interpret the Bible. Would you say that a Christian who doesn't believe in death to all homosexuals as not being a true believer?
No...because all religions are centuries old, and today people realise that you absolutely cannot live in the modern world adhering to the letter of the law in texts written thousands of years ago.
The reason I chose my analogy, and I think it still fits, is because it's the question of lumping everyone together because of the actions of a few.
Another analogy which I believe would fit would be "So what do you think should be done about the Women?" based on the fact that there are a number of girls who go out every Friday, get bladdered and pee in the street, or "So what do you think should be done about the gays?" based on the fact that some gay men go around having unprotected unsafe sex.
And with regards to the moderate Muslims in this (and many other countries), they simply interpret the texts of the Koran in the same way the Christians interpret the Bible. Would you say that a Christian who doesn't believe in death to all homosexuals as not being a true believer?
No...because all religions are centuries old, and today people realise that you absolutely cannot live in the modern world adhering to the letter of the law in texts written thousands of years ago.
Trouble is, there is an extreme group of muslims that I'm sure are in the minority who are in this country despite hating the west and openly rant about their hatred of our country and its people. These are the ones that everyone is against probably including the decent muslims living here! On the same note we have the BNP, an extreme group that hate anything that isn't white anglo saxon etc. Both sides are not a true representation of the race as a whole but all seem to get tared with the same brush. I think that firm action needs to be taken against both sides of extremists and the muslims that wish to live here are welcome to do so along with anyone else that embraces our basic culture, speaks our language and has something to offer the country. Why go and live somewhere you obviously hate?
There is an easy answer to all of this.
Simply proscribe all religious activity outside the home. Religion is not necessary, causes untold suffering and misery and is the root of just about every human conflict. Any other activity that causes so much trouble would be swiftly outlawed. Those wishing to practice it can do so in the comfort of their own living room with the curtains drawn. It would cause a bit of strife in the short term but would pay enormous dividends in the long term.
There – sorted!
Simply proscribe all religious activity outside the home. Religion is not necessary, causes untold suffering and misery and is the root of just about every human conflict. Any other activity that causes so much trouble would be swiftly outlawed. Those wishing to practice it can do so in the comfort of their own living room with the curtains drawn. It would cause a bit of strife in the short term but would pay enormous dividends in the long term.
There – sorted!
Sp1814 – It's late so I'll be brief. You ask, “Would you say that a Christian who doesn't believe in death to all homosexuals as not being a true believer?”
I would answer that they may be a believer but they're not being true to their religion as it has been written down. They have managed to circumvent the narrative to accommodate western secular views.
Sophistry. Nothing more.
“... people realise that you absolutely cannot live in the modern world adhering to the letter of the law in texts written thousands of years ago.”
Agreed. But if you're not adhering to the 'letter of the law' in a religious text then I think it's safe to say that you are flouting your religious rules, are you not?
“The reason I chose my analogy, and I think it still fits, is because it's the question of lumping everyone together because of the actions of a few”
I believe the opposite. I don't think your argument fits. Because white people, black people, brown people, etc. are not told to live their lives by any particular set of rules based upon the colour of their skin. Religious people however, are instructed to live their lives based upon a very specific set of parameters laid down by religious texts. That's why it is reasonable are correct to generalise about people who claim to belong to a specific religion – because they all adhere to the same texts.
I would answer that they may be a believer but they're not being true to their religion as it has been written down. They have managed to circumvent the narrative to accommodate western secular views.
Sophistry. Nothing more.
“... people realise that you absolutely cannot live in the modern world adhering to the letter of the law in texts written thousands of years ago.”
Agreed. But if you're not adhering to the 'letter of the law' in a religious text then I think it's safe to say that you are flouting your religious rules, are you not?
“The reason I chose my analogy, and I think it still fits, is because it's the question of lumping everyone together because of the actions of a few”
I believe the opposite. I don't think your argument fits. Because white people, black people, brown people, etc. are not told to live their lives by any particular set of rules based upon the colour of their skin. Religious people however, are instructed to live their lives based upon a very specific set of parameters laid down by religious texts. That's why it is reasonable are correct to generalise about people who claim to belong to a specific religion – because they all adhere to the same texts.
