You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Islam, a Religion of Suicide
- Thread starter sKaLpZ
- Start date
I disagree, bro.Quote from Sam123:
Most human beings know better, and many just morally support the passionate causes (Kool aid) that is being passed around, but would not hurt a fly.
The missionaries of Jihad are quite good at looking for the disenfranchised, and they exist regardless of the health of their countries and economies. But a lot of these people are not disenfranchised at all. These people are looking for causes, and when they are told over and over and over again that the U.S. and Israel are evil and God is on their side etc., they develop the illusion that they are wronged and disenfranchised. Those are the Attas in the world. The others were juveniles who get recruited by the Islamists in bad neighborhoods and in prison.
Another problem is overpopulation in the Muslim world, and stupid economic systems that discourage young Muslim men to do much of anything else other than sit around and froth at the mouth during prayer meetings.
The crux of your statement involves poor young men, and people who feel disenfranchised and looking for a cause.
The world is full of those type people at one time or another. Yet they don't become suicide bombers.
Example: Poor your black men without a chance of hope in the world living in South Cental L.A. Yet, you don't see a single instance of one of them blowing up themselves, destroying the lives of innocents.
Worst they do is cap off rival gang members and run drugs for a living.
No, the Islamic belief system is the stand-alone root cause of the terrorists/suicide bombers. Most heavily concentrated influence right there in the middle east, origin of the religion.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:
zzz needs to be watched for his tricky journalism. He makes assertions but when you call him on it he shrinks back to hyper technical readings.
Tricky journalism?
Try making a logical argument first, rather than slander first.
Here we see a nice trick. The victim writes anyway they do not even practice the religion. "The" clearly not meant to mean unique or authentic.
Few people, but anit Christians, lump all branches of Christianity into a category of "the religion of Christianity." Yet Muslim haters lump all of those who practice any number of different takes on Islam as being the same."
We see much argument between Catholics, Protestants, and other sects and groups who practice a religion based to some extent on the teachings of Jesus Christ.
Most believe theirs is the only real "Christian" religion.
There is no religion of Christianity as such, there are only various sects who have different interpretations of the life of Christ and Christs first disciples.
These groups focus on the differences between the sects to a greater degree than they focus on the commonality, therefore it is reasonable to conclude that they see the differences between them as more important than the similarities.
I have seen Catholics claim that those who practice Mormonism are not Christians at all.
It is hogwash of course, as Catholics practice Catholicism, that's their expertise, and all they could logically say is that Mormons don't practice Catholicism if they have a full and accurate understanding of Mormonism.
It is the self appointed position of expertise in Christendom as a whole that they use to evaluate then denegrate other beliefs about Christ and Christ's agenda.
Self appointed authorities have no logical validity to critique other faiths beyond comparing and contrasting the different belief systems, but they cannot argue from a known universal and unequivocal objective definition of it is to be a Christian.
Yet zzz then says catholics say latter day saints do not practice "the" religion. Now zzz is trying to victimize more groups.
The Catholics say Mormons are not Christians. Therefore they are effectively saying that Mormons are not practicing "the religion" as they are of a mindset that there is only one true religion of Christ, i.e. Catholicism. True believers are like that, they are usually not very open to different interpretations than their own.
What is the point of this travesty zzz. I think most Catholics recognize that mormons practice their religion.
Learn to write. This sentence:
"I think most Catholics recognize that mormons practice their religion."
This sentence is obscure and poorly written, as it is not clear if the meaning is that Catholics recognize that Mormons (yes, it is capitalized) are practicing their own religion of Mormonism and not Catholicism....or if Catholics recognize that Mormons practice the same religion as they do, i.e. the Christian religion.
Once again you make flawed distinctions to promote your liberal agenda.
False, non sequitur.
I can't believe you are an attorney as sloppy as your use of language is.
it was perfect use of language. you are just not intelligent enough to understand what you are reading and why it was written.
By the way I do not think the victim was saying ahmad rashaad does not practice sunni or shia - the victim was saying he does not practice Islam.
The rest of your diatribe was a waste of time and also totally incorrect and not based on sound principles.
But it was consistent with leftest everything is the same because I say so garbage. the left is the product of weak minds that can not or refuse to make legitimate distinctions. And I no longer wish to play you intellectualy immature games.
Quote from jem:
it was perfect use of language. you are just not intelligent enough to understand what you are reading and why it was written.
By the way I do not think the victim was saying ahmad rashaad does not practice sunni or shia - the victim was saying he does not practice Islam.
The rest of your diatribe was a waste of time and also totally incorrect and not based on sound principles.
But it was consistent with your leftest "everything is the same" because I say so garbage. Your leftist arguements are the product of weak minds that can not or refuse to make legitimate distinctions. And I no longer wish to play you intellectualy immature games.
Authority for violence to be perpetrated in the name of Islam, is rooted and sanctioned from within by the intrinsic nature and essential construct of Islam itself. It is not open to criticism or reform and is why, as it grants itself the sole basis for law and morality, Islam has been profoundly left open to feudal and primitive representations of its many and ancient principles and doctrines which condone and encourage death and destruction for the Glory of God.
Violence is legitimized as a part of its armory and built into the very ethos of Islam. The State is God's State, the Army is God's Army and the enemy is God's enemy and therefore the enemy of God. Islamic Law is God's Law and irrefutable.
So how come Islam should be seen as being especially problematic when it comes to violence? Other mainstream religions hold their own similar irrefutable ideologies full of violent acts sanctioned by God. But why then only within the Islamic religion are there so many Jihad organizations still fighting their Holy War so violently, so physically against innocents, fellow Muslims and themselves.
Why has Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc, essentially lost these traits over the centuries, whilst within Islam it remains today and is expressed even more so than ever?
Because whilst religions demand they have their own incontrovertible connect to the Almighty, in the West they have been effectively disarmed by processes of Secular Democracy. From the middle ages, the idea that certain other men, who simply said they had an authority given to them by God , was no longer to be accepted as a means to control hearts and minds. The critical examination of those who purported to have the exclusive rights to wisdom no longer remained unquestioned.
Also when having to rationalize a religion past the dogmatic utterances of the purely metaphysical, bringing it into an arena where it needs to hold relevance to more pragmatically enlightened and developed communities, the secular process will inadvertently take effect as the refuge of the supernatural gets expelled merely for the meaningless explanation it offers as a justification for acts of violence.
Additionally, the acceptance that entities can have their own identity and not be allowed only through or of God, transformed the development of the West. People were no longer subjugated by one single dominant narrowed viewpoint, which eliminated considerations being open to differing concepts.
Islam does not separate Mosque and State, it is a locked, non pluralistic method of government and religion rolled into one intransigent monologue. Where Islam is practiced under a Secular State, the more peaceful and poetic aspects of its rules and beliefs can be enjoyed by followers who naturally, as non violent human beings, freed from the instruction of less tolerent self appointed teachers of God's Law, are liberated from the pressure and coersion to unquestioningly conform.
The Secularization of Western democracies allows those of various religions and those of no religion to live under Law made by free men and women, whilst maintaining their own conscience to hold their personal views and beliefs what that Law should be based upon.
In Islam, that is unthinkable. But to the many peaceful Muslims, secularism empowers them - perhaps or perhaps not necessarily to question God's word - but to question those who claim knowledge of it.
But until Islam becomes properly secularized, the self appointed Jihad terrorists are sanctioned from within, by Islam itself, to indoctrinate others to explode themselves and everyone around them in the name of God.
just my opinion of course.
Violence is legitimized as a part of its armory and built into the very ethos of Islam. The State is God's State, the Army is God's Army and the enemy is God's enemy and therefore the enemy of God. Islamic Law is God's Law and irrefutable.
So how come Islam should be seen as being especially problematic when it comes to violence? Other mainstream religions hold their own similar irrefutable ideologies full of violent acts sanctioned by God. But why then only within the Islamic religion are there so many Jihad organizations still fighting their Holy War so violently, so physically against innocents, fellow Muslims and themselves.
Why has Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism etc, essentially lost these traits over the centuries, whilst within Islam it remains today and is expressed even more so than ever?
Because whilst religions demand they have their own incontrovertible connect to the Almighty, in the West they have been effectively disarmed by processes of Secular Democracy. From the middle ages, the idea that certain other men, who simply said they had an authority given to them by God , was no longer to be accepted as a means to control hearts and minds. The critical examination of those who purported to have the exclusive rights to wisdom no longer remained unquestioned.
Also when having to rationalize a religion past the dogmatic utterances of the purely metaphysical, bringing it into an arena where it needs to hold relevance to more pragmatically enlightened and developed communities, the secular process will inadvertently take effect as the refuge of the supernatural gets expelled merely for the meaningless explanation it offers as a justification for acts of violence.
Additionally, the acceptance that entities can have their own identity and not be allowed only through or of God, transformed the development of the West. People were no longer subjugated by one single dominant narrowed viewpoint, which eliminated considerations being open to differing concepts.
Islam does not separate Mosque and State, it is a locked, non pluralistic method of government and religion rolled into one intransigent monologue. Where Islam is practiced under a Secular State, the more peaceful and poetic aspects of its rules and beliefs can be enjoyed by followers who naturally, as non violent human beings, freed from the instruction of less tolerent self appointed teachers of God's Law, are liberated from the pressure and coersion to unquestioningly conform.
The Secularization of Western democracies allows those of various religions and those of no religion to live under Law made by free men and women, whilst maintaining their own conscience to hold their personal views and beliefs what that Law should be based upon.
In Islam, that is unthinkable. But to the many peaceful Muslims, secularism empowers them - perhaps or perhaps not necessarily to question God's word - but to question those who claim knowledge of it.
But until Islam becomes properly secularized, the self appointed Jihad terrorists are sanctioned from within, by Islam itself, to indoctrinate others to explode themselves and everyone around them in the name of God.
just my opinion of course.
<b>Feds: Man planned to blow up Ill. mall</b>
CHICAGO - A Muslim convert who talked about his desire to wage jihad against civilians was charged Friday in a plot to set off hand grenades at a shopping mall at the height of the Christmas rush, authorities said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061209/ap_on_re_us/terror_arrest
_____________________________________
Quote from Rearden Metal:
12-23-03
As we have seen with Jose Pedilla, Richard Reed, Taliban Johnny Walker, Idi Amin, Mike Tyson and Carlos The Jackal...demented violent assholes tend to gravitate naturally toward the 'religion of peace'.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=395731
Beware of converts to Islam. These people are disproportionately more bloodthirsty than those 'born and raised' Muslim. No surprise then, that an Islamic convert was behind the King's Cross attack.
CHICAGO - A Muslim convert who talked about his desire to wage jihad against civilians was charged Friday in a plot to set off hand grenades at a shopping mall at the height of the Christmas rush, authorities said.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061209/ap_on_re_us/terror_arrest
_____________________________________
Quote from Rearden Metal:
12-23-03
As we have seen with Jose Pedilla, Richard Reed, Taliban Johnny Walker, Idi Amin, Mike Tyson and Carlos The Jackal...demented violent assholes tend to gravitate naturally toward the 'religion of peace'.
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=395731
Beware of converts to Islam. These people are disproportionately more bloodthirsty than those 'born and raised' Muslim. No surprise then, that an Islamic convert was behind the King's Cross attack.
In my opinion religion and politics should not be mixed. As far as the image of Islam you see is due to the fact the leaders (MUSLIM PRIESTS) are mixing religion with political issues. And instigating many illitrate people to go and blow themselves.
The other point is that Interpretation is also the key point. i.e How you would interpret scripture. ? Some sects in Islam interpret Jihad as struggle with pen and some interpret Jihad as struggle with sword. (Depending on circumstances).
http://www.alislam.org/books/study-of-islam/jihad.html
when ever in history the religion is mixed with estate issues it has always been a total failure. Like wise in the history of christianity, catholic church during middle ages burnt women for witchcraft and so on so forth.
Any one who is interested in learning any religion should see the basics of any religion and not how one group of ignorant people from Arab/Afghan world tarnishing the image of Islam.
The other point is that Interpretation is also the key point. i.e How you would interpret scripture. ? Some sects in Islam interpret Jihad as struggle with pen and some interpret Jihad as struggle with sword. (Depending on circumstances).
http://www.alislam.org/books/study-of-islam/jihad.html
when ever in history the religion is mixed with estate issues it has always been a total failure. Like wise in the history of christianity, catholic church during middle ages burnt women for witchcraft and so on so forth.
Any one who is interested in learning any religion should see the basics of any religion and not how one group of ignorant people from Arab/Afghan world tarnishing the image of Islam.
Quote from temoin:
In my opinion religion and politics should not be mixed. As far as the image of Islam you see is due to the fact the leaders (MUSLIM PRIESTS) are mixing religion with political issues. And instigating many illitrate people to go and blow themselves.
The other point is that Interpretation is also the key point. i.e How you would interpret scripture. ? Some sects in Islam interpret Jihad as struggle with pen and some interpret Jihad as struggle with sword. (Depending on circumstances).
http://www.alislam.org/books/study-of-islam/jihad.html
when ever in history the religion is mixed with estate issues it has always been a total failure. Like wise in the history of christianity, catholic church during middle ages burnt women for witchcraft and so on so forth.
Any one who is interested in learning any religion should see the basics of any religion and not how one group of ignorant people from Arab/Afghan world tarnishing the image of Islam.
If religion mixed with state is bad because of the deaths, what about secular mixed with state? Don't those deaths count, too. You know, the hundreds of millions at the hands of communists? Reminds me of those who rail about Pinochet's three thousand murders and then these same people want to have a rally for Castro. (and his tens of thousands of murders, [at a minimum]).