Happy Atheist Forum

NPR Intelligence Squared Panel Debate makes people think no.

QuoteA team of experts argued both sides of the motion "Islam Is a Religion of Peace" in a recent Intelligence Squared U.S. debate. Two argued in favor and two against.

Before the Oxford-style debate at New York University's Skirball Center for the Performing Arts, the audience voted 41 percent in favor of the motion and 25 percent against. Thirty-four percent were undecided. After the debate, however, 55 percent disagreed that "Islam Is a Religion of Peace," 36 percent supported the motion and 9 percent were still unsure.

Full audio available at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... =130516428 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=130516428)

If people blow themselves (and others) up because of their religion, that religion doesn't seem very peaceful to me.

Anyone saying that Islam is a religion of peace is either uninformed or is being deliberately dishonest. There are numerous instances of violence and calling for violence in the Qur'an. That said, it's not a religion of violence, either. It's just a religion. Some Muslims are violent, the majority are not.

I would argue that no Abrahamic religion is a religion of peace.

Quote from: "Will"Anyone saying that Islam is a religion of peace is either uninformed or is being deliberately dishonest. There are numerous instances of violence and calling for violence in the Qur'an. That said, it's not a religion of violence, either. It's just a religion. Some Muslims are violent, the majority are not.

I agree with this.  Could just as easily say some Christians are violent, the majority are not.

The more I think about it the more I don't think violence would subside if religion fell by the wayside.  Perhaps it is the bad people who express themselves through religion and if it weren't religion it would be politics.  However, it's also hard to accept that so many people would do bad without the push they find in certain religious texts (or politics for that matter).

If someone wants me to risk my life endangering someone else's life they better provide a good reason, because dead is dead.
Religion is helpful in dehumanising the other, making the killing easier, but we can always think of some other reason.
I don't recall religion being much of an issue in the US Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, or Vietnam.

Quote from: "Steven Weinberg"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "Steven Weinberg"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

Although that might be a clever turn of phrase, I suppose, it isn't very philosophically honest.  Here let's think about it backward:

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for evil people to do good things, that takes religion."

Sounds equally as accurate.  Atheist or not I think we could agree that some "evil" people withhold evil because of religious teachings. (and as a side note doesn't Christianity have something to that extent at it's core?)

Sorry but clever quotes like that from both sides are a pet peeve. : f

-ihateusernames

Yeah?  Well, philosophy is a pet peeve of mine.

We should also consider the possibility that Islam is simply a younger religion then the other two abrahamic delusions.
If we look at the history of christianity and compare it's timeline to that of Islam, Islam is still in the middle of it's "dark ages".
Since both faiths have the same basis (old testament), maybe they have a  similar progression or development process.
Reverse crusade, anyone?

Quote from: "Guardian85"We should also consider the possibility that Islam is simply a younger religion then the other two abrahamic delusions.
If we look at the history of christianity and compare it's timeline to that of Islam, Islam is still in the middle of it's "dark ages".
Since both faiths have the same basis (old testament), maybe they have a  similar progression or development process.
Reverse crusade, anyone?

I wouldn't consider Judaism or Christianity a religion of peace either....they too have violent teachings in their holy texts.

Imo, social maturity is what causes religions to become peaceful, not the religions themselves.

Quote from: "Guardian85"We should also consider the possibility that Islam is simply a younger religion then the other two abrahamic delusions.
If we look at the history of christianity and compare it's timeline to that of Islam, Islam is still in the middle of it's "dark ages".
Since both faiths have the same basis (old testament), maybe they have a  similar progression or development process.
Reverse crusade, anyone?

An excellent point, especially when you consider that Christianity was cured of mass religious war by the Thirty Years' War (1618-1648), which was the bloodiest war in man's history until WWI; it is estimated that between 10 and 15 million Germans alone died in this struggle between Protestantism and Catholicism.  Such a massive bloodletting made a deep cultural impression on these two main branches of Christianity.  Thereafter, they generally eschewed large wars, although they do inflict small-scale violence,

Islam, on the other hand, went through nothing of the sort in its schisms.  It is true that the Sunni-Shia split was accompanied by war, but it was not nearly so sanguinary.  I think that because they do not have such a dreadful warning from history in their religion's history, some imams may be less inhibited in calling for jihad than Christians are to call for crusade.

Additionally, tribalism in Islamic lands was much longer-lasting than in much of Christendom, and the forms of tribalism in many of what are now Islamic lands was a rough and unforgiving form.  And much as Christianity adopted the ritual of paganism in order to ease its acceptance, so did Islam adopt these tribal morés, including ideas about violence and loyalty.

This is not to say modern Muslims are affected by these influences to the extent that Islam itself is.  I have yet to meet a Muslim who applauds the jihadi efforts in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Humans are born amoral and possess the potential for all manner nasty behavior. Violence is a human trait. The family and the general culture one is raised in largely determines their adult behaviors. The killing of non-believers is encouraged in numerous passages in the Quran. This belief system offers enticements to martyrs who kill the infidels. Muslims are commanded by Allah to kill the enemies of God. I've often wondered why Allah just doesn't up and do it himself. I mean really.. if he hates us so much then why doesn't he just blink us out of existence? Oh that's right.. he's a figment of the imagination.. so I guess we're safe. Or are we? Hmm...

Quote from: "Thinkbigger"Humans are born amoral and possess the potential for all manner nasty behavior. Violence is a human trait. The family and the general culture one is raised in largely determines their adult behaviors. The killing of non-believers is encouraged in numerous passages in the Quran. This belief system offers enticements to martyrs who kill the infidels. Muslims are commanded by Allah to kill the enemies of God. I've often wondered why Allah just doesn't up and do it himself. I mean really.. if he hates us so much then why doesn't he just blink us out of existence? Oh that's right.. he's a figment of the imagination.. so I guess we're safe. Or are we? Hmm...

Now, if you just take this sort of thinking and apply it to the Bible...

Quote from: "Ihateusernames"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "Steven Weinberg"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

Although that might be a clever turn of phrase, I suppose, it isn't very philosophically honest.  Here let's think about it backward:

"With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for evil people to do good things, that takes religion."

Sounds equally as accurate.  Atheist or not I think we could agree that some "evil" people withhold evil because of religious teachings. (and as a side note doesn't Christianity have something to that extent at it's core?)

Sorry but clever quotes like that from both sides are a pet peeve. : f

-ihateusernames

Exactly. Which is why I am now a Machiavellian. Took me forever to realize the only reason I wasn't being myself was because of the constant threat of hellfire and eternal damnation. But when you don't have that threat hanging over your shoulder, you can finally be yourself.

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"

Quote from: "Thinkbigger"Humans are born amoral and possess the potential for all manner nasty behavior. Violence is a human trait. The family and the general culture one is raised in largely determines their adult behaviors. The killing of non-believers is encouraged in numerous passages in the Quran. This belief system offers enticements to martyrs who kill the infidels. Muslims are commanded by Allah to kill the enemies of God. I've often wondered why Allah just doesn't up and do it himself. I mean really.. if he hates us so much then why doesn't he just blink us out of existence? Oh that's right.. he's a figment of the imagination.. so I guess we're safe. Or are we? Hmm...

Now, if you just take this sort of thinking and apply it to the Bible...

Exactly Mr. Sandwich. However, there is a minor difference in the two disciplines. The Bible urges the faithful to evangelize to their neighbors, whereas, the Quran commands the faithful to exterminate their neighbors should they resist conversion. A small but important distinction. One harvests souls with rhetoric and dogma whereas the other employs the blade. The call to violence in Islam is often a point of pride and serves as a means of preserving family honor. Islam is more dangerous for Muslims than for non-Muslims. Here's a Fun Fact: Far more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than by any other group/s. Additionally, they continue to embrace slavery in Africa. It significant to note that they actually legally own their women much in the same manner as we own our lawnmowers. Clearly this group embraces the least evolved spirit based belief system on the planet. To me, Islam appears to have been developed primarily for the purpose of controlling women and their sexual activity as a further means of guaranteeing fidelity, preserving bloodlines, and minimizing the risk of venereal disease. Of course it is also serves as a means, in many places of great poverty and sparse resource, of acquiring personal power over others. Useful I imagine, under those circumstances.

P.S. I see that you are still laboring under the assumption that I  am one of the faithful Mr. Sandwich. I'm an Atheist alright.. just not a ideologue.

Quote from: "Thinkbigger"Exactly Mr. Sandwich. However, there is a minor difference in the two disciplines. The Bible urges the faithful to evangelize to their neighbors, whereas, the Quran commands the faithful to exterminate their neighbors should they resist conversion. A small but important distinction. One harvests souls with rhetoric and dogma whereas the other employs the blade. The call to violence in Islam is often a point of pride and serves as a means of preserving family honor. Islam is more dangerous for Muslims than for non-Muslims. Here's a Fun Fact: Far more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than by any other group/s. Additionally, they continue to embrace slavery in Africa. It significant to note that they actually legally own their women much in the same manner as we own our lawnmowers. Clearly this group embraces the least evolved spirit based belief system on the planet. To me, Islam appears to have been developed primarily for the purpose of controlling women and their sexual activity as a further means of guaranteeing fidelity, preserving bloodlines, and minimizing the risk of venereal disease. Of course it is also serves as a means, in many places of great poverty and sparse resource, of acquiring personal power over others. Useful I imagine, under those circumstances.

Eh. Sounds reasonable.

QuoteP.S. I see that you are still laboring under the assumption that I  am one of the faithful Mr. Sandwich. I'm an Atheist alright.. just not a ideologue.

I'm still not entirely convinced you aren't a troll, but we'll see.

 :D

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"

Quote from: "Thinkbigger"Exactly Mr. Sandwich. However, there is a minor difference in the two disciplines. The Bible urges the faithful to evangelize to their neighbors, whereas, the Quran commands the faithful to exterminate their neighbors should they resist conversion. A small but important distinction. One harvests souls with rhetoric and dogma whereas the other employs the blade. The call to violence in Islam is often a point of pride and serves as a means of preserving family honor. Islam is more dangerous for Muslims than for non-Muslims. Here's a Fun Fact: Far more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than by any other group/s. Additionally, they continue to embrace slavery in Africa. It significant to note that they actually legally own their women much in the same manner as we own our lawnmowers. Clearly this group embraces the least evolved spirit based belief system on the planet. To me, Islam appears to have been developed primarily for the purpose of controlling women and their sexual activity as a further means of guaranteeing fidelity, preserving bloodlines, and minimizing the risk of venereal disease. Of course it is also serves as a means, in many places of great poverty and sparse resource, of acquiring personal power over others. Useful I imagine, under those circumstances.

Eh. Sounds reasonable.

QuoteP.S. I see that you are still laboring under the assumption that I  am one of the faithful Mr. Sandwich. I'm an Atheist alright.. just not a ideologue.

I'm still not entirely convinced you aren't a troll, but we'll see.

I don't blame you for being suspicious. There's a whole lot of trolls and posers out there. Keep the faith. I'm true blue.

Quote from: "JoeBobSmith"but could an otherwise good person be brainwashed by muslims to blow himself up?

The madrasas in Pakistan seem to be doing good business.

Quote from: "Thinkbigger"Exactly Mr. Sandwich. However, there is a minor difference in the two disciplines. The Bible urges the faithful to evangelize to their neighbors, whereas, the Quran commands the faithful to exterminate their neighbors should they resist conversion. A small but important distinction. One harvests souls with rhetoric and dogma whereas the other employs the blade. The call to violence in Islam is often a point of pride and serves as a means of preserving family honor. Islam is more dangerous for Muslims than for non-Muslims. Here's a Fun Fact: Far more Muslims have been killed by other Muslims than by any other group/s. Additionally, they continue to embrace slavery in Africa. It significant to note that they actually legally own their women much in the same manner as we own our lawnmowers. Clearly this group embraces the least evolved spirit based belief system on the planet. To me, Islam appears to have been developed primarily for the purpose of controlling women and their sexual activity as a further means of guaranteeing fidelity, preserving bloodlines, and minimizing the risk of venereal disease. Of course it is also serves as a means, in many places of great poverty and sparse resource, of acquiring personal power over others. Useful I imagine, under those circumstances.

P.S. I see that you are still laboring under the assumption that I  am one of the faithful Mr. Sandwich. I'm an Atheist alright.. just not a ideologue.

Have you ever lived in an Islamic country?

 :)

 :)

two questions.

I know the answer of question #1.
I would like to know the answer of question #2.


#1 - The people in Afghanistan that fight against NATO forces, are they doing that in the name of Islam?


#2 - Why did the U.S.A. invade Iraq?

- Al Qaeda (Saddam hated Al Qaeda, after the invasion, Al Qaeda came to Iraq and started operating).
- WOMD (No WOMD found so far)
- To help the people (Yes Saddam killed the koerds (Turkey is still killing them), but the war didn't really help the people...)

Only reasonable answer I know off is: Oil.

iSok...if you had actually listened to the debate you'd know why the audience voted against the claim that islam is a religion of peace.  Peaceful religions don't have any passages which call for violence.

Quote from: "Whitney"iSok...if you had actually listened to the debate you'd know why the audience voted against the claim that islam is a religion of peace.  Peaceful religions don't have any passages which call for violence.

No but many people asked me off this.
I did indeed not read the article.
We're only allowed to defend, the passages that are in the Qur'an also are from a context in the Qur'an.
Not just the context, but also the time in which the relevation came.

But when I saw this topic, I thought of Stevil, Tank and Asmodean, they asked me multiple times about this.
So I bumbed in, can anyone answer?

It doesn't matter what someone's holy book says -- what the "correct" interpretation is, or what "context" you may need to view it in. What matters is what its followers do.

Islam is not a religion of peace. Yes, not all Muslims are primitive, barbaric, misogynistic, violent people -- but enough are for the religion not to be peaceful.

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"It doesn't matter what someone's holy book says -- what the "correct" interpretation is, or what "context" you may need to view it in. What matters is what its followers do.

Islam is not a religion of peace. Yes, not all Muslims are primitive, barbaric, misogynistic, violent people -- but enough are for the religion not to be peaceful.

Answer my questions above Ls.

If 'Muslims' were not 'Muslims' but spaghetti-eaters, you would blame on spaghetti...by your logic...

Quote from: "iSok"Answer my questions above Ls.

If 'Muslims' were not 'Muslims' but spaghetti-eaters, you would blame on spaghetti...by your logic...

If eating spaghetti is a religion/ideology, which it is actually, and a lot of its followers were like a lot of the more violent Muslims, then I certainly wouldn't call the religion of eating spaghetti peaceful.

Quote from: "iSok"

Quote from: "Whitney"iSok...if you had actually listened to the debate you'd know why the audience voted against the claim that islam is a religion of peace.  Peaceful religions don't have any passages which call for violence.

No but many people asked me off this.
I did indeed not read the article.
We're only allowed to defend, the passages that are in the Qur'an also are from a context in the Qur'an.
Not just the context, but also the time in which the relevation came.

But when I saw this topic, I thought of Stevil, Tank and Asmodean, they asked me multiple times about this.
So I bumbed in, can anyone answer?

I was hoping you could tell us about how Islam is peacefull and beautiful and treat woman as equals and how the average Muslim person disagrees with terorism and violence and women oppression and do not want to blow up Israel.

I agree with regards to USA though, I don't know why they invaded Iraq it wasn't WOMD, 9/11 maybe it was oil, maybe a feud between the Bushs and Saddam, maybe something strategic. It seems to me USA only get involved when they personally have something to gain, they are certainly not the world peace keepers that they make out they are.

Quote from: "Stevil"

Quote from: "iSok"

Quote from: "Whitney"iSok...if you had actually listened to the debate you'd know why the audience voted against the claim that islam is a religion of peace.  Peaceful religions don't have any passages which call for violence.

No but many people asked me off this.
I did indeed not read the article.
We're only allowed to defend, the passages that are in the Qur'an also are from a context in the Qur'an.
Not just the context, but also the time in which the relevation came.

But when I saw this topic, I thought of Stevil, Tank and Asmodean, they asked me multiple times about this.
So I bumbed in, can anyone answer?

I was hoping you could tell us about how Islam is peacefull and beautiful and treat woman as equals and how the average Muslim person disagrees with terorism and violence and women oppression and do not want to blow up Israel.

I agree with regards to USA though, I don't know why they invaded Iraq it wasn't WOMD, 9/11 maybe it was oil, maybe a feud between the Bushs and Saddam, maybe something strategic. It seems to me USA only get involved when they personally have something to gain, they are certainly not the world peace keepers that they make out they are.

Islam itself is perfect.
It's follower however are not....
But that cannot be blamed on Islam, if you would take away the factor 'Islam' it would be probably even worse...


For example, do you know why there are certain area's in Afghanistan where there is a lot of fighting?
It's because of the people that inhabit these area's, the Pashtun/Pathan/Pakhtun, they are the ones constantly fighting.
However many of them follow Islam, Islam teaches them to be patient and not be an agressor.
I can assure you, if you would take the factor Islam away in Afghanistan....NATO would not stay for a day longer.

Quote from: "iSok"For example, do you know why there are certain area's in Afghanistan where there is a lot of fighting?
It's because of the people that inhabit these area's, the Pashtun/Pathan/Pakhtun, they are the ones constantly fighting.
However many of them follow Islam, Islam teaches them to be patient and not be an agressor.
I can assure you, if you would take the factor Islam away in Afghanistan....NATO would not stay for a day longer.

I don't know much about Afghanistan. I saw Rambo 3, and it looks pretty rugged country. I assume it is a strategic position and that is why Russia and America fight for it. I don't know.

However I am unclear with regards to what you are saying. Are you saying that NATO are only fighting there because they want to kill Muslims?

Quote from: "Stevil"

Quote from: "iSok"For example, do you know why there are certain area's in Afghanistan where there is a lot of fighting?
It's because of the people that inhabit these area's, the Pashtun/Pathan/Pakhtun, they are the ones constantly fighting.
However many of them follow Islam, Islam teaches them to be patient and not be an agressor.
I can assure you, if you would take the factor Islam away in Afghanistan....NATO would not stay for a day longer.

I don't know much about Afghanistan. I saw Rambo 3, and it looks pretty rugged country. I assume it is a strategic position and that is why Russia and America fight for it. I don't know.

However I am unclear with regards to what you are saying. Are you saying that NATO are only fighting there because they want to kill Muslims?

I myself can also just guess why America decided to invade it......
No you understood me wrong, you are saying that you would like to know why Islam is a beautiful religion.

I just gave an example, about the Pashtun (they tradtionally follow the Pashtunwali 'the way of the Pashtun'), some Pashtuns choose to follow Pashtunwali
rather than Islam. But the majority follows rather Islam when the two codes contradicht one and another.
If you take Islam away, hell would break loose for NAVO in Afghanistan.
I wouldn't be exagerating that a Pashtun that rather follows Pashtunwali instead of Islam is a modern day Spartan.

Quote2:216 Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not.
2:217 They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month. Say: Warfare therein is a great (transgression), but to turn (men) from the way of Allah, and to disbelieve in Him and in the Inviolable Place of Worship, and to expel His people thence, is a greater with Allah; for persecution is worse than killing. And they will not cease from fighting against you till they have made you renegades from your religion, if they can. And whoso becometh a renegade and dieth in his disbelief: such are they whose works have fallen both in the world and the Hereafter. Such are rightful owners of the Fire: they will abide therein.
2:218 Lo! those who believe, and those who emigrate (to escape the persecution) and strive in the way of Allah, these have hope of Allah's mercy. Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Quotewill have a painful doom

^numerous instances....not peaceful in any context.

Quote3:155 Lo! those of you who turned back on the day when the two hosts met, Satan alone it was who caused them to backslide, because of some of that which they have earned. Now Allah hath forgiven them. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Clement.     (3:155) Those who retreat while fighting in a holy war are inspired by Satan.

"Those of you who turned back on the day when the two hosts met, Satan alone it was who caused them to backslide."
3:156 O ye who believe! Be not as those who disbelieved and said of their brethren who went abroad in the land or were fighting in the field: If they had been (here) with us they would not have died or been killed: that Allah may make it anguish in their hearts. Allah giveth life and causeth death; and Allah is Seer of what ye do.
3:157 And what though ye be slain in Allah's way or die therein ? Surely pardon from Allah and mercy are better than all that they amass.

^choosing not to fight is the influence of satan and those who fight for allah will be rewarded in heaven.

QuoteSanction is given unto those who fight because they have been wronged.

^Full text: bin Laden's 'letter to America' http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver)

Quote4:69 Whoso obeyeth Allah and the messenger, they are with those unto whom Allah hath shown favour, of the prophets and the saints and the martyrs and the righteous. The best of company are they!
4:70 That is bounty from Allah, and Allah sufficeth as Knower.
4:71 O ye who believe! Take your precautions, then advance the proven ones, or advance all together.    
4:72 Lo! among you there is he who loitereth; and if disaster overtook you, he would say: Allah hath been gracious unto me since I was not present with them.    
4:73 And if a bounty from Allah befell you, he would surely cry, as if there had been no love between you and him: Oh, would that I had been with them, then should I have achieved a great success!    
4:74 Let those fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward.
4:75 How should ye not fight for the cause of Allah and of the feeble among men and of the women and the children who are crying: Our Lord! Bring us forth from out this town of which the people are oppressors! Oh, give us from thy presence some protecting friend! Oh, give us from Thy presence some defender!
4:76 Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil. Lo! the devil's strategy is ever weak.

Quote4:89 They long that ye should disbelieve even as they disbelieve, that ye may be upon a level (with them). So choose not friends from them till they forsake their homes in the way of Allah; if they turn back (to enmity) then take them and kill them wherever ye find them, and choose no friend nor helper from among them,

I could go on...but I think the above is enough...it is not hard to find violent instruction in the quran, even when reading in context.

Again, Peaceful religions don't include calls to violence.

@Whitney,

Could you post this in the other topic, I just created?

Quote from: "iSok"@Whitney,

Could you post this in the other topic, I just created?

That topic isn't related to my point.

I had the impression the prophet said violence was a bad thing, but then circumstances changed, some infidels had to be taken care of, so violence is OK if god or his worldly representatives say so.  Seems a bit dodgy changing like that, if it did happen.
That's a dilemma for religion, change it and the divinity of the words are called into question, don't change and it seems like ancient blood thirsty, misogynist shit.

A big thing missing from this thread, which I'm surprised no one has mentioned, is the idea of "interpretation".  

If you argue that we no longer keep slaves or stone adulterers because moral standards have changed, you ought not turn around and argue that people are evil because of religion, when there are obviously other cultural and social influences.

Religions are interpreted by followers, and you'd be wise to deal with each follower as an individual, rather than broad-brushing them because of some verse they might interpret figuratively instead of literally.

Now, that's not as easy, but it's likely more accurate.  Evil or good are concepts defined by actions, not words.  Saying "I want to kill you" may or may not be evil; killing you would likely be evil.  The idea that a religion can in and of itself be "peaceful," or "violent," is stupid.  It can only be what its followers make it.  A religion cannot be peaceful, or warlike.  To think otherwise is to make a category error.  A religion is only a set of words, and because words must be interpreted, the qualities aroused have a source in the human as well as the text.

The vast majority of Muslims I've known -- and that is many; I lived for four years in Iran -- were peaceful people of good heart.  This horseshit stereotyping is unbecoming of freethinkers, and those indulging in it need to think more.

I'm surprised that this sort of caution should even prove needed.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"A big thing missing from this thread, which I'm surprised no one has mentioned, is the idea of "interpretation".  

If you argue that we no longer keep slaves or stone adulterers because moral standards have changed, you ought not turn around and argue that people are evil because of religion, when there are obviously other cultural and social influences.

Religions are interpreted by followers, and you'd be wise to deal with each follower as an individual, rather than broad-brushing them because of some verse they might interpret figuratively instead of literally.

Now, that's not as easy, but it's likely more accurate.  Evil or good are concepts defined by actions, not words.  Saying "I want to kill you" may or may not be evil; killing you would likely be evil.  The idea that a religion can in and of itself be "peaceful," or "violent," is stupid.  It can only be what its followers make it.  A religion cannot be peaceful, or warlike.  To think otherwise is to make a category error.  A religion is only a set of words, and because words must be interpreted, the qualities aroused have a source in the human as well as the text.

The vast majority of Muslims I've known -- and that is many; I lived for four years in Iran -- were peaceful people of good heart.  This horseshit stereotyping is unbecoming of freethinkers, and those indulging in it need to think more.

I'm surprised that this sort of caution should even prove needed.

Uh, hello? Have you been listening to what we've been saying?

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"It doesn't matter what someone's holy book says -- what the "correct" interpretation is, or what "context" you may need to view it in. What matters is what its followers do.

Islam is not a religion of peace. Yes, not all Muslims are primitive, barbaric, misogynistic, violent people -- but enough are for the religion not to be peaceful.

Quote from: "Thump"A religion cannot be peaceful, or warlike. To think otherwise is to make a category error. A religion is only a set of words, and because words must be interpreted, the qualities aroused have a source in the human as well as the text.

I agree and disagree. Some religions certainly have a more violent history than others. And their inception can include violence as well (Muhammad was a general). Still, it's difficult to label any one religion as violent or peaceful alone because most religions are so broad.

 :)

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"The vast majority of Muslims I've known -- and that is many; I lived for four years in Iran -- were peaceful people of good heart.  This horseshit stereotyping is unbecoming of freethinkers, and those indulging in it need to think more.

To point out that Islam is not an inherently peaceful religion is not the same as sterotyping.  I have known and do know many muslims who are very kind despite certain aspects of their holy text.

Quote from: "JoeBobSmith"

Quote from: "Stevil"It seems to me USA only get involved when they personally have something to gain, they are certainly not the world peace keepers that they make out they are.

considering all factors, we (usa) do a better job than(i believe) any other country could do

The country I belong to (NZ) has very few enemies. We are generally pretty tolerant of other countries, cultures, customs and are much more secular than USA. We do get bullied by the US at times with regards to trade and military operations but we stand up when we need to. USA have been pissed off at us for well over 20 years because we won't let anyone with nuclear weapons or nuclear powered vessels into our country. For this peaceful stance USA broke off the ANZUS treaty and have ensured that NZ do not participate in any international military training operations that occur. NZ are a free trade country, but America pretending to be the leaders of the free world are too worried about the impact a free trade agreement with NZ will have on them.

Anyway, this isn't an I hate America post. They do have lots of pluses going for them as well. I just disagree with your statement that US do a better job than any other country do or could do.

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"Uh, hello? Have you been listening to what we've been saying?

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"It doesn't matter what someone's holy book says -- what the "correct" interpretation is, or what "context" you may need to view it in. What matters is what its followers do.

Islam is not a religion of peace. Yes, not all Muslims are primitive, barbaric, misogynistic, violent people -- but enough are for the religion not to be peaceful.

Mentioning "interpretation" is not the same as weighing it appropriately.  That was my point.  Sorry you missed it.  To make it clear:

It is people who act.  A religion cannot be violent, or peaceful.  Only people, in this context, can act; holy books cannot.  Given that, interpretation is vital.

More clearly, there are perhaps one milion or so jihadis, out of 1.5 billion, with a B, Muslims.  Please explain how you can say this is not a peaceful religion, when well over 99% of its practitioners are not involved in religious violence.

So, to answer your question, yes, I have been listening.  I just think it's crap.  Feel free to correct me.

Quote from: "Sophus"

Quote from: "Thump"A religion cannot be peaceful, or warlike. To think otherwise is to make a category error. A religion is only a set of words, and because words must be interpreted, the qualities aroused have a source in the human as well as the text.

I agree and disagree. Some religions certainly have a more violent history than others. And their inception can include violence as well (Muhammad was a general). Still, it's difficult to label any one religion as violent or peaceful alone because most religions are so broad.

It's true that reliogions have histories, and that that history can be affected by the preachments of the religion in question.  I don't see that Islam is any more violent than Christianity, religiously.

Personally, I think that the terrorism and such is a result of a religion which encourages martyrdom coupled with (in large part) a tribal culture which encourages in-group identity along with out-group grudges.  At least, that's what I saw when I lived there.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"It is people who act.  A religion cannot be violent, or peaceful.  Only people, in this context, can act; holy books cannot.  Given that, interpretation is vital.

Ideologies cannot in and of themselves be peaceful or violent, yes; however, if they influence a significant amount of their followers to act in a certain way, then those ideologies are effectively what they influence their followers to be.

QuoteMore clearly, there are perhaps one milion or so jihadis, out of 1.5 billion, with a B, Muslims.  Please explain how you can say this is not a peaceful religion, when well over 99% of its practitioners are not involved in religious violence.

It's not relatively peaceful, when you compare it to other major world religions.

Also, does your definition of "peaceful" include abstinating from barbaric and primitive acts, such as forcing women to wear burkas and punishing them if they don't?

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"It is people who act.  A religion cannot be violent, or peaceful.  Only people, in this context, can act; holy books cannot.  Given that, interpretation is vital.

Ideologies cannot in and of themselves be peaceful or violent, yes; however, if they influence a significant amount of their followers to act in a certain way, then those ideologies are effectively what they influence their followers to be.

QuoteMore clearly, there are perhaps one milion or so jihadis, out of 1.5 billion, with a B, Muslims.  Please explain how you can say this is not a peaceful religion, when well over 99% of its practitioners are not involved in religious violence.

It's not relatively peaceful, when you compare it to other major world religions.

According to what metrics?

QuoteAlso, does your definition of "peaceful" include abstinating from barbaric and primitive acts, such as forcing women to wear burkas and punishing them if they don't?

http://www.google.com/search?q=define+p ... =firefox-a (http://www.google.com/search?q=define+peaceful&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)

Works for me.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"It is people who act.  A religion cannot be violent, or peaceful.  Only people, in this context, can act; holy books cannot.  Given that, interpretation is vital.

Ideologies cannot in and of themselves be peaceful or violent, yes; however, if they influence a significant amount of their followers to act in a certain way, then those ideologies are effectively what they influence their followers to be.

QuoteMore clearly, there are perhaps one milion or so jihadis, out of 1.5 billion, with a B, Muslims.  Please explain how you can say this is not a peaceful religion, when well over 99% of its practitioners are not involved in religious violence.

It's not relatively peaceful, when you compare it to other major world religions.

According to what metrics?

I don't have any, so I can't continue to argue this. But do you have any metrics?

Quotehttp://www.google.com/search?q=define+p ... =firefox-a (http://www.google.com/search?q=define+peaceful&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a)

Works for me.

Then let me state it this way: how many Muslims are moderate, i.e. have moved on from blatantly misogynic and other barbaric practices?

Quote from: "LegendarySandwich"It's not relatively peaceful, when you compare it to other major world religions.

Quote from: "Thump"According to what metrics?

Quote from: "Sammich"I don't have any, so I can't continue to argue this. But do you have any metrics?

You make the assertion -- you provide the numbers.  Them's the rules.  You claim Islam is not "relatively peaceful" -- then please provide numbers to support this assertion.  

QuoteThen let me state it this way: how many Muslims are moderate, i.e. have moved on from blatantly misogynistic and other barbaric practices?

Guilty until proven innocent, anyone?  

Is Islam misogynistic?  Absolutely.  Is it more so than Christianity? Perhaps, in its fundamentalist iteration.  But not only is Christianity also misogynistic, biology itself means that women will have a different role in life no matter what you, I, or anyone else thinks, which means that women will have different roles in social life, typically.  

I'd answer your question more fully, but "other barbaric practices" is a vague denominator.  Might you be more specific?  Are you perhaps talking about male circumcision?  Well, most Christians do that, too.  Are you talking about slavery?  Well, Christians -- and others -- support sex slavery in Southeast Asia.  Piracy?  Again, not limited to Muslims.

Be specific.  What do you find particularly repulsive about the behavior of Muslims, moreso than believers of other faiths?  Bear in mind, if the behaviors you critique might be found in other faiths, labeling it "Muslim" isn't fair.