Defending Secularism against Religious Incursions

[icehorse]

The majority peaceful Muslims aren't and will never be responsible for the acts of an extremist minority

But a large minority (30-40%?), of them want to live under a theocracy that ignores many basic human rights.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Fear of muslim and non muslim extremists is never unjustified.

Don't feel too bad-- I have a healthy fear of *all* religion that is extreme, not just yours.

I am old enough to remember when the bible was used to "justify" oppression of African-Americans right here on USA soil. I remember reading about "unsolved" deaths of black men in the rural south-- unsolved, because the very people who were supposed to solve the murders, were a part and parcel to the very crimes they were supposed to prevent!

I also remember when non-believers such as myself, were tossed off of tall buildings, or brutally beaten (sometimes to death) for daring to question islam...

... wait. That was just last year, wasn't it?


Do I fear religion? Yes. It's a good thing the world is shifting to secularism, though.

It's even better that secularists won't use the same tactics against the religious, that the religious used to use on secularists...

... the worst we seem to do is write on internet forums, publish books, or post youtube lectures...

... or help create some of the Best TV in history (Cosmos, both versions) ...

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Maybe nobody else noticed the irony of atheists, camped out on a religious forum, which would appear to indicate that atheism is a religion, vehemently complaining about religious incursions against secularism.

Maybe nobody else noticed that there is an "atheist" section of the forum, or that this forum isn't a "religious-only discussion forum", it is a "religious discussion forum" where the TOPIC of religion can be discussed by ANYONE, including by those who don't belong to one.

I also think you need to read the definition of "irony".

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I also think you need to read the definition of "irony".

Personally, I purchase irony meters in bulk lots from Amazon.

And even so, I always use a 50 amp fuse.

Because... you know... you can't always get what you want...

... but our favorite flavor is Cherry Red.

 

[Sakeenah]

Is it hated because it tells the truth?

No, it's not considered a trustworthy source because they give false interpretations,use faricated narrations.

 

[Sakeenah]

How about not using the same word (islamophobia), for two very different situations (discrimination and criticism)?

I've mentioned in a previous post that criticizing islamic ideas isn't islamophobia but hating someone because they are Muslim is.

 

[Sakeenah]

I understand that you are peaceful-- except when you aren't, of course.

And that little problem with you using the same book as those who are less than nice...

That's great..

 

[Sakeenah]

Funny. The extremists say the exact same thing about .. .you... that YOU are not a Real Muslim™, and that YOU take things out of context, and that YOU are insincere in your practice.

Which do I believe?

I personally can't understand why you think an extremist minority are correct and the majority of peaceful Muslims are wrong, but you can believe whatever you want to believe.

 

[icehorse]

I've mentioned in a previous post that criticizing islamic ideas isn't islamophobia but hating someone because they are Muslim is.

And I sincerely think it's great that you personally wouldn't call a criticizer an islamophobe, but sadly, many apologists do - and that's the problem. This fundamental dishonest hurts everyone, Muslim and non-Muslim alike.

 

[Sakeenah]

False. To 100%. Proof, you ask?

Why don't you change your book to remove all the violence it contains? Hmmmm?

What's that? It's "too sacred"?

I rest my case: you do worship it like some sort of golden idol.

Don't feel bad. Many christians act the same way about the equally violent bible...

More proof: Anytime some very ugly person makes a giant point about burning your book-- the entire world of Islam gets all up-in-arms with the threats....

... including the so-called "moderates".

I've never burned one, what would be the point? But the fact that muslims get all up in arms about what is just a copy?

Also proves you do worship this book...

You rest your case? I didn't know this was a court case... I would have hit the lawyer,hired a gym and used grammar/spelling check.

"why don't Muslims change their book and remove all the violence?"
I'll try to answer it by explaining the importance of context and I'll give an example from the Quran.

Context is:
1) The parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect.

2)The set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

Any discussion on Quran verses that refer to violence would be meaningless without studying the surrounding context.
The Quran mentions all life forms are sacred. The value of human life is so great that the Quran compares the taking of one human life unjustly with the killing of humanity. At the same time there are verses that say " and slay them wherever ye catch them"
I'm assuming this is one of the verses you were referring to , this a small part of verse 191 chapter 2.

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.” [Al-Qur’an 2:190-191]

According to Islamic history fighting against agressors was prohibited during the first thirteen years of the Prophet muhammad's mission. After Muslims migrated to Medinah the verses 2:190-191 were revealed to allow the muslim community to fight in self-defense. The next verses show that peace is preffered and agression is prohibited. The verses above specifically refer to fighting against oppression and defense of religious freedom.
So when read in context, the above verses do not command Muslims to be violent or hateful towards people of other faiths.

“Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.” [Al-Qur’an 60:8]

For Muslims and I assume also for Jews and Christians the texts/scriptures are fixed and we do not allow any 'editing'. IMO the solution isn't blaming or editing text that people might think are harsh and challenging. I think the solution is promoting religious interpretations that are more positive, inclusive and shunning interpretations that are extrem,oppressive and violent.

 

[Sakeenah]

But a large minority (30-40%?), of them want to live under a theocracy that ignores many basic human rights.

Is there an official report that says 30-40% of the Muslims in the West want to live under a theocracy?

 

[Sakeenah]

Of course not! You worship it! Your own words prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that you do!

You'd prefer to leave all the violent language in-- so that the extremists can do all the "dirty work" for you... as you and your fellow so-called "peaceful" types look on with a stern "disapproving gaze"....

... all the while, tacitly supporting the violence...

"peaceful"? Not even a little...

Paranoid much?

 

[icehorse]

Is there an official report that says 30-40% of the Muslims in the West want to live under a theocracy?

Perhaps, put I was referring to Muslims worldwide.

 

[Sunstone]

False dichotomy. Which is a logical fallacy.

You know, Bob, for a guy who thinks he has at least a decent grasp of logic, you would sure do yourself a favor if you ceased to lecture Sakeenah on her logic, and instead got hold of an introductory text on informal fallacies to "refresh" your memory. Just sayin'.

 

[Sunstone]

False. To 100%. Proof, you ask?

Why don't you change your book to remove all the violence it contains? Hmmmm?

What's that? It's "too sacred"?

I rest my case: you do worship it like some sort of golden idol.

Don't feel bad. Many christians act the same way about the equally violent bible...

More proof: Anytime some very ugly person makes a giant point about burning your book-- the entire world of Islam gets all up-in-arms with the threats....

... including the so-called "moderates".

I've never burned one, what would be the point? But the fact that muslims get all up in arms about what is just a copy?

Also proves you do worship this book...

Seriously, Bob, do yourself a favor. Study some logic before you claim you understand it.

 

[Notanumber]

No, it's not considered a trustworthy source because they give false interpretations,use faricated narrations.

Like I've mentioned in my previous post, extremist take the verses out of context and intepret it in a way that suits their political agenda,and it seems that you support their interpretation.
The Quran doesn't command readers to murder.

"Whoever kills a person it is as though he has killed all mankind.And whoever saves a life,it is as though he had saved all mankind." (5:32)

I believe this proves that it is not just extremists that take the verses out of context and interpret them in a way that suits their agenda.

If Anyone Slew a Person (Qur'an 5:32) - WikiIslam
Conclusion
In this instance, as in many others, it is the apologists, not the sceptics, who are misinterpreting verses and quoting them out of context. A simple reading of the verse and those that surround it makes this clear.[13]

In the Islamic world, those who propagate their non-Islamic faiths or publicly criticize Islam are often harassed, imprisoned and even executed by their communities or their governments, under laws against "spreading disorder [mischief] through the land" and apostasy.

If verse 5:32 means what some apologists claim it to mean, why are they so reluctant to quote the verse accurately and in context rather than presenting a misleading paraphrasing of what they wished the verse had said? Furthermore, why are moderates unable to silence fellow Muslims on an intellectual level by using that very verse?

They are unable to because their claim is false, and (as proven by the actions of many)[14] anyone who is familiar with the Qur'an already knows this.

David Wood provides the correct meaning.

Answering Muslims: Deliberate Deception? CNN and Arsalan Iftikhar Massacre Qur'an 5:32 in Order to Defend Islam

It was meant as a warning for non-Islamics.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

No, it's not considered a trustworthy source because they give false interpretations,use faricated narrations.

False according to? Who's the Authority, here?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I've mentioned in a previous post that criticizing islamic ideas isn't islamophobia but hating someone because they are Muslim is.

Well, yes--- but what do you call hating someone because they are *not* Muslim, then?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I personally can't understand why you think an extremist minority are correct and the majority of peaceful Muslims are wrong, but you can believe whatever you want to believe.

So. The Majority Rules? Is *that* how you "interpret" your book? Interesting. It's as if there is no other, no actual outside "authority" that would stop false interpretations...

If there is nothing to halt these "false" interpretations? What makes you so certain the **majority** is correct?

Hmmmm?

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

You rest your case? I didn't know this was a court case... I would have hit the lawyer,hired a gym and used grammar/spelling check.

"why don't Muslims change their book and remove all the violence?"
I'll try to answer it by explaining the importance of context and I'll give an example from the Quran.

Context is:
1) The parts of a written or spoken statement that precede or follow a specific word or passage, usually influencing its meaning or effect.

2)The set of circumstances or facts that surround a particular event, situation, etc.

Any discussion on Quran verses that refer to violence would be meaningless without studying the surrounding context.
The Quran mentions all life forms are sacred. The value of human life is so great that the Quran compares the taking of one human life unjustly with the killing of humanity. At the same time there are verses that say " and slay them wherever ye catch them"
I'm assuming this is one of the verses you were referring to , this a small part of verse 191 chapter 2.

“Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors. And slay them wherever ye catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out; for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith.” [Al-Qur’an 2:190-191]

According to Islamic history fighting against agressors was prohibited during the first thirteen years of the Prophet muhammad's mission. After Muslims migrated to Medinah the verses 2:190-191 were revealed to allow the muslim community to fight in self-defense. The next verses show that peace is preffered and agression is prohibited. The verses above specifically refer to fighting against oppression and defense of religious freedom.
So when read in context, the above verses do not command Muslims to be violent or hateful towards people of other faiths.

“Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just.” [Al-Qur’an 60:8]

For Muslims and I assume also for Jews and Christians the texts/scriptures are fixed and we do not allow any 'editing'. IMO the solution isn't blaming or editing text that people might think are harsh and challenging. I think the solution is promoting religious interpretations that are more positive, inclusive and shunning interpretations that are extrem,oppressive and violent.

You only prove my point: you worship this book so much, you are deathly afraid to change any of it.

Even the barbaric parts that modern people easily recognize is pure evil....