I think Islam is a totalitarian ideology with a religious facet.

[icehorse]

I think religion in general must be marginalized. I'm most concerned with the negative influences that Abrahamic religions have on the world, and of those, I'm most concerned with Islam.

Given that, I think the first mistake we make is to declare Islam to be a "religion". That's a misnomer.

Instead, we should be honest and simply say that:
Islam is a totalitarian ideology with a religious component.

I understand that the phrase "totalitarian ideology" will come with negative baggage or connotations for most people, but strictly speaking, "totalitarian ideologies" don't have to be bad things. The point is that there is a crucial distinction between religion and totalitarian ideologies.

 

[raph]

Isnt the distinction between the 2 the religious part? Islam believes in a prophet and God therefore it is a religion.

 

[Useless2015]

What is the negative influence?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Given that, I think the fist mistake we make is to declare Islam to be a "religion".

That's because it is a religion. Or, in a more academic approach, a cult.

The point is that there is a crucial distinction between religion and totalitarian ideologies.

Yes, there is. Islam is clearly a religion and not a political theory. They have rituals, practices, beliefs, and other criteria that meet the definition of religion.

 

[icehorse]

Isnt the distinction between the 2 the religious part? Islam believes in a prophet and God therefore it is a religion.

I'm not arguing that Islam doesn't have a religious component. Yes of course, Islam has a religious component. But it's just a component of a much larger ideology.

 

[Rival]

Although one could say that the prophet of Islam could equate to such figures as Mao, Kim Il Sung, Lenin etc. as all these men were almost venerated and held to be almost infallible by their followers.

 

[icehorse]

What is the negative influence?

Here are a few: misogyny, homophobia, anti-semitism, denial of crucial science, sanctioned pedophila, withholding of aid, championing of suffering (think mother teresa)... (that's just off the top of my head).

 

[icehorse]

That's because it is a religion. Or, in a more academic approach, a cult.

Yes, there is. Islam is clearly a religion and not a political theory. They have rituals, practices, beliefs, and other criteria that meet the definition of religion.

Of course these rituals, practices, and beliefs support the original claim that Islam has a religious component - no argument there. But when you describe it as a *cult*, you're starting to make my point for me, no?

 

[Revoltingest]

I think religion in general must be marginalized. I'm most concerned with the negative influences that Abrahamic religions have on the world, and of those, I'm most concerned with Islam.

Given that, I think the fist mistake we make is to declare Islam to be a "religion". That's a misnomer.

Instead, we should be honest and simply say that:
Islam is a totalitarian ideology with a religious component.

I understand that the phrase "totalitarian ideology" will come with negative baggage or connotations for most people, but strictly speaking, "totalitarian ideologies" don't have to be bad things. The point is that there is a crucial distinction between religion and totalitarian ideologies.

I think I agree with your point, but I'd say that "islam" is a religion,
& that what you describe would better be labeled "Islamist".
I don't know if a single word works for this though.

 

[Useless2015]

misogyny

Mysogyny is a Western problem not Islaamic.

homophobia

In Islaam gays can be gays as long as there is no sodomizing.

anti-semitism

Islaam is an Semitic religion, it comes from Semites. You are talking nonsense.

denial of crucial science

Muslims actually brought science back in Medieval times. So again another bullcrap claim.

sanctioneer pedophila

Marriage is only allowed after puberty. I wouldnt call 16 year olds children.

withholding of aid

Aid for what? You are not making sense whatsoever.

championing of suffering (think mother teresa)

What is 'championing of suffering'?

 

[icehorse]

Hey Useless,

I was responding to my more general claim about religions in general, not just Islam. So for example, the Catholic church famously withholds condoms from AIDs-torn regions, hence withholding aid, and the Catholic church continues to provide sanctuary to known pedophiles. That said...

What on earth are you saying here??? Are you claiming for example that many religious folks aren't actively blocking the progress of science e.g. stem cell research, climate change, and evolution?

And are you saying that Muslims in the ME aren't actively anti-semetic?

And did you really just say that gays can be gays as long as they don't have sex with each other?

And so on...

 

[Unification]

I think religion in general must be marginalized. I'm most concerned with the negative influences that Abrahamic religions have on the world, and of those, I'm most concerned with Islam.

Given that, I think the fist mistake we make is to declare Islam to be a "religion". That's a misnomer.

Instead, we should be honest and simply say that:
Islam is a totalitarian ideology with a religious component.

I understand that the phrase "totalitarian ideology" will come with negative baggage or connotations for most people, but strictly speaking, "totalitarian ideologies" don't have to be bad things. The point is that there is a crucial distinction between religion and totalitarian ideologies.

I see Islam as neither totalitarian ideology, or religion. My point being there is a distinction between all three and not just the two.

Islam means to be in subjection to peace and purity.

When a human being is innerly subjected to peace and purity, they would be in the conscious state of "Islam." Meaning, any human being can be "Islam" regardless of nationality, religion, etc. It is more of a way of inner character than it is anything exoteric. To spread Islam would be to spread peace and purity.
Anything else spread through violence, control/power, greed, dogma is not "Islam."

Anything contrary to peace and purity would not be "Islam." It would then be man-made laws and jurisdictions. Call it what you will. . a cult/dictatorship, etc. If peaceable and pure actions are not reflected outwardly as they are inwardly, it would be not of "Islam." In which case, all of the negative things that do harm and are not of peace and purity are not of "Islam." Those doing things harmful and negative can imposter behind the name of "Islam" but that doesn't make it "Islam."

The only possible way Islam could be totalitarian is if the same inner and outer nature of peace and purity were there.

Definitions of "religion" are too vague and assumptive.

I think that the biggest mistake is to declare anything not of peace and purity to be "Islam."

 

[Kirran]

I would like to make clear that the term anti-Semitic, although common sense would imply it means being prejudiced against Semites, it actually means being prejudiced against Jewish people.

In English, the meanings of many words aren't best reflected by their form and origins, but such is the language. What the word 'anti-Semitic' actually means is to be prejudiced against Jews.

 

[Unification]

I would like to make clear that the term anti-Semitic, although common sense would imply it means being prejudiced against Semites, it actually means being prejudiced against Jewish people.

In English, the meanings of many words aren't best reflected by their form and origins, but such is the language. What the word 'anti-Semitic' actually means is to be prejudiced against Jews.

You were just thinking the same thing I was, that a word may be better off being defined by its original use and language and not so much as how wiki or dictionaries define them now-a-days or how they are commonly and conditionally perceived and assumed.

 

[Kirran]

You were just thinking the same thing I was, that a word may be better off being defined by its original use and language and not so much as how wiki or dictionaries define them now-a-days or how they are commonly and conditionally perceived and assumed.

I think they should be used as they are currently used by speakers of the language.

 

[Unification]

I think they should be used as they are currently used by speakers of the language.

So if someone had their own definition of anti-Semitic in their own language, and another had a differing definition of anti-Semitic in the original language the word came from, which definition and language should be used?

 

[icehorse]

I see Islam as neither totalitarian ideology, or religion. My point being there is a distinction between all three and not just the two.

Islam means to be in subjection to peace and purity.

When a human being is innerly subjected to peace and purity, they would be in the conscious state of "Islam." Meaning, any human being can be "Islam" regardless of nationality, religion, etc. It is more of a way of inner character than it is anything exoteric. To spread Islam would be to spread peace and purity.
Anything else spread through violence, control/power, greed, dogma is not "Islam."

Anything contrary to peace and purity would not be "Islam." It would then be man-made laws and jurisdictions. Call it what you will. . a cult/dictatorship, etc. If peaceable and pure actions are not reflected outwardly as they are inwardly, it would be not of "Islam." In which case, all of the negative things that do harm and are not of peace and purity are not of "Islam." Those doing things harmful and negative can imposter behind the name of "Islam" but that doesn't make it "Islam."

The only possible way Islam could be totalitarian is if the same inner and outer nature of peace and purity were there.

Definitions of "religion" are too vague and assumptive.

I think that the biggest mistake is to declare anything not of peace and purity to be "Islam."

I think you have a very unusual definition of Islam - quite academic, very rarely put into practice. I'm talking about the real day-to-realities.

 

[Useless2015]

Hey Useless,

I was responding to my more general claim about religions in general, not just Islam. So for example, the Catholic church famously withholds condoms from AIDs-torn regions, hence withholding aid, and the Catholic church continues to provide sanctuary to known pedophiles. That said...

So this is unrelated to Islaam. I don't see how this an answer to the question i asked about Islaam?

What on earth are you saying here??? Are you claiming for example that many religious folks aren't actively blocking the progress of science e.g. stem cell research, climate change, and evolution?

No i am telling you that you aren't making much sense. Why would Islam 1000 years ago encourage science if it was against science?

And are you saying that Muslims in the ME aren't actively anti-semetic?

They are Semitic themselves...

And did you really just say that gays can be gays as long as they don't have sex with each other?

Yes.

 

[Unification]

I think you have a very unusual definition of Islam - quite academic, very rarely put into practice. I'm talking about the real day-to-realities.

I would call the harmless, the freedom to perform hobbies... collectively.

The harmful/negative...I would call the "anti-Islam." Anti-peaceful and pure movements/cults/radicals/extremists.

 

[icehorse]

Hey Useless,

I'd be happy to agree with you that 1000 years ago, Islam was receptive to science. But for the last 500 years or so, Islam largely has not been in step with science.

As far as anti-semitism goes, I'm using the common definition of the term, which means bigotry against Jews. Perhaps where you live this term isn't in common use. I wasn't aware that such differences existed, but if they do, I'm referring to anti-Jewish bigotry.

As far as gays go, this of course is where we'll have to agree to disagree. I know I find your opinion on gays to be horrible, and I'd guess you think the same of my opinion. correct?