The Coffee House - the UU Fellowship Thread

[Ciscokid]

"All the Muslim-bashing is making it more and more of a chore for me to check the forums" originally posted by Jamaesi

I am also sorry to read this. At present there seems a huge cultural pressure to highlight the most extreme elements of Islam,and to ignore the fact that many Moslems are valuable members of the community whose contribution to society should be valued. I think that we'd all lose out if this forum were no longer to have contact with Muslim members and hope that you'll stay.

The problem is, the "extreme elements" are large in numbers. Perhaps not here but the middle east seems to be a breeding ground for the "evil" version of the Islamic community. All it took was for a Danish fellow to write a drawing of Mohammed and buildings were being blown up, people were protesting and brandishing signs stating that "those who offend Mohammed should be beheaded" etc.

I have no problems with peaceful Muslims...but I've run out of patience for the murderers who hide behind Islam.

 

[Davidium]

Cisco,

I was not going to comment, but I feel I have to....

Those who use religion as an excuse for violence are not linked to any one religion. How many people have been killed in the name of Christianity? I think it is disengenious to single out Islam in the way your comment seemed to imply.

If you want to speak about fundamentalists, that I understand. Fundamentalists exist in all religions, in all political philosophies, and even in hobbies. There are fundamentalist UU's, for that matter. The woman who told me I had no buisness being a UU, because I had once served in the military and would not disavow all use of war was a fundamentalist UU.

Rather than speak about such people as Moslems, or speak about those who kill planned parenthood doctors as Christians... or those Israelies living in the settlements in Palestine as Jews... why not simply think of them as what they are...

Fundamentalists. Fundamentalists have more in common with each other than the faith traditions they come from. Or the political philosphies they come from. I havce always found it interesting the similarity of thinking between libertarian separatist fundamentalists (militia) and environmental terrorists. Different ideology and different goals, but very similar ways of thinking. The same with ultra-conservative Christians and Ultra-conservative Jews and ultra-conservative moslems.

I just that looking specifically at the ultra-conservatives of any one political or religious sect misses the point.

Yours in faith,

David

 

[lilithu]

Namaste Cisco and David,

David, I have the impression that Cisco does make a distinction between Islam as a religion and extremist elements within Islam. I believe that his concern is the general impression that the extremist elements are larger within Islam than with other religions.

Cisco, I understand that, from watching the news, it may seem that there is more violence being commited by people who are Muslim than others. However, try to consider a few things.

First, our media shows the violence of angry people protesting in the streets, some burning and rioting. It doesn't show the much greater violence caused by our bombs, dropped because our president believes that it is our God-given duty to spread democracy (by force) to the rest of the world. Nor does it show the violence of daily grinding poverty caused by the governments that we have supported. We think that we're just minding our business and being attacked, unprovoked. But our "business", the business of spreading capitalism is seen by many as an attack against them.

Second, it may seem like the level of anger (and hence violence) in reaction to the cartoons is unreasonably strong. But the cartoons in the Danish newspaper were not an innocent mistake or misunderstanding. They knew that it was blasphemous within Islam to portray Mohammed and yet intentionally asked for insulting portrayals of the Prophet. Also, tensions have been brewing between Muslim immigrants and native Europeans for decades, based as much on racism and xenophobia, as on religion. The cartoons were just the catalyst.

Our media only shows the angry reaction; it doesn't show all the hurts and grievances that led up to it.

 

[jamaesi]

I'm part Pakistani.

Today I read in the news that two Pakistani women were killed and four children injured when an American bomb hit their tent.



Is that peaceful? Is that democratic? I'm in tears just thinking about it.

I devote my life to peace. And yet, I'm discriminated against by so many people because of my origin and my religion. I'm told to go home, I'm called horrible names. And I never react violently. I try to talk calmly to them, try to ignore them, just continue on and pretend they aren't there. I'm physically assaulted, I'm spit at. I've had my Qur'an thrown in the trash. Most of this discrimination comes merely because I am part Arab. And much of this happened before 9/11, before people knew that Afganstan existed and there was terrorism in this world.
And I know that some people realise that that there is a difference between Islam and terrorism. But it does no good to say they are large in number! They simply aren't. But no one reports when we speak against terrorism, when we march against it. The cameras are too busy taking in carnage committed by a few.
I'm told by so many people if Islam is supposed to be peaceful, then why don't we do something about the terrorists? What am I to? I disagree with terrorism, I try to live as nonviolently as possible with respect to all people and nature, I educate all people, nonMuslims and Muslims when they understand Islam wrong. Am I to go out and phsyically stop Usama? Even the US government can't do that. What is a girl supposed to do to him?
What would you like me to do?
I'm against Shariah Law, I'm agaisnt theocracy. I'm for democratic and fair and just and nonreligious systems of government. I'm a very progressive Muslim- and that means that I am not accepted by much of the Muslim community, to the extent my life is in danger. But that doesn't stop me, I love Islam, I love the message of the oneness of G-d and peace and charity and loving your fellow man. I don't believe in hell, I don't believe in killing, I don't believe in violence. I don't hate Jews, I don't want Israel destroyed- but I do not agree with how it was formed and how it currently is BUT I want the Jews and Muslims to live in peace, BOTH of them and whoever else wishes to join them.
It's frightening what people feel they can do to me just because of who I am- without even knowing anything more about me than Arab blood is in me and I have a Qur'an in my arms. When people say Arabs are the new black, believe it. When people say that Islam is the only religion left that's acceptable to mock, believe it. The most common name I am called is "sand n*****."


This isn't really directed at anyone anymore, sorry for.. ranting.

 

[lilithu]

Thank you for sharing your experiences with us jamaesi.

 

[Ciscokid]

Namaste Cisco and David,

David, I have the impression that Cisco does make a distinction between Islam as a religion and extremist elements within Islam. I believe that his concern is the general impression that the extremist elements are larger within Islam than with other religions.

Perhaps I didn't explain myself well but you understood what I was getting at.

Cisco, I understand that, from watching the news, it may seem that there is more violence being commited by people who are Muslim than others. However, try to consider a few things.

First, our media shows the violence of angry people protesting in the streets, some burning and rioting. It doesn't show the much greater violence caused by our bombs, dropped because our president believes that it is our God-given duty to spread democracy (by force) to the rest of the world. Nor does it show the violence of daily grinding poverty caused by the governments that we have supported. We think that we're just minding our business and being attacked, unprovoked. But our "business", the business of spreading capitalism is seen by many as an attack against them.

I don't disagree at all here, I wish we would get out of the Middle East. It is long overdue.

Second, it may seem like the level of anger (and hence violence) in reaction to the cartoons is unreasonably strong. But the cartoons in the Danish newspaper were not an innocent mistake or misunderstanding. They knew that it was blasphemous within Islam to portray Mohammed and yet intentionally asked for insulting portrayals of the Prophet. Also, tensions have been brewing between Muslim immigrants and native Europeans for decades, based as much on racism and xenophobia, as on religion. The cartoons were just the catalyst.

Our media only shows the angry reaction; it doesn't show all the hurts and grievances that led up to it.

This is where you will get 0 sympathy from me. Nobody has the right to live life w/o being offended from time to time. There was a controversial painting of Christ called "**** Christ" a few years back and I don't recall anyone rioting and blowing up buildings. I don't like to see people offended and ridiculed, but there is no excuse for the violent reaction of the cartoon. Picket all you want...boycott Danish goods if you want....but don't hurt people and blow up buildings.

What I'd like to see is a gathering of peaceful Muslims to protest against these killers and thugs.

 

[lilithu]

This is where you will get 0 sympathy from me. Nobody has the right to live life w/o being offended from time to time. There was a controversial painting of Christ called "**** Christ" a few years back and I don't recall anyone rioting and blowing up buildings. I don't like to see people offended and ridiculed, but there is no excuse for the violent reaction of the cartoon. Picket all you want...boycott Danish goods if you want....but don't hurt people and blow up buildings.

I don't think you fully understood what I was saying. First, was the fact the the comics were intentionally published in order to offend in the highest way possible. And SECOND, is the fact that tensions have been simmering in Europe between Muslims and white native Europeans for decades, and it doesn't all have to do with religion. It really has more to do with racism and xenophobia. I agree with you that no one has the right to not be offended, not even agregiously offended. Ultimately, there is no excuse for rioting and violence. However, we should at least understand the causes, and it's not just because someone insulted the Prophet.

The closest analogy that I can think of is racism against blacks in the U.S. I lived in Los Angeles during the Rodney King trial and its aftermath. What the nation saw on tv was a bunch of angry, out-of-control black men rioting and looting and beating innocent white bystanders with bricks and fire extinguishers, and shooting at fire-fighters as they tried to put out fires. Even as unjust as the King verdict obviously was, the response to it seemed unreasonable, irrational, frightening. It seemed to validate the fears that caused the officers to be aquitted in the first place. But what the rest of the country did not see on the national news was all the stuff that led up to it. They did not see the grinding daily poverty of South Central L.A. (In fact, most Angelinos don't see it either because we drive through on freeways with protective sound barriers.) The country didn't see the fact for decades, blacks had been stopped and beaten and sometimes killed by the police. They didn't see the fact that tensions between Koreans and Blacks had been simmering due to price-gouging in Korean-owned, local grocery stores. The rest of the country barely noticed, if at all, when a Korean grocer was convicted only of manslaughter and released with time served after being caught on tape shooting a black teenager in the back of the head as she was walking away. Time and time again, the message that the black community got in L.A. was that the system did not care about them. That even when a crime committed against a black person was caught on tape, the system still would not punish the wrong-doers. Basically, what they were told is that their lives were worthless in the eyes of our system. So why should they care about our system?

Again, I'm not saying that it was justified to loot and burn and maim. It's always wrong. There are always consequences to pay. But I can understand the anger of the black community in L.A., which erupted with the King verdict. It wasn't just the King verdict that caused that violence; that was just the last straw. Similarly (not identically), the protests that have erupted in Europe over the Danish cartoons were not caused just by the cartoons. It comes from decades of resentment building up. Jamaesi has given personal testimony of some of her experiences. I have heard very similar stories from friends of mine who are Indian, Pakistani, and Middle Eastern. My friend D was beat up after school in London every day by people who called him "Paki," "towelhead" and "sand-n*gg*r." There are large numbers of people who can't find jobs because the color of their skin and their religion makes people assume they're terrorists. The "war on terror" is as much about race as it is religion. After years of this, even resonable, rational people can become overly-reactionary, bitter, more prone to violence. Which then causes the other people to feel justified in their fears and presumptions, which then causes more bitterness and resentment...

The last thing that I want to do is cause an argument within the UU forums, or else there truly will be no refuge from all the negativity of the world. Again, I'm not saying that the behavior is excusable or justified. Just understandable, from my perspective. And to get back to my original point, it is not something inherent in Islam that is causing this seemingly disproportionate violence. There are a lot of other underlying factors involved.

 

[jamaesi]

What I'd like to see is a gathering of peaceful Muslims to protest against these killers and thugs.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27419
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27883

I have said this before. What more do you want? Would you like me to write "I hate violence- f*** Usama" across my breasts and go topless?
That would at least get attention- maybe even the media.

 

[Ciscokid]

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27419
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=27883

I have said this before. What more do you want? Would you like me to write "I hate violence- f*** Usama" across my breasts and go topless?
That would at least get attention- maybe even the media.

It seems to me that there is a modest number of outspoken peaceful Muslims here in the States at least but where are they in the Middle East? I doubt they'd dare protest, they'd end up dead anyway. It's a sad situation, it really is. I honestly don't blame Islam...but I do hate the breeding of evil and hatred that goes on in the name of religion.

It's a frustrating situation for me. On one hand I'd like to stay out of the Middle East and on the other hand I'd like to see all terrorists dead.

 

[jamaesi]

In one post you blame us (moderate Muslims), and in this one you call us a "modest" number (which is usually degrading) and then you say the reasons we can't speak out.

You think it's frustrating for you?


I'm not trying to be rude to you, I understand what you are saying. But this is what it is like for me and so many other Muslims who actually follow peace. It's almost as if we can do no right.




I agree with you, I want all the terrorists gone. But using terror to get rid of the terrorists doesn't make much sense. :/

 

[lilithu]

Hey Guys, namaste. This is indeed a difficult topic. No matter how one looks at it, lives are at stake, not just life and death but our daily lives. Also at stake is our sense of justice, which we UUs hold up along with freedom as some of our highest ideals. Even as I brought it up I wondered if it wasn't better not to. It would certainly be easier, but not better, imo.

I've been reflecting a lot lately on our 7 principles. Principle 3 is that we affirm and promote acceptance of one another and encouragement to personal growth. It would be easy to accept one another if we never talked about anything controversial but there would be no push towards spiritual growth, on either side. As difficult as it is sometimes, we are called to create a space for those of us with whom we respectfully disagree, while at the same time challenging their assumptions and being open to having our own assumptions challenged. Let's remember to keep this space so that no UU will be hesitant to speak from his or her heart.

 

[Ciscokid]

I agree with you, I want all the terrorists gone. But using terror to get rid of the terrorists doesn't make much sense. :/

I don't think reason and pacifism is the answer either. A terrorist can't slam a plane into a building when his heart is stopped.

 

[Ciscokid]

Hey Guys, namaste. This is indeed a difficult topic. No matter how one looks at it, lives are at stake, not just life and death but our daily lives. Also at stake is our sense of justice, which we UUs hold up along with freedom as some of our highest ideals. Even as I brought it up I wondered if it wasn't better not to. It would certainly be easier, but not better, imo.

I've been reflecting a lot lately on our 7 principles. Principle 3 is that we affirm and promote acceptance of one another and encouragement to personal growth. It would be easy to accept one another if we never talked about anything controversial but there would be no push towards spiritual growth, on either side. As difficult as it is sometimes, we are called to create a space for those of us with whom we respectfully disagree, while at the same time challenging their assumptions and being open to having our own assumptions challenged. Let's remember to keep this space so that no UU will be hesitant to speak from his or her heart.

Great post. I have found that discussing tough topics is worthwhile once you get past the discomfort. I hope I have not offended Jamaesi or any other Muslim. I tend to type exactly what is going on in my mind.
I pray for peace...I want a good world for our children to grow up in. That's all.


P.S. In case you haven't noticed...I'm one of the more conservative UU's you'll find.

 

[jamaesi]

I don't think reason and pacifism is the answer either. A terrorist can't slam a plane into a building when his heart is stopped.

I agree, but look at the innocents killed and innocents tortured and innocents detained without human rights. But you know, I'm less and less in favour of the death penalty as time goes on.

Just killing them doesn't work- you need to go to the root of the problem. I get called a silly liberal when I say this, but if you just kill the terrorists and leave the conditions the same then more terrorists will just pop up. It's an endless cycle and it needs broken.


To fight terror with terror is like putting a fire out with gasoline. It might go out in the end, but only have a big explosion.


Actually, I have a little story to tell. One of my ex-boyfriends WAS a fan of terrorism. (This isn't the reason he is my ex, but alas, I was younger and stupider.) He was from Saudi Arabia, lived there growing up.

He also had no real purpose in his life. His family was (oil) rich and he had whatever he wanted. Which was, for him, video games.

I was the little white-looking American that didn't shun him and the only girl (still!) who ever got close to him. (I was an agnostic back, but most everyone just considered me Jewish, for some reason. I believe it was because of my Jewish grandparents. Which, well, made a few things akward being around Muslim full Arabs so much.)

I was horrified shortly after 9/11 when he said al-Qaidah and the Taleban were good groups, etc, etc. So of course, I immediately gave him a sound verbal thrashing. >:{ Force would be okay to be employed in this situations. After.. quite some time of me bickering with him I won him over. I was actually surprised he never knew of the absolute horrors these groups commit- and to the Arab people. I also got him to see the error in the way he was reading the Qur'an (in the violent "kill the infidels and women suck!" twisting of the Qur'an way that makes my skin crawl)- I knew more about Islam and the Qur'an than he did. D:

And now he's.. well, mostly harmless and going to med school and a rather moderate Muslim.
I'd like to think I had a part in that. *puffs up*




(This is probably how liberal Christians felt during the Crusades! )

 

[jamaesi]

I pray for peace...I want a good world for our children to grow up in. That's all.

Me too. :hug:

 

[Karl R]

I don't think reason and pacifism is the answer either. A terrorist can't slam a plane into a building when his heart is stopped.

While I have no ethical problems with killing people who are attempting to kill others, there is a major flaw with the strategy of killing all the terrorists:

No man is an island. The terrorist you kill today (or the innocent bystander who is "collateral damage") has a brother, a son, or a father that you'll face tomorrow.

There's a good example of this in the western "The Cheyenne Social Club". At the beginning of the movie, The protagonist (Jimmy Stewart) kills an enemy. This enemy's five brothers come gunning for Stewart. He finally manages to kill them. Next thing he knows, the whole extended family (several dozen) are out for his blood. Stewart leaves town, never to return.

I don't know any easy answers to this problem. The solutions the US is currently pursuing seem to be backfiring. As stupid as it sounds, reason and pacifism might actually work better.

 

[lilithu]

I agree with you, I want all the terrorists gone. But using terror to get rid of the terrorists doesn't make much sense.

I don't think reason and pacifism is the answer either. A terrorist can't slam a plane into a building when his heart is stopped.

Respectfully, I believe that we are talking past each other here. You're talking about two different things. I believe that Jamaesi is refering to the "war on terror" and the fact that despite all of our technology, war kills innocents. And even when it doesn't kill them, it terrorizes them and causes them to hate the people who are terrorizing them. The question is whether war in this situation is an effective solution. Whereas, I believe that Cisco is responding to the question of whether war and killing is ever an acceptable solution, and he's saying that pacifism is not the answer.

I won't speak for Jamaesi but I am not a pacifist. I believe that there are times when war is necessary because the alternative causes greater harm. (Hitler is the obvious example, but there are others that I believe were "just" wars.) And if I knew with absolute certainty that a person was about to do something that would kill tens/hundreds/thousands of innocent people, would I kill him or her to prevent that? Yes, I probably would (tho I shudder at the thought of ever being faced with that decision). So pacifism is not the issue here, at least not for me. But Cisco, if you knew that the person, the "terrorist", was in a building with a dozen other people who may be innocent, would you blow up that building in order to kill the one person? How would you stop that one heart without hurting other innocent hearts? And if you'd be willing to hurt innocents, how many? At what price? And wouldn't you be the "terrorist" to those other people and the people who love them? Wouldn't they then be justified in trying to kill you?

 

[lilithu]

While I have no ethical problems with killing people who are attempting to kill others, there is a major flaw with the strategy of killing all the terrorists:

No man is an island. The terrorist you kill today (or the innocent bystander who is "collateral damage") has a brother, a son, or a father that you'll face tomorrow.

There's a good example of this in the western "The Cheyenne Social Club". At the beginning of the movie, The protagonist (Jimmy Stewart) kills an enemy. This enemy's five brothers come gunning for Stewart. He finally manages to kill them. Next thing he knows, the whole extended family (several dozen) are out for his blood. Stewart leaves town, never to return.

I don't know any easy answers to this problem. The solutions the US is currently pursuing seem to be backfiring. As stupid as it sounds, reason and pacifism might actually work better.

Karl, welcome to RF! And thank you for your excellent first post. Since you are new to RF you may not realize the set up here. This discussion is taking place within the Unitarian Universalist forum, which is reserved for UUs and friends of UUs. Since most everyone is our friend, you are certainly welcome to post here when the spirit moves you. There are of course other forums reserved for Christians, Jews, Muslisms, Pagans, Hindus, Buddhists, etc. And in all cases people outside of that faith tradition are welcome to come and ask questions and interact. (I've visited other forums regularly.) Just remember that when you're visiting, you're a visitor. (There are also open forums where all RF members meet to socialize and debate.) Again, I reeeally do not want to give you the impression that you're not welcome in the UU forum. We are glad to have you with us. Nor was your post in any way inappropriate. (Personally, I loved it!) I am just informing you of how some things work while you're getting to know RF.

Again, welcome. I look forward to your future posts.
-lilith

 

[Ciscokid]

Respectfully, I believe that we are talking past each other here. You're talking about two different things. I believe that Jamaesi is refering to the "war on terror" and the fact that despite all of our technology, war kills innocents. And even when it doesn't kill them, it terrorizes them and causes them to hate the people who are terrorizing them. The question is whether war in this situation is an effective solution. Whereas, I believe that Cisco is responding to the question of whether war and killing is ever an acceptable solution, and he's saying that pacifism is not the answer.

I won't speak for Jamaesi but I am not a pacifist. I believe that there are times when war is necessary because the alternative causes greater harm. (Hitler is the obvious example, but there are others that I believe were "just" wars.) And if I knew with absolute certainty that a person was about to do something that would kill tens/hundreds/thousands of innocent people, would I kill him or her to prevent that? Yes, I probably would (tho I shudder at the thought of ever being faced with that decision). So pacifism is not the issue here, at least not for me. But Cisco, if you knew that the person, the "terrorist", was in a building with a dozen other people who may be innocent, would you blow up that building in order to kill the one person? How would you stop that one heart without hurting other innocent hearts? And if you'd be willing to hurt innocents, how many? At what price? And wouldn't you be the "terrorist" to those other people and the people who love them? Wouldn't they then be justified in trying to kill you?

I enjoyed reading your perspective. This is truly a troubling issue and it is hard to nail down firm answers. The problem is evil and it can spread like a virus when people teach their young that hatred and violence is the proper way to handle things.
To be honest I don't think the U.S. can really solve the terrorism issue, especially in the Middle East. Perhaps this happens and is not reported, but why don't other Muslims in the ME try to educate the younger generation?
Perhaps the peaceful Muslims are in fear of speaking out against the violent types....but the U.S. can't be expected to fight this war all on our own. I still think the bad Muslims need to hear it from the good ones.

 

[jamaesi]

To be honest I don't think the U.S. can really solve the terrorism issue, especially in the Middle East. Perhaps this happens and is not reported, but why don't other Muslims in the ME try to educate the younger generation?

We do.