Islam - What's your view on it?

[MaxAttack]

By and large I think Islam is a pretty cool guy. It's a younger faith than Christianity which went through similar phases back there in the middle ages. A lot of the bad **** pinned on Islam (read: Saudi Arabia) is really the work of a backwards system of government justifying its human rights abuses by the scripture where they are in truth more politically motivated.

Islam seems to have always embraced science, medicine and philosophy, contrary to Christianity. Islamic scholars of the middle ages were responsible for many key breakthroughs in areas as simple as mathematics, during a time when Christian rule in Europe almost halted scientific progress.

As for the faith itself, in the modern age... Atrocities are atrocities and the responsibility of the individual who commits them. Blaming a religion that helps hundreds of millions of people sleep at night and conduct themselves like decent people (a huge majority of religious people regardless of faith if you ask me) is asinine and dangerous. Anything that helps you ignore the screaming void of uncertainty that is the human consciousness is fine by me.

Seems to me, overwhelmingly, that militants who claim to be religiously motivated are actually politically motivated.

 

[HenrySwanson]

Story from Germany. Here's a translation:

Young Muslims (dressed in traditional garb because of Eid) ran through Köln railway station to get to the platform. For that they were taken to the ground and cuffed; the station was locked down. They hadn't done anything other than "look suspicious", which was enough for such drastic measures.



Subsequent tweets in this thread state that allegations that they shouted Allahu Akbar were completely false. Others saying that their clothes weren't unusual looking anyway.

An English language report of the incident (Daily Express) is still running with the headline that "men in black vests stormed the station".

I know it's the Express and it's a vomit-inducing rag but still...

This reminds me of the time I was handcuffed against my girlfriends car for running to it to put her handbag in the boot. I'll never know if it was racial profiling whereas this seems to be a blatant case of it.

Terrorists win I guess.

 

[MaxAttack]

This reminds me of the time I was handcuffed against my girlfriends car for running to it to put her handbag in the boot. I'll never know if it was racial profiling whereas this seems to be a blatant case of it.

Terrorists win I guess.

Reminds me of that time a British cop mag dumped an innocent Portugese dude on 7/7. That **** made me uber skechy around ARU cops, and I'm as white as roasted, unseasoned joints of meat.

 

[PocketZeven]

Story from Germany. Here's a translation:

Young Muslims (dressed in traditional garb because of Eid) ran through Köln railway station to get to the platform. For that they were taken to the ground and cuffed; the station was locked down. They hadn't done anything other than "look suspicious", which was enough for such drastic measures.



Subsequent tweets in this thread state that allegations that they shouted Allahu Akbar were completely false. Others saying that their clothes weren't unusual looking anyway.

An English language report of the incident (Daily Express) is still running with the headline that "men in black vests stormed the station".

I know it's the Express and it's a vomit-inducing rag but still...

In context there are many muslims in Germany and i think it is somewhat a miracle such occurences do not happens more often. Especially with the rise of rightwing polarising politics and russian meddling. Adressing immigration issues should never be motivated by fear, hate and demonisation.

 

[Dobermann92]

By and large I think Islam is a pretty cool guy. It's a younger faith than Christianity which went through similar phases back there in the middle ages. A lot of the bad **** pinned on Islam (read: Saudi Arabia) is really the work of a backwards system of government justifying its human rights abuses by the scripture where they are in truth more politically motivated.

Islam seems to have always embraced science, medicine and philosophy, contrary to Christianity. Islamic scholars of the middle ages were responsible for many key breakthroughs in areas as simple as mathematics, during a time when Christian rule in Europe almost halted scientific progress.

As for the faith itself, in the modern age... Atrocities are atrocities and the responsibility of the individual who commits them. Blaming a religion that helps hundreds of millions of people sleep at night and conduct themselves like decent people (a huge majority of religious people regardless of faith if you ask me) is asinine and dangerous. Anything that helps you ignore the screaming void of uncertainty that is the human consciousness is fine by me.

Seems to me, overwhelmingly, that militants who claim to be religiously motivated are actually politically motivated.

Except Islam isn't embracing science now. The support for sharia law is in an all time high. I don't think it is different than any of the ideologies of the past which must reform itself otherwise it is harmful for society.

Reminds me of that time a British cop mag dumped an innocent Portugese dude on 7/7. That **** made me uber skechy around ARU cops, and I'm as white as roasted, unseasoned joints of meat.

And I was searched by security several times on the Schipol Airport for some reason, but I'm white and male (I'm not from The Netherlands). We just can't know what is the reason behind most of the times.

 

[Dotini]

Anything that helps you ignore the screaming void of uncertainty that is the human consciousness is fine by me.

Very interesting statement!

Djinn and devils are an intrinsic part of the Islamic canon. I would be interested in hearing any stories of contact between Muslims, Djinn and devils.

 

[PocketZeven]

Except Islam isn't embracing science now. The support for sharia law is in an all time high. I don't think it is different than any of the ideologies of the past which must reform itself otherwise it is harmful for society.



And I was searched by security several times on the Schipol Airport for some reason, but I'm white and male (I'm not from The Netherlands). We just can't know what is the reason behind most of the times.

It is more a cultural issue then anything else. It is no coincidence Islamic extremism comes from a certain region. I personally believe there would still be extremism in that region, even if there where christianity or judaism.

edit: correction

 

[Dotini]

It is more a cultural issue then anything else. It is no coincidence extremism comes from a certain region.

Explain this more, please. Do you mean extremism comes from Arabs? Or does it come from the very land, the geology and geography the culture occupies? Exactly how?

 

[PocketZeven]

Explain this more, please. Do you mean extremism comes from Arabs? Or does it come from the very land, the geology and geography the culture occupies? Exactly how?

Thanks. I see what I did there. I corrected it. I meant to say islamic extremism and not suggest that all extremism originates from that region. As you might have realised from the rest of my post is, that I connect islamic extremism with the region and its people and not neccesary with their religion.

 

[MaxAttack]

Very interesting statement!

Djinn and devils are an intrinsic part of the Islamic canon. I would be interested in hearing any stories of contact between Muslims, Djinn and devils.

I lived with a guy who was dating a girl who grew up in Saudi Arabia. They were both pretty dramatic people and the guy was a real conspiracy nut. It didn't take long with those two cooped up in a room together for the "Djinn are real and influence everything" talk to start.

Djinn stories seem to have a similar place in society as like, Aesop's fables or Grimm fairytales in the West. A device to teach kids how not to be idiots and keep their attention with a little touch of fantasy.

of course, were it to turn out that they're real, i am certain i will have never had a friend like them...

 

[TenEightyOne]

Reminds me of that time a British cop mag dumped an innocent Portugese dude on 7/7.

Hard to translate this post. Are you referring to Menezes (a Brazilian) who was shot later the same month, and what is the "cop mag" reference?

 

[TexRex]

and what is the "cop mag" reference?

I think the "dumped" is a part of that, in that the British cop emptied a mag.

 

[Dobermann92]

It is more a cultural issue then anything else. It is no coincidence Islamic extremism comes from a certain region. I personally believe there would still be extremism in that region, even if there where christianity or judaism.

edit: correction

Interesting theory, I think it is more likely because of the poorness of the region (there is little fertile land in the Middle East) is the biggest contributor to that, because the wealthy can limit the redistribution of the goods. It is like what was the feudal system in Europe, where lords could get away with anything.

 

[MaxAttack]

Hard to translate this post. Are you referring to Menezes (a Brazilian) who was shot later the same month, and what is the "cop mag" reference?

Post below yours is correct... Also I thought he was Portugese and it was later the same day. In my defence, it's been over a decade, and my point that i'm scared of armed police still makes sense.

You might get used to my particular style of erratic babbling one of these days, my dude

 

[Michael88]

Interesting theory, I think it is more likely because of the poorness of the region (there is little fertile land in the Middle East) is the biggest contributor to that, because the wealthy can limit the redistribution of the goods. It is like what was the feudal system in Europe, where lords could get away with anything.

Not so sure about that, time and time again we have seen that extremely wealthy, educated Saudi Arabians practice....lets say very VERY *strict* Islam.
I do not think that ''practicing religion to the extreme'' is merely a wealth or even an educational issue.

 

[Dennisch]

Islam is still being used as Christianity was used in medieval times. To keep the paupers under control with life long brainwashing sessions.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I think the "dumped" is a part of that, in that the British cop emptied a mag.

Ah, I was wondering what a police printed periodical had to do with things, makes more sense now.

 

[UKMikey]

Post below yours is correct... Also I thought he was Portugese and it was later the same day. In my defence, it's been over a decade, and my point that i'm scared of armed police still makes sense.

He was shot after the 22 July bombings, not 7/7. That's probably where the confusion is coming from.

 

[Imari]

Islam is still being used as Christianity was used in medieval times. To keep the paupers under control with life long brainwashing sessions.

Because Christianity totally isn't used in that way in modern times, right?

As you might have realised from the rest of my post is, that I connect islamic extremism with the region and its people and not neccesary with their religion.

If the extremism isn't connected to the religion, surely calling it Islamic extremism is a misnomer? If it's just the region and it's people, why not name it more correctly as Arabic extremism, or Middle Eastern extremism?

 

[Dennisch]

Because Christianity totally isn't used in that way in modern times, right?

The same silly nonsense as christianity.

 

[PocketZeven]

Because Christianity totally isn't used in that way in modern times, right?



If the extremism isn't connected to the religion, surely calling it Islamic extremism is a misnomer? If it's just the region and it's people, why not name it more correctly as Arabic extremism, or Middle Eastern extremism?

It is a misnomer any which way you say it though. The risk is generalising or demonising all of islam or all of the middle east, or all arabs. The correct way is to just name the terrorist group, but the Media much prefers calling it islamic extremism, because mentioning islam with terrorism/extremism sells or receives views.. Which one could say is accurate, but it is inaccurate to think that all of Islam extremist.

Do you think extremism and islam are connected rather then the region or tribal culture?

 

[Dobermann92]

It is a misnomer any which way you say it though. The risk is generalising or demonising all of islam or all of the middle east, or all arabs. The correct way is to just name the terrorist group, but the Media much prefers calling it islamic extremism, because mentioning islam with terrorism/extremism sells or receives views.. Which one could say is accurate, but it is inaccurate to think that all of Islam extremist.

Do you think extremism and islam are connected rather then the region or tribal culture?

I don't think it is a misnomer. Hating on arab people would be a bad thing to do but disliking an ideology which is the basis of the extremism (no matter how many people sincerely believe in that religion) isn't wrong, if you can express your criticism in a civilised manner.

 

[mustafur]

Because Christianity totally isn't used in that way in modern times, right?



If the extremism isn't connected to the religion, surely calling it Islamic extremism is a misnomer? If it's just the region and it's people, why not name it more correctly as Arabic extremism, or Middle Eastern extremism?

It's not exactly accurate though, the regions where Islam exist have their own forms of terrorism, from Jemaah Islamyia in Indonesia, to Al Shabab in North Africa, to say it's region specific is a bit misleading, I would say each Region has their own unique form of crazy bit still worshipping the same thing.

Also the Whataboutism again, why?

 

[Imari]

It is a misnomer any which way you say it though. The risk is generalising or demonising all of islam or all of the middle east, or all arabs. The correct way is to just name the terrorist group, but the Media much prefers calling it islamic extremism, because mentioning islam with terrorism/extremism sells or receives views.. Which one could say is accurate, but it is inaccurate to think that all of Islam extremist.

It's not a misnomer if you think there's a meaningful link between the two things that you're using to name them. Calling it Islamic extremism doesn't mean that all Muslims are extremists, but it does mean that in cases where you use that descriptor that you think that Islam was a primary cause of the extremism.

Terrorists are not always primarily motivated by their religion, even if they're religious. If you're drawing a connection between the extremism and the region, then Middle Eastern extremism seems like an apt label. If you're drawing it between the extremism and the culture, then Arabic extremism seems fine. It doesn't imply that all Middle Eastern countries are extremist, or all Arabs. Nor does it imply that all extremists are Middle Eastern, or Arabic.

If I say that this is a rotten banana, that does not mean that all bananas are rotten. It does not mean that all rotten things are bananas. But it does mean that I'm saying that this particular thing is both rotten and a banana. And if I've taken the time to say it, it's a fair assumption that there's something meaningful about that particular combination that I'm drawing your attention to.

In this case, its how the English language works and how to avoid logical fallacies.

Do you think extremism and islam are connected rather then the region or tribal culture?

No, I don't think extremism and Islam are a priori connected. I think that humans can be extremists, and that humans partake in Islam. Some particular sects of Islam may be more prone to creating extremists and promoting extremist behaviour than others, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that the number of sub-groups of Islam that promote this sort of behaviour is particularly higher than any other sub-group of a similar large conglomeration of humanity.

There are American extremists, Christian extremists, female extremists, Irish extremists, you name it. Demonstrate to me that the particular group that you're talking about has a higher incidence of extremism than humanity at large, and you'll have something that might be convincing.

Also the Whataboutism again, why?

Largely because people like to attribute behaviours and attitudes to Islam and Muslims that should be appropriately attributed to humans in general. Providing examples of similar behaviour in a religion that is not currently portrayed by the media as a cult of death fanatics, rapists and paedophiles can help people to see that more clearly.

I'd argue that using comparatives to establish what is common human behaviour and what is specific to a religion isn't whataboutism. It's not for the purpose of deflecting the discussion (which is the fallacy of whataboutism), it's about focusing the discussion on attributes that are truly unique to Islam. If a discussion gets lost talking about things that aren't truly central or even connected to the topic, then it loses the majority of it's value.

 

[Dobermann92]

No, I don't think extremism and Islam are a priori connected. I think that humans can be extremists, and that humans partake in Islam. Some particular sects of Islam may be more prone to creating extremists and promoting extremist behaviour than others, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that the number of sub-groups of Islam that promote this sort of behaviour is particularly higher than any other sub-group of a similar large conglomeration of humanity.

What is the punishment for apostasy in the Quran? Or the punishment for homosexuality? Or the punishment of a woman who did not scream when raped? Death. Stoning, to be correct. Islam produces extremism because of the barbaric religious rules which are still in practise in a lot of muslim countries. Even around 40% of muslims who live in Great Britain agree with these punishments.
You can say that Christians in the Southern States say the same, but I've never heard somebody acting on it.

 

[UKMikey]

What is the punishment for apostasy in the Quran? Or the punishment for homosexuality? Or the punishment of a woman who did not scream when raped? Death. Stoning, to be correct. Islam produces extremism because of the barbaric religious rules which are still in practise in a lot of muslim countries. Even around 40% of muslims who live in Great Britain agree with these punishments.

I looked but could only find a poll which said sixty six percent of British Muslims completely condemned stoning as a punishment with a further 13% condemning it to some extent. One in two may think homosexuality should be illegal but I don't know whether they want to stone people to death for it here.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...se-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

 

[baldgye]

Islam produces extremism because of the barbaric religious rules...

lets not worry about European history

 

[PocketZeven]

It's not a misnomer if you think there's a meaningful link between the two things that you're using to name them. Calling it Islamic extremism doesn't mean that all Muslims are extremists, but it does mean that in cases where you use that descriptor that you think that Islam was a primary cause of the extremism.

Terrorists are not always primarily motivated by their religion, even if they're religious. If you're drawing a connection between the extremism and the region, then Middle Eastern extremism seems like an apt label. If you're drawing it between the extremism and the culture, then Arabic extremism seems fine. It doesn't imply that all Middle Eastern countries are extremist, or all Arabs. Nor does it imply that all extremists are Middle Eastern, or Arabic.

If I say that this is a rotten banana, that does not mean that all bananas are rotten. It does not mean that all rotten things are bananas. But it does mean that I'm saying that this particular thing is both rotten and a banana. And if I've taken the time to say it, it's a fair assumption that there's something meaningful about that particular combination that I'm drawing your attention to.

In this case, its how the English language works and how to avoid logical fallacies.



No, I don't think extremism and Islam are a priori connected. I think that humans can be extremists, and that humans partake in Islam. Some particular sects of Islam may be more prone to creating extremists and promoting extremist behaviour than others, but I haven't seen anything that suggests that the number of sub-groups of Islam that promote this sort of behaviour is particularly higher than any other sub-group of a similar large conglomeration of humanity.

There are American extremists, Christian extremists, female extremists, Irish extremists, you name it. Demonstrate to me that the particular group that you're talking about has a higher incidence of extremism than humanity at large, and you'll have something that might be convincing.



Largely because people like to attribute behaviours and attitudes to Islam and Muslims that should be appropriately attributed to humans in general. Providing examples of similar behaviour in a religion that is not currently portrayed by the media as a cult of death fanatics, rapists and paedophiles can help people to see that more clearly.

I'd argue that using comparatives to establish what is common human behaviour and what is specific to a religion isn't whataboutism. It's not for the purpose of deflecting the discussion (which is the fallacy of whataboutism), it's about focusing the discussion on attributes that are truly unique to Islam. If a discussion gets lost talking about things that aren't truly central or even connected to the topic, then it loses the majority of it's value.

I agree with your post, but the problem is the media and mainly the public like to generalise and such descriptions generally have a polarising effect. People do not have common sense like you. Ofcourse there is a relationship between the religion and extremism. But my point was that the tribalistic aggression predates Islam and in my view their roots are more connected to the region then the religion itself. Religion has always only been used as an excuse to justify aggression and oppression. From the point of view of the extremists they are righteous. European history and religion have had similar extremism during the crusades. So in hindsight you are also correct. Islamic extremism is not a misnomer, but it is very open to the risk of generalisation. I much prefer extremists should be named by their name and not their religious beliefs. I dont believe any religion (with some exceptions) is inherently evil or extremist on its own. And that is coming from someone who is an atheist.

What is the punishment for apostasy in the Quran? Or the punishment for homosexuality? Or the punishment of a woman who did not scream when raped? Death. Stoning, to be correct. Islam produces extremism because of the barbaric religious rules which are still in practise in a lot of muslim countries. Even around 40% of muslims who live in Great Britain agree with these punishments.
You can say that Christians in the Southern States say the same, but I've never heard somebody acting on it.

That isnt exclusive to islam. The bible also describes punishements for homosexuality. Ibelieve islam doesnt cause extremism much more then christianity. In history there have been many atrocaties carried out in the name of the bible.There have also been aggression carried out on homosexuals in the name of christianity. Do you think christianity was the cause of that? Another example is Russia, which is also another country that demonizes homosexuality. Is this also caused by religion?

 

[Dobermann92]

I looked but could only find a poll which said sixty six percent of British Muslims completely condemned stoning as a punishment with a further 13% condemning it to some extent. One in two may think homosexuality should be illegal but I don't know whether they want to stone people to death for it here.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news...se-of-belonging-poll-homosexuality-sharia-law

That still leaves 40% (or 27% if I grant you the +13%) who doesn't condemn it, yet they live in a society which does not practise it. This is one of the polls, yes, I'll update this post of the other one I found (I really have to start to bookmark the pages I read, sorry).
This is worrying, because this means at least around 1/3 of the muslim population didn't accept the universal human rights. While I'm not an LGBT+ person, I don't want them to feel that they are in danger.

 

[mustafur]

That still leaves 40% (or 27% if I grant you the +13%) who doesn't condemn it, yet they live in a society which does not practise it. This is one of the polls, yes, I'll update this post of the other one I found (I really have to start to bookmark the pages I read, sorry).
This is worrying, because this means at least around 1/3 of the muslim population didn't accept the universal human rights. While I'm not an LGBT+ person, I don't want them to feel that they are in danger.

It's 21% just over 1 in 5.

I would say that is still a High Number but what would be important is those that actually would do something about it, having extreme opinions isn't illegal last I checked.

Not that it's a comfortable number.