Islam - What's your view on it?

[TenEightyOne]

Don't you think the two of you could've said that in that thread, not here? You're free to jump to any conclusions though. If my thoughts there, and my reaction here makes you think I'm a jihadist, go ahead.

??? What? You asked the question in here, so I replied in here. Who said we thought you were a jihadist? You need a source to follow that up.

You're being puerile, obstinate and silly now.

And BHR still isn't a clue as I know them very very well and they don't have any facility in Bahrain.

 

[LeMansAid]

It's all jokes and stalking @BHRxRacer. Hope you weren't too..... cough..... butthurt.

 

[BHRxRacer]

??? What? You asked the question in here, so I replied in here. Who said we thought you were a jihadist? You need a source to follow that up.

You're being puerile, obstinate and silly now.

And BHR still isn't a clue as I know them very very well and they don't have any facility in Bahrain.

Oh quit it. There's a cold store here named UK, I bet the united kingdom is named after it.

I asked the question in here, because you agreed with a racist bigot in here. I was just trying to find out why. Given how you jump to conclusions I figured I'd do it too and just assumed you think of me as a Bin Laden or something because of my shock at the amount of racist, ignorant responses here.

It's all jokes and stalking @BHRxRacer. Hope you weren't too..... cough..... butthurt.

Nah I wasn't. It actually gave me a nice goodnight laugh. I just wanted to know if it was because of my other posts here, or you just like thinking "we're all the same"

 

[TenEightyOne]

Oh quit it. There's a cold store here named UK, I bet the united kingdom is named after it.

I asked the question in here, because you agreed with a racist bigot in here. I was just trying to find out why. Given how you jump to conclusions I figured I'd do it too and just assumed you think of me as a Bin Laden or something because of my shock at the amount of racist, ignorant responses here.

I'm not from the UK, I'm British Presumably to you "BHR" means Bahrain, apologies for my not knowing that, not sure why I would know that, of course.

Who's a racist bigot? I reported your post presuming it was @LeMansAid, the only other person mentioned in our exchange? He's never struck me as that through all his posting thus far...

 

[BHRxRacer]

I'm not from the UK, I'm British Presumably to you "BHR" means Bahrain, apologies for my not knowing that, not sure why I would know that, of course.

Who's a racist bigot? I reported your post presuming it was @LeMansAid, the only other person mentioned in our exchange? He's never struck me as that through all his posting thus far...

I know it's "GBR", but UK's more common so it's a better analogy. doesn't matter anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-3

As for @LeMansAid , his post was funny but posting it here is obviously implying Islam, and therefore anybody living in an Islamic country, is short-sighted. You agreed with that, which was surprising to me. I thought you were one of those AUP abiding people that stick to the topic religiously. See what I did there?

 

[Rage Racer]

I think that the highest estimates assign blame for some WWII casualties due to the, at times, careless use of troops.

Well, the irrecoverable military losses of USSR were 11.5 million (the rest of the 27 million are civilian losses, I hope there's no need to remind you what Nazis did on the occupied territories and what happened in sieged Leningrad), versus 8.6 million of the Axis on the Eastern Front. The ratio is 1.3 : 1. Still doesn't look like "Stalin won by throwing Germans up with fodder".
The "careless use of troops" may have been true for the early periods of war, but in 1944-45, the "cannon fodder" tactics were no longer popular in the Red Army.

And the Japanese, and the Russians, and the Americans, Australians, British, if you want to go to the big total.

I'm not going big total, but it was Hitler who started the Operation Barbarossa.

The figures therein get you to a score of about 6 million for Stalin if you use the minimums, I think anyone who's read Gulag Archipelago would easily believe that many more died in Stalin's prisons than were recorded to have done.

Well, the Archipelago is a fictional story in a large part, and again, the author - Solzhenitsyn - was the main promoter of the crazy "60+ million" number. Just think about it. It means that every third citizen of the Soviet Union was put to death (and how many were locked up in prisons/labor camps and survived? Every second? Two of three?). My grandmother, who had lived in the era of evil demon Stalin, does not remember anything like this (she only remembers a neighbour who was put to prison for 10 years for saying something wrong - and came out alive). Those who believe in "over 60 millions victims" are probably bad at history, or maths, or both.

P.S. I'm not a stalinist or a communist, but I hate when people equalize Stalin to Hitler and call him "the biggest human killer".
P.P.S. It's funny how we switched from Islam to counting the victims of Stalinism

 

[KSaiyu]

Deadliest genocide of the 20th Century? Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge, killing 3m - just about as many as the Jews exterminated by the Holocaust.

A QI moment here I imagine. Where does the 6 million figure originate from if it is around 3 million? I've only heard 3 million being linked to holocaust deniers, but then seen no solid evidence for 6 million so am genuinely curious.[/quote]

 

[Carbonox]

P.P.S. It's funny how we switched from Islam to counting the victims of Stalinism

Maybe it'll be a good idea that we switch back to discussing what the thread's all about, then.

/wannabemod

 

[BHRxRacer]

Maybe it'll be a good idea that we switch back to discussing what the thread's all about, then.

/wannabemod

Good idea.

To the people that made incredibly ignorant and hateful comments about Islam, I'd like to know if you're anti-religion (understandable, somewhat) in general, or just anti-Islam?

 

[GBO Possum]

Good idea.

To the people that made incredibly ignorant and hateful comments about Islam, I'd like to know if you're anti-religion (understandable, somewhat) in general, or just anti-Islam?

Islam makes "incredibly ignorant and hateful comments" about people, don't you think?

 

[BHRxRacer]

Islam makes "incredibly ignorant and hateful comments" about people, don't you think?

Not the Islam I know, and not the Islam 90% of this country believes in. So no, I don't think.

 

[GBO Possum]

Not the Islam I know, and not the Islam 90% of this country believes in. So no, I don't think.

So you don't believe in the Quran, and reject its contents. I'm relived. But by definition, that makes you not a Muslim.

 

[BHRxRacer]

So you don't believe in the Quran, and reject its contents. I'm relived. But by definition, that makes you not a Muslim.

By whose definition? What contents am I rejecting?

Also, you didn't answer. Is it only Islam you're against, or religion in general?

 

[GBO Possum]

By whose definition? What contents am I rejecting?

Also, you didn't answer. Is it only Islam you're against, or religion in general?

Quran 4:89 for a start. I'm relieved you reject that when I read it. http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089

I did not answer your question because it was directed at those ...

..people that made incredibly ignorant and hateful comments about Islam...

Now that you direct the question to me, my answer is that I am against all religions, but to varying degrees. Islam tops the list because it has proven to be the most dangerous. What makes it dangerous is the Quran.

The Quran makes hateful comments about people. That is, if you can accept that non-Muslims are "people".

 

[BHRxRacer]

Quran 4:89 for a start. I'm relieved you reject that when I read it. http://www.usc.edu/org/cmje/religious-texts/quran/verses/004-qmt.php#004.089

Did you bother reading the 4:90? Or the ones before? You're taking it out of context, without keeping in mind that literal translations aren't at all accurate. Read 4:90. it clearly says not to fight those of them who make peace with you(Muslims). Only fight those who aren't. In other words, only kill in self defense. Is that hateful?

Now that you direct the question to me, my answer is that I am against all religions, but to varying degrees. Islam tops the list because it has proven to be the most dangerous.

Most dangerous? Well, as people here say, citation needed.

I agree religion organized religion has been one of the leading causes of death, but I'd like to know where you got your statistics from.

What makes it dangerous is the Quran.

No, what makes it dangerous is the same thing that made/makes Christianity or any other group-belief dangerous. People. People will use whatever it is necessary to gain power. In this case, a sick, twisted interpretation of religion.

edit

 

[TenEightyOne]

I know it's "GBR", but UK's more common so it's a better analogy. doesn't matter anyway. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO_3166-1_alpha-3

More common than what? Great Britain's different from the Kingdom... that's a group of parliamentary countries under a single Royalist Parliament. The same way that Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia.

Did you bother reading the 4:90? Or the ones before? You're taking it out of context, without keeping in mind that literal translations aren't at all accurate. Read 4:90. it clearly says not to fight those of them who make peace with you(Muslims). Only fight those who aren't. In other words, only kill in self defense. Is that hateful?

That's a mistranslation itself; the "self" as the Koran describes it is ones self as a Muslim. That's how extremists extrapolate it whatever the translation.

No, what makes it dangerous is the same thing that made/makes Christianity or any other group-belief dangerous. People. People will use whatever it is necessary to gain power. In this case, a sick, twisted interpretation of religion.

It took us a long time to agree on something...

 

[GBO Possum]

From Pew Research:-

Count the non-Muslim countries in this list of all countries which have laws against apostasy.

"2011, a total of 20 countries across the globe prohibited apostasy (abandoning one’s faith, including by converting to another religion). Such measures were in effect in more than half the countries in the Middle East-North Africa region (11 of 20, or 55%) as well as in five of the 50 countries in the Asia-Pacific region (10%) and four of the 48 countries in sub-Saharan Africa (8%). Laws against apostasy were not present in any country in Europe or the Americas."

In many of these countries, they could legally put me to death. I count that as "dangerous".

 

[BHRxRacer]

More common than what? Great Britain's different from the Kingdom... that's a group of parliamentary countries under a single Royalist Parliament. The same way that Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia.



That's a mistranslation itself; the "self" as the Koran describes it is ones self as a Muslim. That's how extremists extrapolate it whatever the translation.



It took us a long time to agree on something...

I don't have the energy to reply to the other stuff for now. What do you mean Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia?

In many of these countries, they could legally put me to death. I count that as "dangerous".

I agree, ridiculous law. I'd stand against it any time.

Unfortunately it doesn't help your stance, as it's the countries' faults for writing laws that were made up a long time ago by a group of extremists. Not Islam's fault they misinterpreted it.

Apostasy in Islam is complicated. TL;DR it's applied practically the same way high treason crimes are applied in every country. Is that bad?

 

[TenEightyOne]

More common than what? Great Britain's different from the Kingdom... that's a group of parliamentary countries under a single Royalist Parliament. The same way that Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia.

I don't have the energy to reply to the other stuff for now. What do you mean Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia?

I misanalogised, apologies. You were confusing Great Britain and the United Kingdom, very different things to some people. Some British refuse to recognise that they're Subjects.

Imagine Saudi having parliamentary control over Bahrain and everyone presuming you were Saudi, very similar thing... although there'd be less opposition to you having a GP, obviously.

 

[Carbonox]

Good idea.

To the people that made incredibly ignorant and hateful comments about Islam, I'd like to know if you're anti-religion (understandable, somewhat) in general, or just anti-Islam?

I don't know where the ignorant and hateful comments are, and who you're even referring to.

Me, I just oppose 7th century values gaining a foothold in a Western society.

 

[GBO Possum]

I don't have the energy to reply to the other stuff for now. What do you mean Bahrain is effectively controlled by Saudi Arabia?


I agree, ridiculous law. I'd stand against it any time.

Unfortunately it doesn't help your stance, as it's the countries' faults for writing laws that were made up a long time ago by a group of extremists. Not Islam's fault they misinterpreted it.

Apostasy in Islam is complicated. TL;DR it's applied practically the same way high treason crimes are applied in every country. Is that bad?

"Not Islam's fault"?

My first reaction to reading these words was incredulity. Then I delved deeper.

I discovered that it is illegal in your country to even criticize Islam, so I can appreciate why you would make this claim. You want to stay out of the scrutiny of your Sharia laws. Jails in Muslim countries don't have a great reputation for humanitarian treatment.

So I just feel sorry for you.

Of course you want citation. Here is one source.

And is it "bad" that apostasy is treated the same as high treason? You must be joking, surely!!

 

[TenEightyOne]

"Not Islam's fault"?

My first reaction to reading these words was incredulity. Then I delved deeper.

I discovered that it is illegal in your country to even criticize Islam, so I can appreciate why you would make this claim. You want to stay out of the scrutiny of your Sharia laws. Jails in Muslim countries don't have a great reputation for humanitarian treatment.

So I just feel sorry for you.

Of course you want citation. Here is one source.

And is it "bad" that apostasy is treated the same as high treason? You must be joking, surely!!

I'm starting to think that he may just be a gentle, persistent troll.

 

[BHRxRacer]

Me, I just oppose 7th century values gaining a foothold in a Western society.

Which is why I asked if it's only Islam that falls under those 7th century values, in your opinion of course. I think it's unfair to blame it on religion and not the people, let alone single out ONE religion.

Regardless, nobody's forcing you to listen to their demands. If your country has a "democratic" system that accepts change, let the people process through it. If the majority of the people happen to disagree, you have every right to deny religionism in your country. What's the problem?

"Not Islam's fault"?

My first reaction to reading these words was incredulity. Then I delved deeper.

I discovered that it is illegal in your country to even criticize Islam, so I can appreciate why you would make this claim. You want to stay out of the scrutiny of your Sharia laws. Jails in Muslim countries don't have a great reputation for humanitarian treatment.

So I just feel sorry for you.

Of course you want citation. Here is one source.

And is it "bad" that apostasy is treated the same as high treason? You must be joking, surely!!

When did I state I agree with every rule where I live? We have the freedom to run for election in the house of representatives and try to change laws.

The law regarding that subject is vague anyway. Any public practice that's found to contradict the "principles" of Islam or Bahraini traditions, is against the law. They're very lenient with this, so it's not as bad as you think.

Technically speaking, pre-marital sex is illegal here (gay or straight). I disagree with that. I think it's ridiculous to force people into certain lifestyles. However you'd be surprised to know that they never actually enforce that law, or any of those annoyingly strict laws that you may bring up. Here:
http://bahrain.shafaqna.com/researches/item/590-top-10-sin-cities-in-the-world.html

Oh and I have no concerns over being jailed for my beliefs here, not that jail here is as bad as you think anyway.

Again, this is Bahrain. Bahrain(or any country) =/= Islam. Don't associate its laws with what Islam is truly about. Alcohol isn't banned here. Isn't that anti-"sharia"? Yes, yet it's perfectly legal...


Oh and no, of course not. Apostasy is not "treated" the same as high treason, the definition of apostasy in islam IS what you may today call high treason. The conditions that have to be met for you to be "killed" for apostasy, are no different in practice. You need to understand the context in which it was forbidden. Then you need to look at the literal conditions.

You're American, right? Suppose you're enlisted, in a war. Then, in the middle of battle you decide to drop your American citizenship, flee and apply for a new citizenship. What would you be called by your military then? What would they do with you in a court marshal? That's apostasy in Islam.

Summary of conditions:
*You're a Muslim: Seen practicing the faith by at least two eyewitnesses
*You're a soldier
*You're in a war against Islam : A war, in which a group of people are killing your fellow Muslims in attempt to stop them practicing their faith.

All of those have to met.

Any more questions?

I'm starting to think that he may just be a gentle, persistent troll.

Starting to think? I've already established that a lot of members here, including you, are bigots. You can't stand the fact that I have a moderate view on things, it's like I have to either be completely with you or I'm a bigoted Islamist homophobe.

 

[GBO Possum]

@BHRxRacer - the definition of "apostasy" is not really as narrow as you claim. One doesn't have to be a soldier according to the research I have been doing. The question is what is your source of this narrow definition of apostasy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#What_constitutes_apostasy_in_Islam

Since you have no concerns over being jailed for your beliefs, are you prepared to publicly state those beliefs? Such as your disagreement with the illegality of pre-marital sex? Or Bahrain's homophobic laws? Are you prepared to support dissent and become identified with that dissent?

I am and I do. I write frequently to express my condemnation of laws and government behavior. Such as the way women are sometimes treated, and our government's habit of sticking its military nose into the religious wars of other people, and its use of torture.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/02/09/idINIndia-54770520110209

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_during_the_Bahraini_uprising_(2011–present)

And back to your statement

I think it's unfair to blame it on religion and not the people, let alone single out ONE religion.

I DO blame the people. Without people, religion would not exist. People make up religions. Then they brainwash their kids into believing this dangerous rubbish. Why? Because their parents did the same to them. Every so often, some opportunist sees a chance to hijack an existing religion into a different direction and tries to spawn off a new branch. They come up with some new rules which add appeal to the source religion, and promote their new brand. Monotheism, forgiveness of sins, afterlife, free women slaves in the afterlife and so on.

Most of these attempts are unsuccessful. Some are spectacularly successful such as the major factions of Christianity and Islam which split off from previous monotheistic roots.

The scary thing is that for a new mutation to be successful, it has to be able to dominate, has to be more extreme and has to offer even larger incentives. The more recent a religion is, the more extreme it tends to be.

We have come a long way down this terrible path since the days of sun-worship, and clearly it's only going to get worse. The next step will be beyond the bounds of today's Islam.

 

[BHRxRacer]

the definition of "apostasy" is not really as narrow as you claim. One doesn't have to be a soldier according to the research I have been doing. The question is what is your source of this narrow definition of apostasy?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apostasy_in_Islam#What_constitutes_apostasy_in_Islam

I don't blame you on this one, I couldn't find sources in English either. Arabic sources online are all forums. My source is living here all my life, the books I read, and the clerks I've talked to. Most importantly, my source is WHEN and HOW Apostasy was being handled during Mohammed's days.

You know what I take that back. I do blame you. Just because you can't find the right sources doesn't make it right to jump to conclusions.

Since you have no concerns over being jailed for your beliefs, are you prepared to publicly state those beliefs?

Such as your disagreement with the illegality of pre-marital sex?

Isn't this what I've been doing here...? This is a public forum isn't it? I do share that opinion in person as well, if asked.

Or Bahrain's homophobic laws?

Citation needed. Bahrain as no homophobic laws.

Are you prepared to support dissent and become identified with that dissent?

I think you'll have to go back to the post that started all of this.

I'm always a minority

So yeah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture_during_the_Bahraini_uprising_(2011–present)

The 2011 issue such a different topic I won't even start. Don't believe any sources you read online, don't believe anything anybody tells you about it. If you'd like to learn what really happened and what really happens, get over here and I'll take you wherever you want and let you decide for yourself.

Without people, religion would not exist.

Of course not. I think you're confusing theism with religion.

People make up religions.

That's doesn't mean the religion they made up is dangerous, hateful, etc.

Is your religion dangerous and hateful?

Then they brainwash their kids into believing this dangerous rubbish. Why? Because their parents did the same to them. Every so often, some opportunist sees a chance to hijack an existing religion into a different direction and tries to spawn off a new branch. They come up with some new rules which add appeal to the source religion, and promote their new brand. Monotheism, forgiveness of sins, afterlife, free women slaves in the afterlife and so on.

Then blame those who hijack existing religions and make it bad. Don't blame the religion itself.

 

[GBO Possum]

Reuters - http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/02/09/idINIndia-54770520110209 - gays arrested.

Do you have a citation which refutes the "2011 issue"? As an apostate, I think I'll decline any offers to visit any country with Sharia Law.

Then blame those who hijack existing religions and make it bad. Don't blame the religion itself.

That would include "the prophet" who had conversations with "the angel Gabriel". As I said I blame the people who either create religions or modify them to make them stronger.

 

[Rage Racer]

I'm starting to think that he may just be a gentle, persistent troll.

What's bad about it?
When people don't know much about your country (but pretend they do) and think stereotypically - it's a perfect opportunity to troll a little. I've made that sure in the Homosexuality thread, Ukrainian crisis thread, and in this one as well. And in the "Driving in Russia" thread a little bit.

 

[TenEightyOne]

When people don't know much about your country (but pretend they do) and think stereotypically...

Me in particular? I hope not Have a beer any way, the F1 was fun

 

[BHRxRacer]

Reuters - http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/02/09/idINIndia-54770520110209 - gays arrested.

False. People caught engaging in a non-martial sex party were arrested. Being homosexual had nothing to do with it. There isn't a special law regarding them. Once again, Bahrain has no homophobic laws. Produce a citation or take back what you said.

Media being the media, were twisting a story to create controversy. However, they did confirm something I said previously here:

Bahrain is considered among the more liberal Gulf states, with alcohol sold in shops while elsewhere in the Gulf sales are limited to hotels.

here

Its nightlife attracts weekend visitors from other Gulf countries such as Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, to which Bahrain is linked via a causeway.

and here

"Bahrain has been more tolerant compared to for example the United Arab Emirates, without allowing it to be public," Said Boumedouha, a researcher at human rights group Amnesty International

Really illustrating how ill informed you are. Maybe you should try reading your own sources.

Do you have a citation which refutes the "2011 issue"?

Read my previous post.

As an apostate, I think I'll decline any offers to visit any country with Sharia Law.

Citation needed. Pretty sure Sharia law bans the sale of alcohol.

That would include "the prophet" who had conversations with "the angel Gabriel". As I said I blame the people who either create religions or modify them to make them stronger.

Blame yourself too, then.

EDIT

Furthermore:

From Pew Research:-

Count the non-Muslim countries in this list of all countries which have laws against apostasy.

Bahrain isn't on that list. You really do need to read your own sources.

 

[Chrunch Houston]

Reuters - http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/02/09/idINIndia-54770520110209 - gays arrested.

So @BHRxRacer, all 200 of those men were getting it on? That must have been one hell of an orgy.

I'm sure you country must allow gay marriage then, otherwise gays would never be allow to have sex.