In U.S., fear and distrust of Muslims runs deep

  • Thread starter Thread starter L. Spiro
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Meh. i dont care if you dont change you mind about it but, I can only suggest that you shouldn't want to have you ideals forced on anyone else like chaos control does... because as my previous post pointed out, that would make you no better than hitler as thats what he wanted and set out to achieve.

If religion was to successfully baned the resulting war would be unlike anything that has been seen yet. Its my opinion that such a war is unavoidable due to the fact that more and more people are taking that same opinion as chaos control, foolishly thinking that it would somehow be better at the same time that the other half of the world disagrees and would fight back against it if it was to occur.
(i reckon that once the ratio gets to just past half way it will occur, and i would estimate that its only about 1/4 at the moment ... so give it say 500years, thats my guess for ww3)

And as for richard the lionheart, i was under the impression that he was chatholic or something... of to wiki i go.
 
Last edited:
Religion just sucks, nothing more nothing less.
It's overrated and shouldn't be allowed.
Click to expand...
i would actually trust Muslims more than any other religion. Saladin didn't kill Christians like Richard the Lionheard did, he just let everyone be. However I agree the most with chaoscontrol.
Click to expand...
I respect chaoscontrol's opinions about religion, but who is to say that others can't practice it?  What gives anyone the right to stop others?

Wow...showing prejudice towards an entire religious following because of comparing the actions of two individuals from the twelfth century.  I believe chaoscontrol's religious point of view comes from the fact that organized religion has a tendency to divide people, cause conflict, and mistrust.  And you are doing just that...brilliant.
 
I respect chaoscontrol's opinions about religion, but who is to say that others can't practice it?  What gives anyone the right to stop others?
Click to expand...
Yay, one for the good guys. haha... lol.

Just jesting... i dont consider myself above anyone else here. But i'll have to admit its hard not to fall into that trap.
 
Last edited:
One of my problems with Islam is its "success" as a religion -- it is based on the fact that "muslim missionaries" (more like Islamic armies) virtually went on religious conquests, forcing everybody to become muslim regardless of their beliefs.
Click to expand...
I had a really long post planned out, but I decided that most of it had already been said or didn't need to be. But this quote above simply isn't accurate. Forced conversions are actually somewhat rare. Since the early caliphates non-converts have been an important source of tax revenue. So important that at times it was even difficult to convert to dodge the jizya. The Prophet Muhammad himself had a brief alliance with Jewish tribes in Medina. Albanian Christians made up the elite infantry of the Ottomans. Conversion was very low in India. And those who converted still retained many indigenous practices as they adopted Sufism. Even Persian Zoroastrians were not forced to convert.
 
I think the basic problem with most Monotheistic institutions, including the Judaic, Christian, and Islamic religons, is the idea that "God" (in whatever form) is on your side. Therefore, all other religons and their followers are wrong and evil. If "God" is on your side, and you are fighting for "him", there is no crime that you can commit in "his" name.

You're not killing, you're "purifying", "cleansing", or (even more cynically)"bring 'God' to the masses". Anybody who resists you is resisting "God", and therefore evil in the extreme. Executing them becomes more than a mere nesessity, it is a duty to the Almighty himself. Rape, murder, pillage, all are forgiven, because you are doing the "Lord's Work". And if you die, don't worry. You become a "martyr" to the cause. And we'll kill even more people in your name. Plus, you'll get a fast pass to "Heaven" and your ultimate reward.

The really sad part of this all is that neither the Torah, the Bible, nor the Qhu'ran, advocate or excuse this type of thinking or behavior. In fact, all unanimously denouce it as evil. However, RELIGOUS LEADERS are the people who are twisting and defiling the very things they claim to uphold, usually to expand their power among people. After all, they're "selected/blessed by 'God' ", and therefore able to correctly 'interpret' his words and meanings.

The problem isn't with religon, per se. The problem comes from religous organizations. One person shouting out that 'somethings wrong' isn't dangerous. But when authority figures, especially those espoused to be to be leaders of their communities religous beliefs, start 'preaching' hate and intolerance of others.. well now we see the backlash this generates in others who become the victims of those views.

Don't get me wrong, because I in no way support or agree with those who are willing to trade liberty and justice for security and a false sense of peace. But, the only way to truly 'win' this type of attack, is to refuse to change at the others behest. Every time we ltrade away our rights for some false sense of security, they win. It simply encourages them to do bigger and more damaging attacks, because they can make us change, which is their goal.
 
I think its time this thread was closed up. Everythings been said, its only going to get repetative or obusive from here on.
 
Hmmm... I'd say no.

It hasn't been a habit here to close threads for reasons like that, and I sure hope it doesn't start now. Especially so because quite a few our members visit less often than they used to, so closing threads few days after they started just makes them unable to reply - since most likely they won't happen to visit while the thread was open.

If it gets repetitive... what's the big deal? Don't read the rest. :) Besides, who knows, perhaps someone does have something to add.
 
From what I have read in Islamic history and recording accounts of the follows of the Prophet Muhammad, there were rarely any enforced conversions.
The invitation of conversion was sent by messenger to the corresponding ruler, if they refused the invitation then they would confont each other - usually on the battlefield.
But like pointed out in a previous post, people who didn't convert were allowed to stay as they were but would have to pay some kind of tax.
Islam spread very quickly in its first 100 years of conception (1400+ years ago) and rightly so as they proposed and upheld many more rights then other religions did at the time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top