The Common Denominator: Islam

[PoliticalChic]

Bet you evinced the same attitude toward the education your teachers offered.

That's, after all, what makes one a Liberal.

Where do you get your fortune cookies from? They're far more interesting than the ones I get....

At any rate - I'm willing to bet that the Bible can (and has been) just as easily cherry picked with an eye towards extremism as the Quran has and cherry picking does not equal understanding - just the skillful taking out of context appropriate phrases. I'll bypass your nifty educational efforts and leave you to your fortune cookie enterprise.

Pretty stupid post.

I've taken nothing "just the skillful taking out of context."

The Q'ran is a book about making war.

"The Koran’s core theme is about the duty of all Muslims to fight non-Muslims; an Islamic Mein Kampf, in which fight means war, jihad. The Koran is above all a book of war – a call to butcher non-Muslims (2:191, 3:141, 4:91, 5:3), to roast them (4:56, 69:30-69:32), and to cause bloodbaths amongst them (47:4). Jews are compared to monkeys and pigs (2:65, 5:60, 7:166), while people who believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God must according to the Koran be fought (9:30 [9:29])."
Geert Wilders 8217 Parliamentary Speech On The Koran Pat Dollard

That is not the case with the Bible.


Ready to admit that you are a dunce?

Geert Wilders??? Seriously? Ok. You've lost all credibility. That would be like using a quote from a neo-Nazi to bolster an antisemitic claim.

Where did you learn that commenting about the messenger is the equivalent to rebutting the message???

Liberal academy?


Of course....if you'd like to show how the quote is incorrect......????

Not happening.

Geert: "The Koran’s core theme is about the duty of all Muslims to fight non-Muslims; an Islamic Mein Kampf, in which fight means war, jihad. "

First - red flag language, the "poisoning of the well" by implying a similarity to Hitler and Mein Kampf.

Second - what is the Quran?

Quran - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Quran assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in the Jewish and Christian scriptures. It summarizes some, dwells at length on others and, in some cases, presents alternative accounts and interpretations of events.[10][11][12] The Quran describes itself as a book of guidance. It sometimes offers detailed accounts of specific historical events, and it often emphasizes the moral significance of an event over its narrative sequence.

The Quranic content is concerned with the basic beliefs of Islam which include the existence of God and the resurrection. Narratives of the early prophets, ethical and legal subjects, historical events of Muhammad's time, charity and prayer also appear in the Quran. The Quranic verses contain general exhortations regarding right and wrong and the historical events are related to outline general moral lessons. Verses pertaining to natural phenomena have been interpreted by Muslims as an indication of the authenticity of the Quranic message.[62]

Ethico-Religious concepts: Belief is the center of the sphere of positive moral properties in the Quran. A number of scholars have tried to determine the semantic contents of the words meaning 'belief' and 'believer' in the Quran [67] The Ethico-legal concepts and exhortations dealing with righteous conduct are linked to a profound awareness of God, thereby emphasizing the importance of faith, accountability and the belief in each human's ultimate encounter with God. People are invited to perform acts of charity, especially for the needy. Believers who "spend of their wealth by night and by day, in secret and in public" are promised that they "shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve"[68] It also affirms family life by legislating on matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. A number of practices such as usury and gambling are prohibited. The Quran is one of the fundamental sources of the Islamic law, or sharia. Some formal religious practices receive significant attention in the Quran including the formal prayers and fasting in the month of Ramadan. As for the manner in which the prayer is to be conducted, the Quran refers to prostration.[9][65] The term used for charity, Zakat, actually means purification. Charity, according to the Quran, is a means of self-purification.[51][69]

Third - what is Mein Kampf?
Mein Kampf - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

In Mein Kampf, Hitler used the main thesis of "the Jewish peril", which posits a Jewish conspiracy to gain world leadership.[6] The narrative describes the process by which he became increasingly antisemitic and militaristic, especially during his years in Vienna. Yet, the deeper origins of his anti-semitism remain a mystery. He speaks of not having met a Jew until he arrived in Vienna, and that at first his attitude was liberal and tolerant. When he first encountered the anti-semitic press, he says, he dismissed it as unworthy of serious consideration. Later he accepted the same anti-semitic views, which became crucial in his program of national reconstruction of Germany.


Mein Kampf has also been studied as a work on political theory. For example, Hitler announces his hatred of what he believed to be the world's two evils: Communism and Judaism. The new territory that Germany needed to obtain would properly nurture the "historic destiny" of the German people; this goal, which Hitler referred to as Lebensraum (living space), explains why Hitler aggressively expanded Germany eastward, specifically the invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland, before he launched his attack against Russia. In Mein Kampf Hitler openly states that the future of Germany "has to lie in the acquisition of land in the East at the expense of Russia."[7]


During his work, Hitler blamed Germany's chief woes on the parliament of the Weimar Republic, the Jews, and Social Democrats, as well as Marxists. He announced that he wanted to completely destroy the parliamentary system, believing it to be corrupt in principle, as those who reach power are inherent opportunists.​

Not much similarity.

Geert: "The Koran is above all a book of war – a call to butcher non-Muslims (2:191, 3:141, 4:91, 5:3), to roast them (4:56, 69:30-69:32), and to cause bloodbaths amongst them (47:4). Jews are compared to monkeys and pigs (2:65, 5:60, 7:166), while people who believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God must according to the Koran be fought (9:30 [9:29]).""

There you go again - cherry picking a handful bits and attempting broadbrush the whole Quran with them.

You would think that if it is, "above all a book of war - a call to butcher non-Muslims" there would be tons of material there on it...at least a majority of the text devoted to it...certainly far more than the Bible.

Yet...

Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran NPR

Defense Vs. Total Annihilation

Violence in the Quran, he and others say, is largely a defense against attack.

"By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane," he says. "Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide."

It is called herem, and it means total annihilation. Consider the Book of 1 Samuel, when God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: "And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them," God says through the prophet Samuel. "But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."

When Saul failed to do that, God took away his kingdom.

"In other words," Jenkins says, "Saul has committed a dreadful sin by failing to complete genocide. And that passage echoes through Christian history. It is often used, for example, in American stories of the confrontation with Indians — not just is it legitimate to kill Indians, but you are violating God's law if you do not."

Jenkins notes that the history of Christianity is strewn with herem. During the Crusades in the Middle Ages, the Catholic popes declared the Muslims Amalekites. In the great religious wars in the 16th, 17th and 19th centuries, Protestants and Catholics each believed the other side were the Amalekites and should be utterly destroyed...

'Out Of Context'


That may be the popular notion of jihad, says Waleed El-Ansary, but it's the wrong one. El-Ansary, who teaches Islamic studies at the University of South Carolina, says the Quran explicitly condemns religious aggression and the killing of civilians. And it makes the distinction between jihad — legal warfare with the proper rules of engagement — and irjaf, or terrorism.

​

Or...more food for thought Top Christian Scholar The Bible is More Violent Than the Koran

Top Christian Scholar: The Bible is More Violent Than the Koran
"In terms of its bloodthirsty and intolerant passages, the Bible raises considerably more issues than does the Qur'an. Some Bible passages justify genocide and multigenerational race war; the Qur'an has nothing comparable. While many Qur'anic texts undoubtedly call for warfare or bloodshed, these are hedged around with more restrictions than their biblical equivalents, with more opportunities for the defeated to make peace and survive. Furthermore, any of the defenses that can be offered for biblical violence--for instance, that these passages are unrepresentative of the overall message of the text--apply equally to the Qur-an."

...Yes, the bloody scriptures continue to exist, and in some circumstances, in certain conditions of social and political breakdown, extremists will cite them to provide a spiritual aura to violent and revolting acts that they were going to commit anyway. But that does not mean that we should hold the scriptures themselves responsible, or imagine that the faith as such is irrevocably tainted. Religions develop and mature over time, and it is lunatic to condemn a whole faith on the basis of its ancient horrors. That's true for Christians, Jews -- and Muslims.""If the founding texts determine the whole later course of a faith, then it should be impossible for Christians and Jews to live their faith without the genocidal violence and racial segregation that so abounds in their holy book -- yet most believers do just that, and have done so in most eras of their history. "

So here we have two great holy books: one with considerably more call to genocide, murder and violence and another with a more restrictive code of warfare and Geert, through cherry picking attempts to claim that the one is inherently a book of war and the other somehow..not?

Let's cut to the chase:

How many religions can you name where the adherents attend religious services and then rush out and kill people?




Only one.....

 

[JoeB131]

[

Let's cut to the chase:

How many religions can you name where the adherents attend religious services and then rush out and kill people?

Only one.....

There's a Mosque a couple miles from where I live. No one has ever rushed out after services and killed anyone that I know of.

It does have to keep a big iron fence around it to keep people from vandalizing it, though.

 

[Kondor3]

The only danger inherent is Islam is that if you invade their countries and try to take their shit, they will kill you.

Just like anyone else would.

Disagree.

Islam's so-called holy texts are absolutely saturated with conditional permissions to engage in violence against non-believers and to make war, and its founder encouraged blood-letting and violence across a wide-spectrum of circumstances which may be easily invoked and which are operative today within Islam in accordance with core values.

Judaism's similar texts and corresponding permissions are fewer and less given-over to violence-rationalizing and are viewed largely as historical narrative and are not operative amongst global Judaism.

Christianity's similar texts and corresponding permissions are largely confined to the tag-along Jewish Old Testament. Its newer text (New Testament) is virtually free from such subject matter and material and permissions - and its founder largely eschewed and discouraged violence of any kind - its violence is a departure from its core values and is the result of latter-day (long after the time of its founder) fallible mortal interpretations and spin-doctoring, against the nature and teachings of its founder, rather than explicit (and supposedly divinely-sanctioned) permissions to wage war and commit violence.

Major differences which are glossed-over by many (not all) Liberals in a misguided and dangerous attempt at moral equivalency, oftentimes originating from the best of intentions and with the intent of protecting freedom-of-worship traditions which we all value and prize so highly.

In the case of Islam, however, it's largely an apples-and-oranges comparison - a head-in-the-sand scenario - in treating this hybrid misogynistic, aggressive, intolerant, self-aggrandizing, conquest-hungry political and cultural system married to a religious component, as purely religious in nature - which it is not.

Islam is a cancer and a threat to world peace - far worse than its counterparts, in the context of serving-up divinely sanctioned explicit permissions to wage war and to commit violence - an easily invoked and awakened mindset which is still routinely operative within its domain.

Or so it seems to this observer.

 

[PoliticalChic]

[

Let's cut to the chase:

How many religions can you name where the adherents attend religious services and then rush out and kill people?

Only one.....

There's a Mosque a couple miles from where I live. No one has ever rushed out after services and killed anyone that I know of.

It does have to keep a big iron fence around it to keep people from vandalizing it, though.

"We were at work when we heard Muslims were burning churches… Leaders in the mosques were telling Muslims to attack Christians and kill them… They broke into the shop, took everything and burned the place down They caught my father and shot him multiple times. Then they dragged his body to the mosque… When they reached the mosque they tied his body to a tractor and dragged him through the village again… The next day some people dug up his body and dragged it through the village again. They did this three times that day… We have no money, no clothes, no job, our home is destroyed, and our business is destroyed."
Muslims Murder Christian Man Right In Front Of His Son Drag His Body To The Mosque Tie His Body And Mutilate Him - Walid Shoebat

 

[Newby]

ISIS/ISIL is about as Muslim as the KKK is Christian.

What is it they are doing that is not Islamic?

 

[PoliticalChic]

• There are 13 countries in the world where the state can execute you for being atheist. Every single one is officially Islamic.
• Muslim Statistics - WikiIslam

 

[Newby]

The only danger inherent is Islam is that if you invade their countries and try to take their shit, they will kill you.

Just like anyone else would.

You mean they shouldn't be welcoming? Isn't that what you libs say that we should be with the Mexicans illegally entering our country? Why is there one set of rules for us, but another for others? Why do your rules change depending on who you're talking about?

 

[PoliticalChic]

The only danger inherent is Islam is that if you invade their countries and try to take their shit, they will kill you.

Just like anyone else would.

You mean they shouldn't be welcoming? Isn't that what you libs say that we should be with the Mexicans illegally entering our country? Why is there one set of rules for us, but another for others? Why do your rules change depending on who you're talking about?

1. Because Liberals subscribe to the multicultural thesis....all cultures are equal. So, if one believes in cutting off the heads of innocents.....who are we to say it's wrong.

2. The roots of postmodernism can be traced to the anthropologist Franz Boas, who, in an effort to study exotic cultures without prejudice, found it useful to take the position that no culture is superior to any other. Thus was born the idea of cultural relativity.

3. The idea spread like wildfire through the universities, catapulted by the radical impetus of the sixties. ready and willing to reject "the universality of Western norms and principles."
Bawer, "The Victim's Revolution"


a. "Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture. This principle was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students. Boas first articulated the idea in 1887: "...civilization is not something absolute, but ... is relative, and ... our ideas and conceptions are true only so far as our civilization goes."[1] but did not actually coin the term "cultural relativism."https://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/t...elativism.html

 

[Jroc]

Leftist and muslim extremist are both tyrannical. They want to control people. They have a kinship in that way.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So how many of you who have decided that international Islamry (like that?) is the problem believe that our logical response to that should be that we amend our Constitution so that we can ban Islam from the US?

 

[g5000]

ISIS/ISIL is about as Muslim as the KKK is Christian.

What is it they are doing that is not Islamic?

It is revealing that you are so profoundly ignorant and biased that you have to ask such a question.

 

[gipper]

Here we go again...you haters bring up ancient history as a way to denigrate Christianity TODAY. Are you nuts?

Have you heard of the New Testament or the Reformation? Are Christians murdering vast numbers of people TODAY in cold blood, citing their God as justification?

I know Christian haters are stuck in 5000BC, but it is time to get current. No?

Okay, let's look at history after the New Testament.

You had Crusades, wars that lasted for over 200 years and killed hundreds of thousands.

After the vaunted "Reformation", you had the Thirty Years War which is estimated to have had 8 million casualties using primitive weapons. Yes, it was a continent wide war over whether Jesus was made of wafers or not.

The period of colonization of the America in the name of Jesus led to the Genocide of Native American civilizations like the Aztec and Inca. But they were Genociding for Jesus.

But,whew, eventually, Christians learned that you need to fight genocidal wars over important things like land and resources, not silly Sky Fairies. Dumb Muslims fighting over sky fairies and not liking us taking their land!

You proved you know a little about western history.

Do you know anything about the history of Islam?

So how many of you who have decided that international Islamry (like that?) is the problem believe that our logical response to that should be that we amend our Constitution so that we can ban Islam from the US?

Typical knee jerk reaction from the left.

You present a straw-man argument. No one has suggested or promoted the idea you presented.

Why would you present an argument never offered by anyone?

 

[g5000]

The common denominator:

Now things have changed on this front but not nearly enough. I also pointed out that we face not an Islam problem but an Arab problem. For example, in 2001 and 2002 Indonesia was on the top of people's worries because of a series of terror attacks there soon after 9/11, but over the last decade jihad and even Islamic fundamentalism has not done well in Indonesia, which is the largest Muslim country in the world, larger than Iraq, Syria, Egypt, and Libya and all the Gulf states put together.

Well, look at India which is right next door to Ayman Zawahiri's headquarters and yet very few of India's more than 150 million Muslims are known members of al Qaeda. Zawahiri has announced a bold effort to recruit Indian Muslims, but I suspect it will not do too well. The central point of the essay was that the reason the Arab world produces fanaticism and jihad is that it is a place of complete political stagnation. By 2001 when I was writing almost every part of the world had seen significant political progress. Eastern Europe was freed, Asia, Latin America and even Africa had held many free and fair elections but the Arab world remained a desert. In 2001 most Arabs had fewer freedoms, political, economic, social than they did in 1951.

The one aspect of life that Arab dictators could not ban, however, was religion. So Islam had become the language of political opposition to these secular regimes. The Arab world was then left with secular dictatorships on the one hand and deeply illiberal religious groups on the other. Hosni Mubarak and al Qaeda. The more extreme the regime the more violent was the opposition.

CNN.com - Transcripts

 

[g5000]

For the perpetually willfully ignorant bigots, I recommend two books:

Pakistan: Between Mosque and Military

Taliban: Militant Islam, Oil and Fundamentalism in Central Asia

 

[Redfish]

So how many of you who have decided that international Islamry (like that?) is the problem believe that our logical response to that should be that we amend our Constitution so that we can ban Islam from the US?

not necessary, we already have laws against murder, robbery, female mutilation, slavery, etc. Just apply our laws to muslims as we apply them to everyone else------------------oh, except illegals of course.

 

[g5000]

From our brief analysis of thirty texts it emerges clearly that the Qur'an is taken as guidance very selectively to suit the jihadists' particular strategic and political agenda and to strengthen the accompanying narrative set forth by proponents of militant Islamism. Numerous verses and sections of the Qur'an that call for peaceful co-existence and mutual respect, counter-balancing many of the verses used to justify (terrorist) violence, are ignored and excluded from their one-sided narrative. This is typical of the tailored, politically motivated foundation upon which much of the militant jihadist discourse rests. Quoting from the Holy Book of Islam is shamelessly selective in order to serve their propaganda objectives.

Using the Qur an to Justify Terrorist Violence Analysing Selective Application of the Qur an


Just like the KKK, Islamic terrorists are very selective in which verses of their holy text they use to justify their political aims and actions.


ISIS/ISIL is about as Muslim as the KKK is Christian.

 

[Jroc]

So how many of you who have decided that international Islamry (like that?) is the problem believe that our logical response to that should be that we amend our Constitution so that we can ban Islam from the US?

Watch it and learn something

Zuhdi Jasser separating mosque and state

 

[g5000]

Top Ten Ways Islamic Law forbids Terrorism

I can’t understand why people who have never so much as read a book about a subject appoint themselves experts on it.

The killing of innocent non-combatants is forbidden. According to Sunni tradition, ‘Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, the first Caliph, gave these instructions to his armies: “I instruct you in ten matters: Do not kill women, children, the old, or the infirm; do not cut down fruit-bearing trees; do not destroy any town . . .

 

[g5000]

Reading a book which reinforces your preconceived biases by some schmuck like Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh or some no-name asshole in America does not inform you about Islam.

Read the two books I linked above. These writers are long time writers and experts on the subject of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism. They are reporters from the region who clearly do not support the radicalization of their religion. They give outstanding objective reportage on the rise of Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism.

In fact, Rashid's book was pretty much required reading by the Bush Administration, and has been widely read in the military.

 

[Coyote]

Where do you get your fortune cookies from? They're far more interesting than the ones I get....

At any rate - I'm willing to bet that the Bible can (and has been) just as easily cherry picked with an eye towards extremism as the Quran has and cherry picking does not equal understanding - just the skillful taking out of context appropriate phrases. I'll bypass your nifty educational efforts and leave you to your fortune cookie enterprise.

Pretty stupid post.

I've taken nothing "just the skillful taking out of context."

The Q'ran is a book about making war.

"The Koran’s core theme is about the duty of all Muslims to fight non-Muslims; an Islamic Mein Kampf, in which fight means war, jihad. The Koran is above all a book of war – a call to butcher non-Muslims (2:191, 3:141, 4:91, 5:3), to roast them (4:56, 69:30-69:32), and to cause bloodbaths amongst them (47:4). Jews are compared to monkeys and pigs (2:65, 5:60, 7:166), while people who believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God must according to the Koran be fought (9:30 [9:29])."
Geert Wilders 8217 Parliamentary Speech On The Koran Pat Dollard

That is not the case with the Bible.


Ready to admit that you are a dunce?

Geert Wilders??? Seriously? Ok. You've lost all credibility. That would be like using a quote from a neo-Nazi to bolster an antisemitic claim.

Where did you learn that commenting about the messenger is the equivalent to rebutting the message???

Liberal academy?


Of course....if you'd like to show how the quote is incorrect......????

Not happening.

Geert: "The Koran’s core theme is about the duty of all Muslims to fight non-Muslims; an Islamic Mein Kampf, in which fight means war, jihad. "

First - red flag language, the "poisoning of the well" by implying a similarity to Hitler and Mein Kampf.

Second - what is the Quran?

Quran - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The Quran assumes familiarity with major narratives recounted in the Jewish and Christian scriptures. It summarizes some, dwells at length on others and, in some cases, presents alternative accounts and interpretations of events.[10][11][12] The Quran describes itself as a book of guidance. It sometimes offers detailed accounts of specific historical events, and it often emphasizes the moral significance of an event over its narrative sequence.

The Quranic content is concerned with the basic beliefs of Islam which include the existence of God and the resurrection. Narratives of the early prophets, ethical and legal subjects, historical events of Muhammad's time, charity and prayer also appear in the Quran. The Quranic verses contain general exhortations regarding right and wrong and the historical events are related to outline general moral lessons. Verses pertaining to natural phenomena have been interpreted by Muslims as an indication of the authenticity of the Quranic message.[62]

Ethico-Religious concepts: Belief is the center of the sphere of positive moral properties in the Quran. A number of scholars have tried to determine the semantic contents of the words meaning 'belief' and 'believer' in the Quran [67] The Ethico-legal concepts and exhortations dealing with righteous conduct are linked to a profound awareness of God, thereby emphasizing the importance of faith, accountability and the belief in each human's ultimate encounter with God. People are invited to perform acts of charity, especially for the needy. Believers who "spend of their wealth by night and by day, in secret and in public" are promised that they "shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve"[68] It also affirms family life by legislating on matters of marriage, divorce and inheritance. A number of practices such as usury and gambling are prohibited. The Quran is one of the fundamental sources of the Islamic law, or sharia. Some formal religious practices receive significant attention in the Quran including the formal prayers and fasting in the month of Ramadan. As for the manner in which the prayer is to be conducted, the Quran refers to prostration.[9][65] The term used for charity, Zakat, actually means purification. Charity, according to the Quran, is a means of self-purification.[51][69]

Third - what is Mein Kampf?
Mein Kampf - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

In Mein Kampf, Hitler used the main thesis of "the Jewish peril", which posits a Jewish conspiracy to gain world leadership.[6] The narrative describes the process by which he became increasingly antisemitic and militaristic, especially during his years in Vienna. Yet, the deeper origins of his anti-semitism remain a mystery. He speaks of not having met a Jew until he arrived in Vienna, and that at first his attitude was liberal and tolerant. When he first encountered the anti-semitic press, he says, he dismissed it as unworthy of serious consideration. Later he accepted the same anti-semitic views, which became crucial in his program of national reconstruction of Germany.


Mein Kampf has also been studied as a work on political theory. For example, Hitler announces his hatred of what he believed to be the world's two evils: Communism and Judaism. The new territory that Germany needed to obtain would properly nurture the "historic destiny" of the German people; this goal, which Hitler referred to as Lebensraum (living space), explains why Hitler aggressively expanded Germany eastward, specifically the invasions of Czechoslovakia and Poland, before he launched his attack against Russia. In Mein Kampf Hitler openly states that the future of Germany "has to lie in the acquisition of land in the East at the expense of Russia."[7]


During his work, Hitler blamed Germany's chief woes on the parliament of the Weimar Republic, the Jews, and Social Democrats, as well as Marxists. He announced that he wanted to completely destroy the parliamentary system, believing it to be corrupt in principle, as those who reach power are inherent opportunists.​

Not much similarity.

Geert: "The Koran is above all a book of war – a call to butcher non-Muslims (2:191, 3:141, 4:91, 5:3), to roast them (4:56, 69:30-69:32), and to cause bloodbaths amongst them (47:4). Jews are compared to monkeys and pigs (2:65, 5:60, 7:166), while people who believe in Jesus Christ as the Son of God must according to the Koran be fought (9:30 [9:29]).""

There you go again - cherry picking a handful bits and attempting broadbrush the whole Quran with them.

You would think that if it is, "above all a book of war - a call to butcher non-Muslims" there would be tons of material there on it...at least a majority of the text devoted to it...certainly far more than the Bible.

Yet...

Is The Bible More Violent Than The Quran NPR

Defense Vs. Total Annihilation

Violence in the Quran, he and others say, is largely a defense against attack.

"By the standards of the time, which is the 7th century A.D., the laws of war that are laid down by the Quran are actually reasonably humane," he says. "Then we turn to the Bible, and we actually find something that is for many people a real surprise. There is a specific kind of warfare laid down in the Bible which we can only call genocide."

It is called herem, and it means total annihilation. Consider the Book of 1 Samuel, when God instructs King Saul to attack the Amalekites: "And utterly destroy all that they have, and do not spare them," God says through the prophet Samuel. "But kill both man and woman, infant and nursing child, ox and sheep, camel and donkey."

When Saul failed to do that, God took away his kingdom.

"In other words," Jenkins says, "Saul has committed a dreadful sin by failing to complete genocide. And that passage echoes through Christian history. It is often used, for example, in American stories of the confrontation with Indians — not just is it legitimate to kill Indians, but you are violating God's law if you do not."

Jenkins notes that the history of Christianity is strewn with herem. During the Crusades in the Middle Ages, the Catholic popes declared the Muslims Amalekites. In the great religious wars in the 16th, 17th and 19th centuries, Protestants and Catholics each believed the other side were the Amalekites and should be utterly destroyed...

'Out Of Context'


That may be the popular notion of jihad, says Waleed El-Ansary, but it's the wrong one. El-Ansary, who teaches Islamic studies at the University of South Carolina, says the Quran explicitly condemns religious aggression and the killing of civilians. And it makes the distinction between jihad — legal warfare with the proper rules of engagement — and irjaf, or terrorism.

​

Or...more food for thought Top Christian Scholar The Bible is More Violent Than the Koran

Top Christian Scholar: The Bible is More Violent Than the Koran
"In terms of its bloodthirsty and intolerant passages, the Bible raises considerably more issues than does the Qur'an. Some Bible passages justify genocide and multigenerational race war; the Qur'an has nothing comparable. While many Qur'anic texts undoubtedly call for warfare or bloodshed, these are hedged around with more restrictions than their biblical equivalents, with more opportunities for the defeated to make peace and survive. Furthermore, any of the defenses that can be offered for biblical violence--for instance, that these passages are unrepresentative of the overall message of the text--apply equally to the Qur-an."

...Yes, the bloody scriptures continue to exist, and in some circumstances, in certain conditions of social and political breakdown, extremists will cite them to provide a spiritual aura to violent and revolting acts that they were going to commit anyway. But that does not mean that we should hold the scriptures themselves responsible, or imagine that the faith as such is irrevocably tainted. Religions develop and mature over time, and it is lunatic to condemn a whole faith on the basis of its ancient horrors. That's true for Christians, Jews -- and Muslims.""If the founding texts determine the whole later course of a faith, then it should be impossible for Christians and Jews to live their faith without the genocidal violence and racial segregation that so abounds in their holy book -- yet most believers do just that, and have done so in most eras of their history. "

So here we have two great holy books: one with considerably more call to genocide, murder and violence and another with a more restrictive code of warfare and Geert, through cherry picking attempts to claim that the one is inherently a book of war and the other somehow..not?

Let's cut to the chase:

How many religions can you name where the adherents attend religious services and then rush out and kill people?




Only one.....

Oh brother.

You demand people address your points and counter your argument and then when they do you come up with a one-liner cheapass answer like that?

The answer is zero (unless you can show me that all Muslims or even a majority of them do that but don't expect me to waste any more time countering your claims - I'll use the fortune cookie arguments )