The Growth of Islam is a Threat to Modern Society

[Pogo]

Number one, you're about 1400 years late.

Number two, you're proposing to pass judgement on a 1400 year old religion with well over a billion followers on the basis of............ a YouTube video. And a bullshit blanket statement.

Captain Obvious scuttles another garbage scow. Down she goes, to the deep with her entire cargo of fatal fallacies.

Arrrr.

Why is it that so many of the faithful, regardless of religious affiliation give the number of their religion's followers as if that were some sort of indicator of that religion being true. The majority can and has been wrong before. So there is no reason to believe that it is not wrong now as well. And my views are not made on the basis of a single video but on the understanding of the Muslim world and how they treat non-Muslims when they are in the majority.

I said nothing of "true" nor do I believe such a concept even exists. Assume much?

Oh wait, I saw the OP, so... there's my answer.

Regardless of whether or not you hold Muslim belief your defense of the Muslim faith is simply wrong.

I didn't even address "the Muslim faith". I didn't need to. I addressed YOU.

Completely over your head.... I tellya what, let me use small words...
subsitute "Jews" for Muslim in your OP. Or substitute "Spanish speakers". Or "lefthanded people". Doesn't matter. The point's the same.

Dumbass.

That's a strawman if I ever saw one. The difference between those groups and Muslims is that those groups don't inherently pose a threat to the civil rights and safety of others. It is not the dogma of the lefthanded to kill the righthanded or to force them to write lefthanded. Nor is it the dogma of the spanish speaker to kill those who do not speak Spanish. The Jews in Israel are caught up in a political struggle and they are just as wrong as their Muslim opponents but the Jewish faith in general is not a threat to the non Jewish.

Very good. You're halfway there.
Now take the next step. Plug "Muslim" back in and look around to see where you are.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

I agree. At least with Christianity people can agree to disagree. There are some Christians that don't see it that way, but the actual precepts of the Bible only mandate that the faithful let others know about the "Good News" once they've done that and you have either accepted it or not, their obligation ends. So atheists and Christians can, in theory, agree to disagree and still live side by side in a democratic society even if Christians are the majority. There will obviously be squabbles but that is largely because people aren't perfect. Islam on the other hand is at its core, fundamentally incompatible with democracy and the punishments for rejecting it in a Muslim dominated society are quite clear.

I was making the following point in another thread. The West, the Post-Christian West, is built on the foundation of Christianity. Many of the ways of life that you and I, two Atheists, enjoy come from the Christian tradition. Christianity laid down the foundations and templates of our society. We're a better society for having had that fortune. Look to other societies which haven't intersected with Christianity or Enlightenment values and try to imagine how you could get to the place we are at today but from a different starting point. If Islamic explorers had reached the New World and settled it instead of Spanish, Portuguese, French and English settlers, what would America look like today?Remember that there has been no Enlightenment YET in the Islamic world, so if Christianity had been vanquished at some earlier point in history what course would have been followed instead?

I have a lot of trouble imagining how an Islamic influenced Enlightenment would take form and what its end-state would look like.

I agree with you here on almost all points. I agree that Western society has its roots and foundation in Christianity, that is just a simple fact. But I am of the opinion that our democratic society and our Enlightenment came about in spite of it and not as a result of it. I consent that more moderate elements within Christianity aided it but without dissenting opinions and without people who questioned authority and questioned faith it may never have happened.

If these new philosophies and ways of thinking originate in a vacuum then why no Enlightenment thinkers in the lands of Islam? All the action was taking place in Europe? That shouldn't be the case if there is no connection between Christianity and Enlightenment thinking. Heck, why none in India or China? For the Enlightenment to rise, it had to stand on the shoulders of Christendom. This doesn't mean that there were no rejections of Christian thought, it means that in order to reject Christian doctrine one must first be familiar with it and it's weaknesses. Much is thrown away but much of Christian society is kept.

Perhaps I should clarify my prior statement. I do give some elements of Christianity for being supportive of and helpful towards the Enlightenment movement that too place in the West. I simply don't think that they can take credit for its genesis. Islam however is fundamentally opposed to such a movement. So to be fair, I'm not saying that there is no connection between Christianity and the Enlightenment, just not one that completely favors Christianity. I think that, for the most part, we are on the same page, and in the areas we are not I hope that we can still extend mutual respect toward one another.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

Number one, you're about 1400 years late.

Number two, you're proposing to pass judgement on a 1400 year old religion with well over a billion followers on the basis of............ a YouTube video. And a bullshit blanket statement.

Captain Obvious scuttles another garbage scow. Down she goes, to the deep with her entire cargo of fatal fallacies.

Arrrr.

Why is it that so many of the faithful, regardless of religious affiliation give the number of their religion's followers as if that were some sort of indicator of that religion being true. The majority can and has been wrong before. So there is no reason to believe that it is not wrong now as well. And my views are not made on the basis of a single video but on the understanding of the Muslim world and how they treat non-Muslims when they are in the majority.

I said nothing of "true" nor do I believe such a concept even exists. Assume much?

Oh wait, I saw the OP, so... there's my answer.

Regardless of whether or not you hold Muslim belief your defense of the Muslim faith is simply wrong.

I didn't even address "the Muslim faith". I didn't need to. I addressed YOU.

Completely over your head.... I tellya what, let me use small words...
subsitute "Jews" for Muslim in your OP. Or substitute "Spanish speakers". Or "lefthanded people". Doesn't matter. The point's the same.

Dumbass.

That's a strawman if I ever saw one. The difference between those groups and Muslims is that those groups don't inherently pose a threat to the civil rights and safety of others. It is not the dogma of the lefthanded to kill the righthanded or to force them to write lefthanded. Nor is it the dogma of the spanish speaker to kill those who do not speak Spanish. The Jews in Israel are caught up in a political struggle and they are just as wrong as their Muslim opponents but the Jewish faith in general is not a threat to the non Jewish.

Very good. You're halfway there.
Now take the next step. Plug "Muslim" back in and look around to see where you are.

Muslims treat the minorities in their part of the world as second class citizens. They advocate bronze age traditions such as the removal of a thief's hands and the stoning to death of women convicted of adultery. These things threaten the democratic way of life that is so essential to the future of modern society.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Number one, you're about 1400 years late.

Number two, you're proposing to pass judgement on a 1400 year old religion with well over a billion followers on the basis of............ a YouTube video. And a bullshit blanket statement.

Captain Obvious scuttles another garbage scow. Down she goes, to the deep with her entire cargo of fatal fallacies.

Arrrr.

Why is it that so many of the faithful, regardless of religious affiliation give the number of their religion's followers as if that were some sort of indicator of that religion being true. The majority can and has been wrong before. So there is no reason to believe that it is not wrong now as well. And my views are not made on the basis of a single video but on the understanding of the Muslim world and how they treat non-Muslims when they are in the majority.

I said nothing of "true" nor do I believe such a concept even exists. Assume much?

Oh wait, I saw the OP, so... there's my answer.

Regardless of whether or not you hold Muslim belief your defense of the Muslim faith is simply wrong.

I didn't even address "the Muslim faith". I didn't need to. I addressed YOU.

Completely over your head.... I tellya what, let me use small words...
subsitute "Jews" for Muslim in your OP. Or substitute "Spanish speakers". Or "lefthanded people". Doesn't matter. The point's the same.

Dumbass.

That's a strawman if I ever saw one. The difference between those groups and Muslims is that those groups don't inherently pose a threat to the civil rights and safety of others. It is not the dogma of the lefthanded to kill the righthanded or to force them to write lefthanded. Nor is it the dogma of the spanish speaker to kill those who do not speak Spanish. The Jews in Israel are caught up in a political struggle and they are just as wrong as their Muslim opponents but the Jewish faith in general is not a threat to the non Jewish.

She's just a cranky old bitch. It happens to a lot of old Leftists. She can't answer why Muslim countries have almost universal adherence to Islam. This game of "everyone is the same" is outgrown when most people hit adulthood, but liberals seen stuck in some weird loop and can't break free. Recall earlier I wrote about substitution models, well here's your proof of how liberals see life.

 

[Pogo]

Number one, you're about 1400 years late.

Number two, you're proposing to pass judgement on a 1400 year old religion with well over a billion followers on the basis of............ a YouTube video. And a bullshit blanket statement.

Captain Obvious scuttles another garbage scow. Down she goes, to the deep with her entire cargo of fatal fallacies.

Arrrr.

Why is it that so many of the faithful, regardless of religious affiliation give the number of their religion's followers as if that were some sort of indicator of that religion being true. The majority can and has been wrong before. So there is no reason to believe that it is not wrong now as well. And my views are not made on the basis of a single video but on the understanding of the Muslim world and how they treat non-Muslims when they are in the majority.

I said nothing of "true" nor do I believe such a concept even exists. Assume much?

Oh wait, I saw the OP, so... there's my answer.

Regardless of whether or not you hold Muslim belief your defense of the Muslim faith is simply wrong.

I didn't even address "the Muslim faith". I didn't need to. I addressed YOU.

Completely over your head.... I tellya what, let me use small words...
subsitute "Jews" for Muslim in your OP. Or substitute "Spanish speakers". Or "lefthanded people". Doesn't matter. The point's the same.

Dumbass.

That's a strawman if I ever saw one. The difference between those groups and Muslims is that those groups don't inherently pose a threat to the civil rights and safety of others. It is not the dogma of the lefthanded to kill the righthanded or to force them to write lefthanded. Nor is it the dogma of the spanish speaker to kill those who do not speak Spanish. The Jews in Israel are caught up in a political struggle and they are just as wrong as their Muslim opponents but the Jewish faith in general is not a threat to the non Jewish.

Very good. You're halfway there.
Now take the next step. Plug "Muslim" back in and look around to see where you are.

Muslims treat the minorities in their part of the world as second class citizens. They advocate bronze age traditions such as the removal of a thief's hands and the stoning to death of women convicted of adultery. These things threaten the democratic way of life that is so essential to the future of modern society.

Aaaaaannnnd right back down the same hole again. OK.

One more hint:
First two words. And the verb doesn't even matter. Use any verb you like.
If you still don't get it you don't want to.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

Number one, you're about 1400 years late.

Number two, you're proposing to pass judgement on a 1400 year old religion with well over a billion followers on the basis of............ a YouTube video. And a bullshit blanket statement.

Captain Obvious scuttles another garbage scow. Down she goes, to the deep with her entire cargo of fatal fallacies.

Arrrr.

Why is it that so many of the faithful, regardless of religious affiliation give the number of their religion's followers as if that were some sort of indicator of that religion being true. The majority can and has been wrong before. So there is no reason to believe that it is not wrong now as well. And my views are not made on the basis of a single video but on the understanding of the Muslim world and how they treat non-Muslims when they are in the majority.

I said nothing of "true" nor do I believe such a concept even exists. Assume much?

Oh wait, I saw the OP, so... there's my answer.

Regardless of whether or not you hold Muslim belief your defense of the Muslim faith is simply wrong.

I didn't even address "the Muslim faith". I didn't need to. I addressed YOU.

Completely over your head.... I tellya what, let me use small words...
subsitute "Jews" for Muslim in your OP. Or substitute "Spanish speakers". Or "lefthanded people". Doesn't matter. The point's the same.

Dumbass.

That's a strawman if I ever saw one. The difference between those groups and Muslims is that those groups don't inherently pose a threat to the civil rights and safety of others. It is not the dogma of the lefthanded to kill the righthanded or to force them to write lefthanded. Nor is it the dogma of the spanish speaker to kill those who do not speak Spanish. The Jews in Israel are caught up in a political struggle and they are just as wrong as their Muslim opponents but the Jewish faith in general is not a threat to the non Jewish.

Very good. You're halfway there.
Now take the next step. Plug "Muslim" back in and look around to see where you are.

Muslims treat the minorities in their part of the world as second class citizens. They advocate bronze age traditions such as the removal of a thief's hands and the stoning to death of women convicted of adultery. These things threaten the democratic way of life that is so essential to the future of modern society.

Aaaaaannnnd right back down the same hole again. OK.

One more hint:
First two words. And the verb doesn't even matter. Use any verb you like.
If you still don't get it you don't want to.

If you are trying to imply that Muslims are treated as badly in parts of the world where they are the minority as they treat minorities in their part of the world then I point you to the UK where there are Muslim dominated neighborhoods that are very hostile to non Muslims. And what is the British government doing about this? Next to nothing. Because they fear people like you who would turn public opinion against them and claim that any action that disfavors Muslims in any way is racist.

 

[Pogo]

No. Not even remotely close.
Utter and complete failure. Strawman eats red herring, pukes guts out.

Go learn about logical fallicies. You're sooo not ready.

Dismissed.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

No. Not even remotely close.
Utter and complete failure. Strawman eats red herring, pukes guts out.

Dismissed.

I see nothing in this post other than the temper tantrum of someone that has been defeated honestly in this debate with evidence and reason.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

In fact, Pogo, what are your beliefs on this matter? You have never espoused them at all? You have simply refuted everything said in this thread without giving any reason as to why? I smell a troll.

 

[Rikurzhen]

No. Not even remotely close.
Utter and complete failure. Strawman eats red herring, pukes guts out.

Dismissed.

I see nothing in this post other than the temper tantrum of someone that has been defeated honestly in this debate with evidence and reason.

Leftists work on emotion.If you examine her postings you see that they're all of a kind - they serve to position her as the enlightened person who holds the correct position and thus this elevates her status amongst her liberal group-think peers. This same dynamic occurs with religious people who try to battle each other with being "holier than thou" in order to boost their reputational status in their peer group. For religious people, status is about adherence to religious standards, for people who follow the Religion of Liberalism, their religious standard is to showboat their tolerance and enlightenment. Logic, evidence, facts are to liberals like holy water is to vampires.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

No. Not even remotely close.
Utter and complete failure. Strawman eats red herring, pukes guts out.

Dismissed.

I see nothing in this post other than the temper tantrum of someone that has been defeated honestly in this debate with evidence and reason.

Leftists work on emotion.If you examine her postings you see that they're all of a kind - they serve to position her as the enlightened person who holds the correct position and thus this elevates her status amongst her liberal group-think peers. This same dynamic occurs with religious people who try to battle each other with being "holier than thou" in order to boost their reputational status in their peer group. For religious people, status is about adherence to religious standards, for people who follow the Religion of Liberalism, their religious standard is to showboat their tolerance and enlightenment. Logic, evidence, facts are to liberals like holy water is to vampires.

Not all liberals are this way, though sadly the ones with influence in politics mostly are.

 

[Agit8r]

Islam never had a Protestant Reformation type of revolution nor did it have an Enlightenment revolution.

Well, there were the Abbasids

 

[MaxGrit]

Galatians 1
I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— not that there is another one, but there are some who trouble you and want to distort the gospel of Christ. But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed. As we have said before, so now I say again: If anyone is preaching to you a gospel contrary to the one you received, let him be accursed.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

This video is a good example of how even moderate Muslims respond to any dissenting opinions. This talk show host is a prime example of the extreme views held by even a run of the mill Muslim. It is not a religion of peace. It is a religion of forceful expansion and barbarism.

Islam never had a Protestant Reformation type of revolution nor did it have an Enlightenment revolution. It's stuck where Christianity was in the year 800 or so and even here Christianity didn't see the world as House of Peace and House of War.

That said, Islam is a clear alternative method of organizing society which has a different vision of what is good and how things SHOULD be than what is seen in the Post-Christian West. This really is a battle of ideas which is different than what happened with Christianity. Islam is the total package - a one-stop shop for organizing society, religion, law and government all rolled into one package.

One horrific package that the Muslims will kill for turning down. They Muslim faith and the world that it dominates is still stuck in the bronze age only now the have increasing access to modern day weapons. A terrifying combination.

Look back into Christian history and you see heretics being put to death. That practice didn't derive from scripture and so it was a cultural attachment to how Christianity was practiced and it's been reformed away over time. Now compare to Islam where death to apostates is mandated by all five schools of Islamic Jurisprudence and there are no schools which dissent from this view and it's practiced to this day. A man who leaves Islam faces punishment of death. You can't be a Muslim and reject this, much like you can't be a Christian and reject the divinity of Christ. It's part and parcel of what defines the faith.

What a lot of Westerners don't get about Islam is that it's not a substitute of how we see religion as modeled on Christianity. The mental model they use is to simply substitute - Mosque for Church, private belief for private belief, etc. Christianity is built on the model of a faith which is professed. One guy professes he's a Baptist, another guy professes his faith as a Catholic and all is well with society. Faith is a private matter. That's not how Islam works. Islam is society. It's not just a matter of personal belief, the goal of Islam is to transform society so that is operates on an Islamic basis. This is the problem with America's 1st Amendment - it's built on a model where religion is a private matter. Islam doesn't fit that model.

Look at how much blood and treasure America wasted in Iraq trying to turn it in an America clone in the ME and with all of our influence, look at what is enshrined in the Iraqi Constitution:

• Islam is the state religion and a basic foundation for the country's laws,[3] and no law may contradict the established provisions of Islam.[4]

This is unavoidable, this is how Islam operates. Even America, which denazified Germany and Austria, can't create a secular Constitutional State where people are Muslims. Even with a vanquished state, Islam had to be enshrined in the Constitution.

You are seriously mistaken. The Catholic Church was putting the Christians to death. All through the Inquisition. The RCC is not a Christian doctrine and their teachings are not based on the bible. They nailed the tongues of Christians to the roofs of their mouths to stop them from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. Look up the Doctrine of Lea. You are in for a rude awakening!

 

[AtheistBuddah]

This video is a good example of how even moderate Muslims respond to any dissenting opinions. This talk show host is a prime example of the extreme views held by even a run of the mill Muslim. It is not a religion of peace. It is a religion of forceful expansion and barbarism.

Islam never had a Protestant Reformation type of revolution nor did it have an Enlightenment revolution. It's stuck where Christianity was in the year 800 or so and even here Christianity didn't see the world as House of Peace and House of War.

That said, Islam is a clear alternative method of organizing society which has a different vision of what is good and how things SHOULD be than what is seen in the Post-Christian West. This really is a battle of ideas which is different than what happened with Christianity. Islam is the total package - a one-stop shop for organizing society, religion, law and government all rolled into one package.

One horrific package that the Muslims will kill for turning down. They Muslim faith and the world that it dominates is still stuck in the bronze age only now the have increasing access to modern day weapons. A terrifying combination.

Look back into Christian history and you see heretics being put to death. That practice didn't derive from scripture and so it was a cultural attachment to how Christianity was practiced and it's been reformed away over time. Now compare to Islam where death to apostates is mandated by all five schools of Islamic Jurisprudence and there are no schools which dissent from this view and it's practiced to this day. A man who leaves Islam faces punishment of death. You can't be a Muslim and reject this, much like you can't be a Christian and reject the divinity of Christ. It's part and parcel of what defines the faith.

What a lot of Westerners don't get about Islam is that it's not a substitute of how we see religion as modeled on Christianity. The mental model they use is to simply substitute - Mosque for Church, private belief for private belief, etc. Christianity is built on the model of a faith which is professed. One guy professes he's a Baptist, another guy professes his faith as a Catholic and all is well with society. Faith is a private matter. That's not how Islam works. Islam is society. It's not just a matter of personal belief, the goal of Islam is to transform society so that is operates on an Islamic basis. This is the problem with America's 1st Amendment - it's built on a model where religion is a private matter. Islam doesn't fit that model.

Look at how much blood and treasure America wasted in Iraq trying to turn it in an America clone in the ME and with all of our influence, look at what is enshrined in the Iraqi Constitution:

• Islam is the state religion and a basic foundation for the country's laws,[3] and no law may contradict the established provisions of Islam.[4]

This is unavoidable, this is how Islam operates. Even America, which denazified Germany and Austria, can't create a secular Constitutional State where people are Muslims. Even with a vanquished state, Islam had to be enshrined in the Constitution.

You are seriously mistaken. The Catholic Church was putting the Christians to death. All through the Inquisition. The RCC is not a Christian doctrine and their teachings are not based on the bible. They nailed the tongues of Christians to the roofs of their mouths to stop them from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. Look up the Doctrine of Lea. You are in for a rude awakening!

Catholics are Christian and in fact the origin of Christianity is found in Catholic history and no amount of use of the No True Scotsman Fallacy is going to change that.

 

[Avatar4321]

It's only a threat so long as we continue in our wicked ways. If we repent and return to the Lord, He will strengthen us to overcome any threat.

 

[Rikurzhen]

You are seriously mistaken. The Catholic Church was putting the Christians to death. All through the Inquisition. The RCC is not a Christian doctrine and their teachings are not based on the bible. They nailed the tongues of Christians to the roofs of their mouths to stop them from preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ. Look up the Doctrine of Lea. You are in for a rude awakening!

The Catholic Church is the long, unbroken thread which connects you to the happenings and teachings of the past. Everything you know about Christianity has, at its foundation, a Catholic signature. Unless your knowledge of Christian doctrine is based on archeological digs, scrolls found independent of Catholic influence, then it's logically impossible for you to have a truth, based on scripture, that wasn't present through the period where Catholicism was supreme. The schisms in Christianity all focus on interpretation of scripture and practices instituted by Churches.

To argue that Catholicism is not Christian doctrine is insane.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If Islam weren't a religion of peace, and the 1.4 billion Muslims in the world all believed in a Paradisical afterlife was waiting for them, and killing non-Muslims was okay with God, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

 

[AtheistBuddah]

If Islam weren't a religion of peace, and the 1.4 billion Muslims in the world all believed in a Paradisical afterlife was waiting for them, and killing non-Muslims was okay with God, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not necessarily true. It isn't exactly as simple as you put it. There are other factors. Many people's non violent nature overcomes the violent mindset that is created Islam and the culture built around its laws. But regardless of any of that I think that it is safe to assume that a religion that advocates that thieves get their hands chopped off, adulteresses get stoned to death and those that choose to leave the faith be killed and also desires that these laws be implemented world wide is not a religion of peace. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Islam at its core is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and where one reigns the other can never truly thrive.

 

[Rikurzhen]

If Islam weren't a religion of peace, and the 1.4 billion Muslims in the world all believed in a Paradisical afterlife was waiting for them, and killing non-Muslims was okay with God, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

That's not necessarily true. It isn't exactly as simple as you put it. There are other factors. Many people's non violent nature overcomes the violent mindset that is created Islam and the culture built around its laws. But regardless of any of that I think that it is safe to assume that a religion that advocates that thieves get their hands chopped off, adulteresses get stoned to death and those that choose to leave the faith be killed and also desires that these laws be implemented world wide is not a religion of peace. Not by any stretch of the imagination. Islam at its core is fundamentally incompatible with democracy and where one reigns the other can never truly thrive.

Exactly. Delta's argument takes the form that Catholicism is totally supportive of divorce and birth control because Catholics divorce and Catholic women practice family planning and don't, as a matter of course, each have 8 children. We know the reverse to be true - Catholic doctrine on these two practices is well know, they define what it means to be a good Catholic and those who violate doctrine have to explain to God why they violated his law, as passed down through Catholic teachings.