 |
| |
|
|
Imran Siddiqui
|
 |
The Potterverse
Jan 1970
time: 00:20
|
|
Very interesting New York Times article by Nicholas D. Kristof.
quote:
The Islamic world represses women, spawns terrorism, is prone to war, resists democracy and has contributed remarkably few great scientists or writers to modern civilization. So it's time to defend Islam.
In speaking to Arab friends, I've reproached them for the virulent anti-Semitism in their societies. But it's a cheap shot for us to scold Arabs for acquiescing in religious hatred unless we try vigorously to uproot our own religious bigotry.
Since 9/11, appalling hate speech about Islam has circulated in the U.S. on talk radio, on the Internet and in particular among conservative Christian pastors — the modern echoes of Charles Coughlin, the "radio priest" who had a peak listening audience in the 1930's of one-third of America for his anti-Semitic diatribes.
"Islam is, quite simply, a religion of war," Paul Weyrich and William Lind, two leading American conservatives, write in a new booklet titled "Why Islam Is a Threat to America and the West." Mr. Lind said of American Muslims: "They should be encouraged to leave. They are a fifth column in this country."
Ann Coulter, the columnist, suggested that "we should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity."
The Rev. Franklin Graham, son of the Rev. Billy Graham and a prominent evangelist in his own right, said of Islam: "I believe it's a very evil and wicked religion." The Rev. Jerry Vines, past president of the Southern Baptist Convention, declared that the Prophet Muhammad was "a demon-obsessed pedophile."
President Bush set an example of tolerance immediately after 9/11, but lately has been quiet. He should denounce the bigotry, rather than (as he did by speaking to the Baptist convention after the "pedophile" slur) condoning it. If we want Saudi princes to confront their society's hate-mongers, our own leaders should confront ours.
One problem with this prejudice (as with Osama bin Laden's) is that it blinds the bigots to any understanding of what they deride. If Islam were really just the caricature that it is often reduced to, then how would it be so appealing as to become the world's fastest-growing religion?
Islam already has 1.3 billion adherents and is spreading rapidly, particularly in Africa, partly because it also has admirable qualities that anyone who has lived in the Muslim world observes: a profound egalitarianism and a lack of hierarchy that confer dignity and self-respect among believers; greater hospitality than in other societies; an institutionalized system of charity, zakat, to provide for the poor. Many West Africans, for example, see Christianity as corrupt and hierarchical and flock to Islam, which they view as democratic and inclusive.
One can dispute that, and it's reasonable to worry about the implications of the spread of Islam for the status of women and for the genital mutilation of girls. But simply thundering that Islam is intrinsically violent does not help to understand it and picks up on racist and xenophobic threads that are some of the sorriest chapters in our history.
Of course, Islam is troubled in ways no one can ignore. The scholar Samuel Huntington has noted that the Islamic world has "bloody borders," with conflict around much of its perimeter. Of the 26 countries torn by conflict in the year 2000, 14 have large Muslim populations. And on average, Muslim countries mobilize twice as large a share of the population in armed forces as do predominately Christian countries.
This is fair grounds for debate, but the sweeping denigrations of Islam are mush. Critics often quote from the Koran, for example, to argue that Islam is intrinsically violent ("fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them"). But the Koran, like the Bible, can be quoted for any purpose. After all, the New Testament embraces slavery ("Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling").
In times of stress, even smart and sophisticated people tend to be swept up in prejudice. Teddy Roosevelt said in 1886: "I don't go so far as to think that the only good Indians are dead Indians, but I believe nine out of ten are, and I shouldn't inquire too closely in the case of the tenth. The most vicious cowboy has more moral principle than the average Indian."
History suggests that focusing on the moral deficiencies of other peoples simply underscores our own. |
I think he has a good point. Our own bigot are out in force against Islam, so how can we chide the bigotry of Islam while letting our own go unabated.
Thoughts?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:20
|
|
Good article.
quote:
...it's reasonable to worry about the implications of the spread of Islam for the status of women and for the genital mutilation of girls. But simply thundering that Islam is intrinsically violent does not help to understand it and picks up on racist and xenophobic threads that are some of the sorriest chapters in our history.
Of course, Islam is troubled in ways no one can ignore. The scholar Samuel Huntington has noted that the Islamic world has "bloody borders," with conflict around much of its perimeter. Of the 26 countries torn by conflict in the year 2000, 14 have large Muslim populations. And on average, Muslim countries mobilize twice as large a share of the population in armed forces as do predominately Christian countries.
This is fair grounds for debate, but the sweeping denigrations of Islam are mush. Critics often quote from the Koran, for example, to argue that Islam is intrinsically violent ("fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them"). But the Koran, like the Bible, can be quoted for any purpose. After all, the New Testament embraces slavery ("Slaves, obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling"). |
I think this is extremely important: it's not that Islam doesn't have problems or issues that can be discussed. It clearly does (as does the Catholic Church, what with Priests molesting little boys), but the discussion should be rational and informed. Those quotes from the American far right are neither.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
 |
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
yes, but if a country will become muslim , It will empose it's silly laws on me? besides , I think we should help all the people that suffer from these terrible laws. At least half of the population suffers ( women ) , and if that's not enough , the whole concept of religion in general , and Islam , in particular , is halting the progress of the human race. 
in short, If you won't bother with it now, It'll come back , and bite you in the ass .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
Dalgetti, they might not even see it as suffering but as their destination. I know it's hardly bearable from our point of view, but still... of course, in the end there's enlightenment for everyone, so yeah, but I fail to see the connection between Islam and planes flying into office towers.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Monk
|
|
I don't think we're in Brønshøj anymore
Jan 1970
time: 06:20
|
|
Imran,
A very good subject to raise. Maybe you've noted I've made a few slightly aggressive points on Islam to express my concern on the issue. Let's break up the article a bit...
Critics often quote from the Koran, for example, to argue that Islam is intrinsically violent ("fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them"). But the Koran, like
the Bible, can be quoted for any purpose.
Of course this is a valid point, but as far as I know, the Koran is per definition the inerrant word of God, word for word, whereas the widespread Christian perception of the Bible is different. Sure, the Bible is also supposed to be God's message to mankind, but it's generally agreed upon that it's authored by people, not God himself. This also means you can attribute some parts of the Bible to the society in which it was written, whereas the very word of God per definition would apply equally much today as it did in the days of Muhammad.
[Islam has] greater hospitality than in other societies; an institutionalized system of charity, zakat, to provide for the poor
This is probably correct as well, but once again there are two sides of the story. At least partly, Islam can be regarded as a religion of greater hospitality because according to the doctrine, state and church isn't supposed to be seperate entities. This is one of the things that bothers me the most regarding Islam contra Christianity - it's unquestionable that Jesus much unlike Muhammad to none or very little degree made up laws or anything of that sort. You can't deny that Christianity doesn't have remotely the same political dimension you find in Islam, which is probably the very reason religion continues to play such a big part down there. Generally speaking, the guidelines present in Muslim thought leave much lesser room for the individual, thus making it significantly more difficult than other religions to incorparate in our modern 21st century society based on the belief in the potential and the abilities of said individual.
(EDIT: I typed "the Bible" where it should have been "the Koran". Now corrected.)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
I had a similar thought briefly ago, about the Matrix and all that... actually that was just a misled thought of myself... we claim our societies enlightened, and that includes liberation of oppressed, somehow.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
dalgetti: yes for the people in turkey but they seem to always want the islamists. no for external relations 'cause military regime is as bad as islamist IMO (we have lived next to both)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Az
|
|
MACEDONIA - It's the name of the sovereign country to the north of Greece
Apr 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
this is not a real post. You're the only one seeing this . If you mention it to other people , they'll make fun of you . Better get some medication and forget you ever saw this.
Last edited by Az on 10-07-2002 at 01:02
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
dal, i already said that it's better for the people of turkey. but dont think that turkish women are free just beacue a military regime is in power. the culture remains islamic.
as for being accountable to the US, no. If they turn islamic they'll be such as abnoxious in external relations (i told you we lived with both islamic and military turkey next to us) and not having the US support is only a good thing if you get my drift.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000
time: 06:20
|
|
what?
plus, women are free in a republic
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Monk
|
|
I don't think we're in Brønshøj anymore
Jan 1970
time: 06:20
|
|
Oh, I missed one;
If Islam were really just the caricature that it is often reduced to, then how would it be so appealing as to become the world's fastest-growing religion?
This is one of the weakest points he tries to make. If the same flawed thought process was applied a relatively short while ago when concrete communism was one of the world's fastest-growing ideologies - maybe Kristof would have argued it couldn't have been that appealing after all.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sirotnikov
|
 |
<--- Yes, It's a "kitty" in a boot.
Feb 2000
time: 07:20
|
|
I agree with Dal.
It's not that Islam is inherently worse that Christianity. It has it's differences, and it's hard to judge, considering it has brighter but also darker points.
The problem is that Islam is younger, and still is very active and has not matured to the point that Christianity has.
Christianity, it seems, has far less effect on people and life and politics than Islam does right now.
Furthermore, Christianity is currently hardly as missionary as it was, say, 600 years ago. And Islam is some 600 years younger than Christianity.
The problem is, that while now fundamentalist Islamists are still prevalent, they have access to more and better weapons of mass destruction, which Christianity didn't have 600 years ago. Though they did manage to slaughter enough people.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-07-2002 00:00
(for the better)
.
|