Should we really differentiate between "Radical" Muslims and "Moderate" Muslims?

[mikey123]

We live in a society that in the last few years seem to want to create fear and enemies, why can we not look into the mirror instead...mikey123

[Duder]

One camp wants to kill all of us with their own bare hands, the other camp gives silent support for it.

Both camps believe in the same thing--a global Caliphate. i.e. They want Islam to take over the world and they believe that any action taken to attain this goal is justified (even if they themselves die as victims).

So, why should we differentiate? Both would rather see the US destroyed, while in their hypocrisy rolling in every Western freedom and priviledge that is condemned in the Qu'ran and the Hadiths. I'm tired of people taking advantage of our freedom while secretly plotting to overthrow us. Let US not end up like France.

sfj

Hello, SFJ -

If I have correctly absorbed the sense of this, it brings to mind a saying taken from the manifest destiny era of our American history: "The only good Indian is a dead Indian." I am also reminded of what the papal legate said to the religious army that was preparing its attack on a heretical town in the south of France: "Kill them all - God will know his own."

The advantage to ignoring the differences between people and lumping them into the same group is that it relieves you of the pain of having to exercize your powers of discrimination. If "they're all alike", then you don't have to evaluate them on their individual merits. You get to adopt a lazy solution to your problem.

The disadvantage to employing rationalizations like this is that they are usually a kind of self-deception, rather like Gollum with his "birthday present". As you repeat it and try to convince others of it, you might start to believe it yourself.

[Da Lone-Warrior]

Rebecca Haines of the Institute for Global Engagement has a good answer for this question.
http://www.globalengagement.org/issu...5/08/islam.htm

dlw

[Barry Desborough]

I've only just skimmed this thread, so sorry to blunder in, but I do feel the need to say something.

I think its terribly sad that the richest, most powerful state in history cannot seem to give a positive lead to the world.

I like to ask people, "What are you?" What, of the multiple identities that we all have, gender, religion, nationality, politics, language etc. - what is the indentity of primary importance. I'm always heartened when I hear, "human being".

As a British atheist, I'm an alien with respect to Right-Wing Christian America. With the majority of thinking, caring people in the world trying to 'widen the circle', what is it about the RWCA mindset that creates so much exclusivity, so much hate and fear and distrust? Don't just answer, "9/11", unless you are prepared to examine its context. At the time of the attack, I had good friends who were working very close to the Pentagon, and a daughter living two blocks from ground zero, and I'm not out to kill all Muslims and foreigners.

[Duder]

I've only just skimmed this thread, so sorry to blunder in, but I do feel the need to say something.

I think its terribly sad that the richest, most powerful state in history cannot seem to give a positive lead to the world.

I like to ask people, "What are you?" What, of the multiple identities that we all have, gender, religion, nationality, politics, language etc. - what is the indentity of primary importance. I'm always heartened when I hear, "human being".

As a British atheist, I'm an alien with respect to Right-Wing Christian America. With the majority of thinking, caring people in the world trying to 'widen the circle', what is it about the RWCA mindset that creates so much exclusivity, so much hate and fear and distrust? Don't just answer, "9/11", unless you are prepared to examine its context. At the time of the attack, I had good friends who were working very close to the Pentagon, and a daughter living two blocks from ground zero, and I'm not out to kill all Muslims and foreigners.

But Barry, didn't you hear President Bush when he explained that you are either for us or against us? We integrate not only moderate and radical Muslims into the same group, but everyone who does not wholeheartedly support our invasions and occupations goes into the same catagory of "against us" - which means we do not have to pay attention to any of the fine details of your particular attributes.

"Kill them all - let God sort 'em out."

Are you for us or against us?

[mikey123]

What utter crap. Go outside, talk to a muslim and ask them if they believe that any action is justified. Oh and then go and check out some of the quotes from religious leaders in Saudi Arabia regarding terrorism. For example:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...239063,00.html


What are you proposing here? Killing them all? Oh and what is the sly reference to France that you are making here? Are you going to use the phrase 'surrender monkey' that makes me ashamed to love America every time I hear it?

This unashamed bigotry on a supposedly Christian site is starting to get me down. I think some professed Christians need to start taking a long hard look at themselves.

Hi...mikey123 here...thanks for your opinion , i share it with you up here in Canada...m

[mikey123]

One camp wants to kill all of us with their own bare hands, the other camp gives silent support for it.

Both camps believe in the same thing--a global Caliphate. i.e. They want Islam to take over the world and they believe that any action taken to attain this goal is justified (even if they themselves die as victims).

So, why should we differentiate? Both would rather see the US destroyed, while in their hypocrisy rolling in every Western freedom and priviledge that is condemned in the Qu'ran and the Hadiths. I'm tired of people taking advantage of our freedom while secretly plotting to overthrow us. Let US not end up like France.

sfj

What's the number on the side of your glass house??

[suffer for joy]

What?

Do you guys go around looking for year-old threads that offend you?

Anyway, I stand by my posts. The 'moderate' muslims are chanting 'Kill the Jews' in their Mosques alongside the so called radicals... they just aren't the ones pulling the 'trigger' of terrorism--but they do provide the gun.

[RaisingPaine]

Hi, suffer_for_joy

What?

Do you guys go around looking for year-old threads that offend you?

Anyway, I stand by my posts. The 'moderate' muslims are chanting 'Kill the Jews' in their Mosques alongside the so called radicals... they just aren't the ones pulling the 'trigger' of terrorism--but they do provide the gun.

You're right, this was quite an old post. Octavian, Rahab, Soundsurfr and I (among others) had quite an animated discussion on the topic recently in this thread.

I was doing some research on Al-Taqiyya, its interpretations and allowed usage and found it fascinating. The situations where it can be introduced make the notion, overall, seem pretty reasonable.

I'll give you some of my links and perhaps you can forward some of yours.

Al-Islam.org on Al-Taqiyya, Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3

Answering-Islam.org on Al-Taqiyya

There seems to be an issue in Islam regarding the true spirit of Al-Taqiyya (which, as defined by the Shia, is closer to "diplomacy") but how easily it can be stretched is demonstrated in this article, Understanding Deceit and Dishonesty in Islam, also from Answering-Islam.org.

Ultimately, it may depend on what Islam sect is sourced determines its popular meaning. Anyway, interesting subject.

[Soundsurfr]

Hi, suffer_for_joy



You're right, this was quite an old post. Octavian, Rahab, Soundsurfr and I (among others) had quite an animated discussion on the topic recently in this thread.

Indeed, and you will find, if you read through it, that I have taken a position very similar to Suffer_for_joy's. Now, before you call me a bigot, understand that it is not my contention that anyone should be persecuted or killed for their beliefs. But at the root of much destructive behavior in this world are fundamentally irrational beliefs, and I think it's high time we started denouncing irrational, ultimately destructive beliefs.

Now, it may seem that I am targeting only Islam for this criticism, but I am not. I believe Christianity and some other religions make similar mistake, but I also believe that Islam embraces a few unique concepts that add to its destructive capabilities.

First, it is totally irrational to believe that there is a God who takes sides in human conflicts, or is concerned about preserving any parcel of land as "holy" and belonging to one arbitrary sect or another. There is no evidence for it. There is no rationale for it and there is no good that can come of it. It cuts off any opportunity for diplomacy or compromise.

As a subset, it is irrational to believe that one who dies for a cause in this life will be rewarded in an afterlife. There is no evidence for it. There is no rationale for it and no good can come of it. It creates a situation where life on Earth is ultimately devalued.

Finally, it is blatantly true that Islam in particular, whether it be in its moderate or conservative interpretations, is not compatible with Western style democracy. Study it. It is more than a religion. It is a political system and a system of law and it is in direct conflict with nearly every salient aspect of the US Constitution, for one. People are willing to acknowledge this with regard to communism, but they will employ the most egregious cognitive dissonance to deny it with respect to Islam.

So ask yourself - if Muslims were the majority in this country, what do you think would happen to your system of government? How does that make you feel?

[RaisingPaine]

Indeed, and you will find, if you read through it, that I have taken a position very similar to Suffer_for_joy's. Now, before you call me a bigot,

LOL, not at all my friend...you're an equal-opportunity chastizer.

understand that it is not my contention that anyone should be persecuted or killed for their beliefs. But at the root of much destructive behavior in this world are fundamentally irrational beliefs, and I think it's high time we started denouncing irrational, ultimately destructive beliefs.

Now, it may seem that I am targeting only Islam for this criticism, but I am not. I believe Christianity and some other religions make similar mistake, but I also believe that Islam embraces a few unique concepts that add to its destructive capabilities.

First, it is totally irrational to believe that there is a God who takes sides in human conflicts,

Most religions believe this.

or is concerned about preserving any parcel of land as "holy"

And this, too.

and belonging to one arbitrary sect or another. There is no evidence for it. There is no rationale for it and there is no good that can come of it. It cuts off any opportunity for diplomacy or compromise.

As a subset, it is irrational to believe that one who dies for a cause in this life will be rewarded in an afterlife.

I think it's fair to say that most religions believing in an afterlife see moral behavior in this life as having some effect on the rewards received in the next.

There is no evidence for it. There is no rationale for it and no good can come of it. It creates a situation where life on Earth is ultimately devalued.

Devalued? In comparison to the afterlife, yes. But I think most people, regardless of religious affiliation, view this life as precious. Otherwise, to die in the name of a cause would not represent a sacrifice.

Finally, it is blatantly true that Islam in particular, whether it be in its moderate or conservative interpretations, is not compatible with Western style democracy. Study it. It is more than a religion. It is a political system and a system of law and it is in direct conflict with nearly every salient aspect of the US Constitution, for one.

Without being a scholar of either, I would generally agree.

People are willing to acknowledge this with regard to communism, but they will employ the most egregious cognitive dissonance to deny it with respect to Islam.

Yes, but part of what that Constitution provides for is freedom of worship, or not to at all, as in the case of Communism, which is more of an idealogy. Any person or group of people are free to embrace whatever idealogy or religion they want, to the degree they don't break local or federal laws. Islam, within the country is practiced as a religion and, nothing stops muslims, from operating their Mosque as a theocracy if they so see fit.

So ask yourself - if Muslims were the majority in this country, what do you think would happen to your system of government?

Well, to affect the changes in our Constitution, rewriting/repealling amendments, etc. they would have to be typically two/thirds majority (and all voting the same way) in two/thirds of the states. At that point, they're the majority, so I guess we'd be in for a change. It doesn't mean you'd have to convert religions, since many Muslim countries have sizable Christian populations (assuming you were Christian).

How does that make you feel?

It makes me proud to live in a country where the people ultimately determine whats in their best interest (not their government), including (but not limited to) changing the style of government altogether.

[Pilgrim]

What?

Do you guys go around looking for year-old threads that offend you?

Anyway, I stand by my posts. The 'moderate' muslims are chanting 'Kill the Jews' in their Mosques alongside the so called radicals... they just aren't the ones pulling the 'trigger' of terrorism--but they do provide the gun.

Bull crap. What a silly assertion. Can we assume you have real audio of these chants. Please.

But using your logic I guess I have no choice but to lump you in with Fred Phelps.

[Soundsurfr]

LOL, not at all my friend...you're an equal-opportunity chastizer.

I'll drink to that.

Most religions believe this.

I'm well aware. Irrational, nonetheless.

And this, too.

Irrational, nonetheless.

I think it's fair to say that most religions believing in an afterlife see moral behavior in this life as having some effect on the rewards received in the next.

Do I have to say it?

Devalued? In comparison to the afterlife, yes. But I think most people, regardless of religious affiliation, view this life as precious. Otherwise, to die in the name of a cause would not represent a sacrifice.

The problem arises when the belief is that it is ALWAYS better to fight and die than to not fight and die. When dying itself becomes an end rather than a means:

The believers who stay at home - apart from those who suffer a great impediment - are not the equal of those who fight for the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God has given those who fight with their goods and their persons a higher rank than those who stay at home. God has promised all a good reward, but far richer is the recompense of those who fight for Him...he that leaves his dwelling to fight for God and his apostle and is then overtaken by death shall be rewarded by God....the unbelievers are your inveterate enemies. - [Koran 4:95-101]

Let those who would exchange the life of this world for the hereafter fight for the cause of God; whoever fights for the cause of God whether he dies or triumphs, We shall richly reward him...[Koran 4:74-78]

This is the religion of peace, I remind you. And when the above enjoinders are considered in light of the fact that Islam does not distinguish between religious and civil authority, the lit fuse is plainly visible.

Yes, but part of what that Constitution provides for is freedom of worship, or not to at all, as in the case of Communism, which is more of an idealogy. Any person or group of people are free to embrace whatever idealogy or religion they want, to the degree they don't break local or federal laws.

Agreed.

Islam, within the country is practiced as a religion and, nothing stops muslims, from operating their Mosque as a theocracy if they so see fit.

I am not concerned with anyone operating a Mosque as a theocracy, except that enforcing Shariah law and some of its proscribed punishements would be in violation of US law. (And what is a good Muslim expected to do when such a conflict arises?)

Well, to affect the changes in our Constitution, rewriting/repealling amendments, etc. they would have to be typically two/thirds majority (and all voting the same way) in two/thirds of the states. At that point, they're the majority, so I guess we'd be in for a change. It doesn't mean you'd have to convert religions, since many Muslim countries have sizable Christian populations (assuming you were Christian).

No, I wouldn't have to convert religions. I would, as a non-Muslim, however, not enjoy the same rights as a Muslim. I'd be subject to higher taxes, and if I were ever accused and convicted of trying to convert a Muslim away from their religion, I would be put to death. This is not an "interpretation" of Islam. It's written in the texts as clearly as this post.

It makes me proud to live in a country where the people ultimately determine whats in their best interest (not their government), including (but not limited to) changing the style of government altogether.

Me too! That's what I'm trying to preserve.

[mikey123]

Then, study the doctrine of Al-Taqiyya/Dissimulation and realize that Muslims have the right from the Qu'ran to blatantly lie to infidels.

Now that was a stretch. It seems your own personal biases are pouring out here.

Bigotry? Would you say the same thing if I posted a similar rant about Nazis or Communists? I believe my stance is more than justified through my research and experience.

Yours, however, is justified through the word of the liberal media, and muslims themselves (who without a doubt, practice dissimulation).

I am amazed how it is we want to blame others, so that we can remain victims of our own lives ...mikey123

[Snarf]

Then, study the doctrine of Al-Taqiyya/Dissimulation and realize that Muslims have the right from the Qu'ran to blatantly lie to infidels.

Since you were unable to find a verse in Quran that says that Muslims can lie to infidels, don't you think that ought to read your own Bible and what it says about bearing false witness?

Or do you intend to convince us that muslims are liars by lying about them?