Sharia law is a clear statement on the religion. The point is that Islam is not just worship as it comes complete with Sharia law, and that makes it political and incompatible with freedom and violently incompatible at that. France has turned into Jurassic Park with its Islamic population flood due to France's past colonial ways. Burkas and free speech are tail of the Tyrannosaurus Rex, with 'Charlie' just the beginning and there is no melting pot in sight. We'll have to see if the French surrender (and Europe).
Liberal and conservative progressives (Clintons and Bushies) who love Saudi election money are playing dumb. Muslims that act like Sharia law is an artifact are disingenuous.
Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2488
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
And the result of the story
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-30863159
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-30863159
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Yes, freedom meets Islam with result that Muslims go massively violent and kill everyone non Muslim. Progressives would blame freedom, I blame Islam as every other religious group (Hindus, Buddists, Hebrew, Christian, etc) seem to do fine with freedom. (Progressives don't do well with freedom either as they believe people must be managed or farmed for their progressive utopia to work - of course it doesn't work so more management is always needed - or the 'experiment' needs to be bigger, hence push for a world utopian gubertmant, the big utopian farm.)
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Something interesting happens when you study Islam on a timeline. The early "recitations" are generally gentle-spiritied, inclined to be conciliatory, and do not support terrorism or the use of war or violence to spread Islam. They insisted that there is no compulsion in religion. As time went on, the tone changed, and so did the Prophet's actions.
The reason Islam asks followers to turn off their minds, follow blindly, and never question a word of what the Prophet said or did is pretty simple: the guy contradicted himself over time. This affects both the Quran and Sharia.
One way the scholars have calculated around this is to say that the early messages were made under duress, that the time was not right to say the real message, which was "death to the non-believers." Adherents of this line of reasoning disregard all the gentle early messages and follow the mean stuff. And they're the problem.
The problem with this approach is that each and every Sura begins, "In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate." As the first words, and most repeated, you'd think they have the most weight. Yet they're ignored at the convenience of people selling the very opposite of mercy and compassion.
The reason Islam asks followers to turn off their minds, follow blindly, and never question a word of what the Prophet said or did is pretty simple: the guy contradicted himself over time. This affects both the Quran and Sharia.
One way the scholars have calculated around this is to say that the early messages were made under duress, that the time was not right to say the real message, which was "death to the non-believers." Adherents of this line of reasoning disregard all the gentle early messages and follow the mean stuff. And they're the problem.
The problem with this approach is that each and every Sura begins, "In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate." As the first words, and most repeated, you'd think they have the most weight. Yet they're ignored at the convenience of people selling the very opposite of mercy and compassion.
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2488
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
I think most of the differences in the Koran can be directly tribute to man. The book has a long history of being passed along orally as well as a written version. This would make it very susceptible to revisionist history. Current King Oman or tribal leader has a liner to inserted to help justify his current policies beliefs or the war at hand.
Even the Bible has several different versions all basically heading towards the same general truth but contradicting in several places. This is the same thing that I feel is occurred in the Koran. Over the years those in charge of passing down the history edited to change things in order to keep their version of history in power, or justifed
No great mystery
Even the Bible has several different versions all basically heading towards the same general truth but contradicting in several places. This is the same thing that I feel is occurred in the Koran. Over the years those in charge of passing down the history edited to change things in order to keep their version of history in power, or justifed
No great mystery
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
I don't think there was much drift in the Quran. Muslims believe it was literally the word of God, a poem so beautiful and clever that only God could have created it (that's one of those assertions that you are not allowed to question). God spoke the words to Jibrail (Christians call this angel Gabriel), who went down to Earth and recited it to Muhammad, who, with some divine help, memorized it word for word. Muhammad would then, the following day, gather his followers and, in a trance, recite the words exactly. It was the job of a select few of those followers to memorize the verses exactly.
We would not trust this approach today ... we would make a video or audio recording. But in that time, worldwide, in illiterate societies you did not have much choice. Rhymes were often used as memory aids. But within a few generations the Quran was written down, and it has been maintained quite faithfully since. When the words hit paper, there were several editions and they were nearly exact duplicates. If there was any mis-remembering of the verses, it happened in a very short period of time.
Now compare this to the Judeo-Christian "Book of God", the Bible, which is clearly a strange collection of culture myths, history, and prophesy collected over a couple of millennia, and only a few words of which purport to actually be from the mouth of God or Gabriel. The exact words have drifted in various translations, and that includes some tweaks put in by scholars or kings over the years. There is, for example, a difference in "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shall do no murder." The new Testament has a bit more direct provenance, but alas was written down by the barely literate, and the misplaced pronouns drive me nuts. You can't tell who said what.
Where the variation comes in is Sharia. It varies dramatically from region to region, blending in early tradition with local custom. Do women have to wear just a head scarf, or a burka? Are they subject to female circumcision (strictly practiced only in a small region of Africa)? Are other religions subject to violent persecution, or are they merely taxed for it (demis)? Sharia varies all over the place, it is at the whim of local clerics, and it is quite plain that some of them are power mad and abuse this control. In many Islamic countries the clerics have been stripped of their power because of it.
The split between Sunni and Shiih is like the split between Catholic and Protestant. Each considers the other to be apostates. But within the Sunnis you have violent disagreement. In Saudi Arabia you have the Wahhabi sect, known for being strict. But in Jordan you have the Salafi sect, which considers the Wahhabis to be slackers and non-believers. Some of the most dangerous jihadists are Salafi. They favor civil war to create a Muslim state so that they can kill all the infidels and force compliance with their version of Sharia, a process that would leave most Muslims dead.
Let's not leave out Boko Haram (more or less means West Forbidden), which hates Western influence, but who otherwise is making up their own rules as they please.
We would not trust this approach today ... we would make a video or audio recording. But in that time, worldwide, in illiterate societies you did not have much choice. Rhymes were often used as memory aids. But within a few generations the Quran was written down, and it has been maintained quite faithfully since. When the words hit paper, there were several editions and they were nearly exact duplicates. If there was any mis-remembering of the verses, it happened in a very short period of time.
Now compare this to the Judeo-Christian "Book of God", the Bible, which is clearly a strange collection of culture myths, history, and prophesy collected over a couple of millennia, and only a few words of which purport to actually be from the mouth of God or Gabriel. The exact words have drifted in various translations, and that includes some tweaks put in by scholars or kings over the years. There is, for example, a difference in "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shall do no murder." The new Testament has a bit more direct provenance, but alas was written down by the barely literate, and the misplaced pronouns drive me nuts. You can't tell who said what.
Where the variation comes in is Sharia. It varies dramatically from region to region, blending in early tradition with local custom. Do women have to wear just a head scarf, or a burka? Are they subject to female circumcision (strictly practiced only in a small region of Africa)? Are other religions subject to violent persecution, or are they merely taxed for it (demis)? Sharia varies all over the place, it is at the whim of local clerics, and it is quite plain that some of them are power mad and abuse this control. In many Islamic countries the clerics have been stripped of their power because of it.
The split between Sunni and Shiih is like the split between Catholic and Protestant. Each considers the other to be apostates. But within the Sunnis you have violent disagreement. In Saudi Arabia you have the Wahhabi sect, known for being strict. But in Jordan you have the Salafi sect, which considers the Wahhabis to be slackers and non-believers. Some of the most dangerous jihadists are Salafi. They favor civil war to create a Muslim state so that they can kill all the infidels and force compliance with their version of Sharia, a process that would leave most Muslims dead.
Let's not leave out Boko Haram (more or less means West Forbidden), which hates Western influence, but who otherwise is making up their own rules as they please.
-
paperburn1
- Posts: 2488
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2009 5:53 am
- Location: Third rock from the sun.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Because of so many different versions appearing the third caliph (religious and political ruler) in the Sunni line, Uthman (644-656 C.E.), ordered an authorized version, then assigned reciters to deliver copies to several major Muslim towns and sought to destroy all other koran texts in order to enforce uniformity. Due to his efforts there seems to be only seven accepted versions of the koran by modern day Muslims.
Adams also says disparate Quran collections existed alongside Uthman’s version for three centuries with “real and substantial” differences but none that affect key doctrines. Citing Islamic sources, Jeffery listed 15 “primary” and other “secondary” Quran versions in circulation long after Uthman’s reign, though none of these has survived.
Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/getreligio ... z3PITn7ASi
Adams also says disparate Quran collections existed alongside Uthman’s version for three centuries with “real and substantial” differences but none that affect key doctrines. Citing Islamic sources, Jeffery listed 15 “primary” and other “secondary” Quran versions in circulation long after Uthman’s reign, though none of these has survived.
Read more: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/getreligio ... z3PITn7ASi
I am not a nuclear physicist, but play one on the internet.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
I wonder how much scholars will disagree with armed and fanatic followers of the 'true' Islam? I wonder if the Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, (non Muslims) in the Moslem dominated countries feel safe these days? The point is how peaceful Islam truly is, is dependent on real life in Muslim dominated countries. For a long time there was some safety in Muslim countries for non Muslims, but that seems to be changing to there is no safety for non Muslims. So, after the churches etc have been burned down, non Muslims chased out, converted, or murdered, then the scholars will start arguing again how peaceful Islam is.
Counting the days to commercial fusion. It is not that long now.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Recall reading an article some years back about a very old abandoned mosque that was excavated and copies of the Koran were found. What they showed was the dynamic nature of the Arabic language, how the same words and phrases can have multiple meanings or interpretations. The language changes over time and allows for a great deal of evasiveness by the speaker, very important in a society where what you say can get you killed.
CHoff
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
You need to go back and read the Koran for yourself. There is no truth in this whatsoever. Mohamed was himself a raider, who plundered and murdered anyone who did not agree with his faith. From its first days, Islam has been violent start to finish so if you're reading something that says differently, you're not reading history and the Koran. The First Battle of Islam occurred in the life of Mohammad and his life is often seen as defined by the various battles he took part in, so any nonsense about how violence is not intrinsic to Islam is just that. Islam is violent first to last. It is not the "fundamentalists" who are the violent aberration. It is the modern peace loving Muslims who are the aberration. Their religion did not teach them this.Tom Ligon wrote:Something interesting happens when you study Islam on a timeline. The early "recitations" are generally gentle-spiritied, inclined to be conciliatory, and do not support terrorism or the use of war or violence to spread Islam. They insisted that there is no compulsion in religion.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
I actually have read a considerable portion of the Quran. I was researching a story. The story concept was about a starship hijacking, told from the point of view of the hijacker. The attempt fails, of course (not a spoiler ... the first paragraphs of the story reveal the ending). The hijacker finally sits down in his prison cell and reads the Quran with open eyes, and finds the early Suras, the ones his mentors steered him clear of.
The fact that the violent stuff is in the later Suras was brought to my attention a couple of years ago by an author and speaker named Joe Butta, at the Halo security summit in 2012, Joe has written several books on the subject, and you'd probably like them. He's no fan of Islam.
It is not true that Islam started out violent. It is true that it got that way well within one lifetime. Muhammed was just a trader when he started doing recitations. He had no power and limited influence. But by the end of his life he was a blood and guts leader of slashing armies.
The difference between violent jihadists and the more peaceful sort of Muslims like that grocery store clerk in France is the difference in what parts of the Quran they're being taught, and what they believe they should do about it (largely their Sharia tradition).
I leave it for the reader to judge how trustworthy a book is that is so inconsistent. Although I also leave it to the reader to judge the credibility of any religious text.
Most of the gentle stuff is from a Sura called "The Imrans". In Islamic tradition, Mary, mother of Jesus, was from this family, and she is highly respected by Muslims (and in fact, so is Jesus, they just deny that he is the Son of God). Here's part of the conclusion of the story, told by my repentant terrorist.
There are few sins as great as for a believer to turn away from the True Path. On virtually every page of that divine book, I find a mortal transgression I have committed. These are not vague passages I have overlooked, but basics repeated over and over again. Their truth is obvious to me now, but until now I chose to ignore them.
Did I suppose that it was the Prophet's whimsy to begin each sura by reminding us that God is Merciful and Compassionate? How could I believe that my mission from God was exactly the opposite?
Certainly I was taught that it was my duty to defend the Faith against aggression. And I was taught that the aggression against the Faith was perpetual and universal. I was also taught that revenge and retaliation are permitted (though not recommended) under God's Law. It was upon these few snippets of the Truth that I based my life. I chose to overlook all the rest.
"... thou wilt never cease to light upon some act of treachery on their part, except a few of them. Yet pardon them, and forgive ...."
"... they will not harm you, except a little hurt."
"... their guile will hurt you nothing."
"Let not detestation for a people move you not to be equitable."
"Thine it is only to deliver the message."
Time and again the Koran reminds us that God prefers us to be forgiving and kind, and that such actions are rewarded in the Hereafter. Time and again it reminds us that aggression and persecution are condemned. Over and over we are told that there is no compulsion in religion, that God guides whom He will to or away from belief, and that the unbelievers harm no one but themselves.
The fact that the violent stuff is in the later Suras was brought to my attention a couple of years ago by an author and speaker named Joe Butta, at the Halo security summit in 2012, Joe has written several books on the subject, and you'd probably like them. He's no fan of Islam.
It is not true that Islam started out violent. It is true that it got that way well within one lifetime. Muhammed was just a trader when he started doing recitations. He had no power and limited influence. But by the end of his life he was a blood and guts leader of slashing armies.
The difference between violent jihadists and the more peaceful sort of Muslims like that grocery store clerk in France is the difference in what parts of the Quran they're being taught, and what they believe they should do about it (largely their Sharia tradition).
I leave it for the reader to judge how trustworthy a book is that is so inconsistent. Although I also leave it to the reader to judge the credibility of any religious text.
Most of the gentle stuff is from a Sura called "The Imrans". In Islamic tradition, Mary, mother of Jesus, was from this family, and she is highly respected by Muslims (and in fact, so is Jesus, they just deny that he is the Son of God). Here's part of the conclusion of the story, told by my repentant terrorist.
There are few sins as great as for a believer to turn away from the True Path. On virtually every page of that divine book, I find a mortal transgression I have committed. These are not vague passages I have overlooked, but basics repeated over and over again. Their truth is obvious to me now, but until now I chose to ignore them.
Did I suppose that it was the Prophet's whimsy to begin each sura by reminding us that God is Merciful and Compassionate? How could I believe that my mission from God was exactly the opposite?
Certainly I was taught that it was my duty to defend the Faith against aggression. And I was taught that the aggression against the Faith was perpetual and universal. I was also taught that revenge and retaliation are permitted (though not recommended) under God's Law. It was upon these few snippets of the Truth that I based my life. I chose to overlook all the rest.
"... thou wilt never cease to light upon some act of treachery on their part, except a few of them. Yet pardon them, and forgive ...."
"... they will not harm you, except a little hurt."
"... their guile will hurt you nothing."
"Let not detestation for a people move you not to be equitable."
"Thine it is only to deliver the message."
Time and again the Koran reminds us that God prefers us to be forgiving and kind, and that such actions are rewarded in the Hereafter. Time and again it reminds us that aggression and persecution are condemned. Over and over we are told that there is no compulsion in religion, that God guides whom He will to or away from belief, and that the unbelievers harm no one but themselves.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
mvanwink5 wrote:I wonder how much scholars will disagree with armed and fanatic followers of the 'true' Islam? I wonder if the Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, (non Muslims) in the Moslem dominated countries feel safe these days? The point is how peaceful Islam truly is, is dependent on real life in Muslim dominated countries. For a long time there was some safety in Muslim countries for non Muslims, but that seems to be changing to there is no safety for non Muslims. So, after the churches etc have been burned down, non Muslims chased out, converted, or murdered, then the scholars will start arguing again how peaceful Islam is.
“Two die in Belgian anti-terror raid.” … The headline is from the BBC website, yesterday, but these keywords could be found in breaking-news headlines all across Europe. (I checked.)
Gentle reader must have been wondering, who is it this time? The Buddhists, perhaps? (Mahayana or Theravada?) Jains? Angry rampaging Hindu swamis? Prim Confucians? Taoist anarchists? What about the Zoroastrians, we haven’t heard from them in a while. But it might be the Lutherans, no? Or the Presbyterians? High Church Anglicans? (I’ve looked into some of their eyes.) Hmm, but now I’m thinking, what about those Pentecostals? Baptists? Some other Fundamentalist Christians from Allah-bama and the Deep South? Hey wait, Belgium used to be a Catholic country, perhaps they were Latin Mass traditionalists? SSPiXies? Dominican monks? Third Order Franciscans? On the other hand, Secular Humanists would be statistically more likely. Wiccans? Druids? Nudists? Maybe we should bet long-shot on Animists of some sort, from the former Belgian Congo. Or from New Guinea: could be, you never know these days.
Well, the answer caught everyone by surprise. Muslims: can you believe it?
http://www.davidwarrenonline.com/2015/0 ... gio-pacis/
‘What all the wise men promised has not happened, and what all the damned fools said would happen has come to pass.’
— Lord Melbourne —
— Lord Melbourne —
-
GIThruster
- Posts: 4686
- Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:17 pm
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
The violent stuff is in all the Suras.Tom Ligon wrote:. . .the violent stuff is in the later Suras. . .
Allah is an enemy to unbelievers. - Sura 2:98
On unbelievers is the curse of Allah. - Sura 2:161
Slay them wherever ye find them and drive them out of the places whence they drove you out, for persecution is worse than slaughter. - 2:191
Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme. (different translation: ) Fight them until there is no persecution and the religion is God's entirely. - Sura 2:193 and 8:39
Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it. - 2:216
(different translation: ) Prescribed for you is fighting, though it is hateful to you.
..... martyrs.... Enter heaven - Surah 3:140-43
If you should die or be killed in the cause of Allah, His mercy and forgiveness would surely be better than all they riches they amass. If you should die or be killed, before Him you shall all be gathered. - 3:157-8
You must not think that those who were slain in the cause of Allah are dead. They are alive, and well-provided for by their Lord. - Surah 3:169-71
Let those fight in the cause of God who sell the life of this world for the hereafter. To him who fights in the cause of God, whether he is slain or victorious, soon we shall give him a great reward. - Surah 4:74
Those who believe fight in the cause of God, and those who reject faith fight in the cause of evil. - 4:76
But if they turn renegades, seize them and slay them wherever you find them. - 4:89
Therefore, we stirred among them enmity and hatred, which shall endure till the Day of Resurrection, when Allah will declare to them all that they have done. - 5:14
O believers, take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends of each other. Those of you who make them his friends is one of them. God does not guide an unjust people. - 5:54
Make war on them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme - 8:39
O Prophet! Exhort the believers to fight. If there are 20 steadfast men among you, they shall vanquish 200; and if there are a hundred, they shall rout a thousand unbelievers, for they are devoid of understanding. - 8:65
It is not for any Prophet to have captives until he has made slaughter in the land. - 8:67
Allah will humble the unbelievers. Allah and His apostle are free from obligations to idol-worshipers. Proclaim a woeful punishment to the unbelievers. - 9:2-3
When the sacred months are over, slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. - 9:5
Believers! Know that idolators are unclean. - 9:28
Fight those who believe neither in God nor the Last Day, nor what has been forbidden by God and his messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, even if they are People of the Book, until they pay the tribute and have been humbled. - 9:29 (another source: ) The unbelievers are impure and their abode is hell. (another source: ) Humiliate the non-Muslims to such an extent that they surrender and pay tribute.
Whether unarmed or well-equipped, march on and fight for the cause of Allah, with your wealth and your persons. - 9:41
O Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites. Be harsh with them. Their ultimate abode is hell, a hapless journey's end. - 9:73
Allah has purchased of their faithful lives and worldly goods, and in return has promised them the Garden. They will fight for His cause, kill and be killed. - 9:111
Fight unbelievers who are near to you. 9:123 (different translation:
Believers! Make war on the infidels who dwell around you. Let them find harshness in you. (another source: ) Ye who believe! Murder those of the disbelievers....
As for those who are slain in the cause of Allah, He will not allow their works to perish. He will vouchsafe them guidance and ennoble their state; He will admit them to the Paradise He has made known to them. - 10:4-15
Allah has cursed the unbelievers and proposed for them a blazing hell. - 33:60
Unbelievers are enemies of Allah and they will roast in hell. - 41:14
When you meet the unbelievers, smite their necks, then when you have made wide slaughter among them, tie fast the bonds, then set them free, either by grace or ransom, until the war lays down its burdens. - 47:4
(different translation: ) When you meet the unbelievers in the battlefield, strike off their heads, and when you have laid them low, bind your captives firmly.
Those who are slain in the way of Allah - he will never let their deeds be lost. Soon will he guide them and improve their condition, and admit them to the Garden, which he has announced for them. - 47:5
Muslims are harsh against the unbelievers, merciful to one another. - 48:25
Muhammad is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another. Through them, Allah seeks to enrage the unbelievers. - 48:29
Prophet! Make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites and deal sternly with them. Hell shall be their home, evil their fate. - 66:9
The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of hell. They are the vilest of all creatures. - 98:51
This is what the Bible calls the "doctrines of demons" that would come after the Bible. Sorry that this is not PC, but it's true. This stuff is straight from the pit.
"Courage is not just a virtue, but the form of every virtue at the testing point." C. S. Lewis
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
The numbering of the Suras in most modern versions of the Quran is not cronological, but based on their length. A couple of those early-numbered ones reveal the turnaround to violence, specifically Muhammad taking up arms against towns that had run him out earlier when he was in that peaceful streak.
The Quran is full of puns. The Quran is supposed to be quite literally the word of God. So the Quran would have us believe that God is a fan of the lowest form of humor. One could ponder the question, is the Quran blasphemy?
The question here is not if Islam has a violent component. Yeah, absolutely it does. You can find it in the passages above and you can find it in the evening news. And yet you can find Muslims who are decent neighbors and live peacefully among us.
So, what to do? I've seen a historical observation that all the major religions have gone thru a period of insanity, of excesses and cruelty. For Christians, it was several centuries back. Things got so nuts in Europe that there were bloody wars fought over it, and Protestant religions started to crop up. Most of the colonies that became the United States were either founded by religious refugees or were highly influenced by what was going on in Europe. They did NOT all have the same background, though. Jamestown was strictly government-endorsed, and so Church of England, but appears to have had a few Roman Catholic insurgents in their midst, with an unproven suspicion that some of the health problems of the colony were due to sabotage (poisoning the wells). Maryland was founded by Roman Catholics. Massachusetts by the humorless Puritans who later took power in England. Not for long ... the English would not stand for it. This religious fervor resulted in three civil wars there in the space of about a decade, with heads flying every which-way.
The response was a Constitution with a set of amendments that specified separation of Church and State, the assurance of religious freedom, and pretty much everything we hold dear.
Islam, as well pointed out above, does not hold with this nonsense.
So, what do we do? Prohibit that religion? We can't do it. Embrace that religion? We won't. Civilize it? We'll try. Let it win? Not in THIS country, or hemisphere. In my opinion, much of what we are seeing in Islam is it desperately trying to survive in a world that tempts its members away. We're seeing a Medieval religion, at the peak of its insane period, trying to maintain itself in a modern world. It won't last, but we may be in for another century or two of unpleasantness.
There are a couple of ways the Muslims converted the lands they conquored. Much of the conversation above deals with the lopping off of heads, and it certainly happened. But the more insidious side was that, once in power, many Muslim countries permitted people to maintain their old religion. The trick was they imposed a huge tax on non-Muslims, possibly half your earnings. All you had to do to get out of it was convert. And the truth was, in most countries the standards for being a convert were pretty low ... just declare that you believed in the Five Pillars, show up at prayer now and then, make your wife dress correctly and do as she was told, and you could get by. You didn't need to be all that devout. So most subjected people went along, because it was much cheaper and not all that hard.
So that's what we're up against, at least in the US. A few of the enemy are fanatics. Most don't really care that much unless somebody is making a point to rile them, and they are as subject to the temptations of modern life just like the next guy. We're required by our own laws to tolerate them. We're also required by our own laws not to allow Islamic control of goverment. So the question is, can we out-last them until they succumb to our evil influence?
I think probably. It will take some vigilance. The jihadists are not really the danger because they evoke such a strong negative reaction (i.e. they'll be clobbered mercilessly). According to Joe Butta, its that sneaky side that tries to tax you into submission that is the long term danger, and the T-P audience already has a dim view of being taxed into submission.
In Europe, we're seeing that strong negative reaction at work.
The Quran is full of puns. The Quran is supposed to be quite literally the word of God. So the Quran would have us believe that God is a fan of the lowest form of humor. One could ponder the question, is the Quran blasphemy?
The question here is not if Islam has a violent component. Yeah, absolutely it does. You can find it in the passages above and you can find it in the evening news. And yet you can find Muslims who are decent neighbors and live peacefully among us.
So, what to do? I've seen a historical observation that all the major religions have gone thru a period of insanity, of excesses and cruelty. For Christians, it was several centuries back. Things got so nuts in Europe that there were bloody wars fought over it, and Protestant religions started to crop up. Most of the colonies that became the United States were either founded by religious refugees or were highly influenced by what was going on in Europe. They did NOT all have the same background, though. Jamestown was strictly government-endorsed, and so Church of England, but appears to have had a few Roman Catholic insurgents in their midst, with an unproven suspicion that some of the health problems of the colony were due to sabotage (poisoning the wells). Maryland was founded by Roman Catholics. Massachusetts by the humorless Puritans who later took power in England. Not for long ... the English would not stand for it. This religious fervor resulted in three civil wars there in the space of about a decade, with heads flying every which-way.
The response was a Constitution with a set of amendments that specified separation of Church and State, the assurance of religious freedom, and pretty much everything we hold dear.
Islam, as well pointed out above, does not hold with this nonsense.
So, what do we do? Prohibit that religion? We can't do it. Embrace that religion? We won't. Civilize it? We'll try. Let it win? Not in THIS country, or hemisphere. In my opinion, much of what we are seeing in Islam is it desperately trying to survive in a world that tempts its members away. We're seeing a Medieval religion, at the peak of its insane period, trying to maintain itself in a modern world. It won't last, but we may be in for another century or two of unpleasantness.
There are a couple of ways the Muslims converted the lands they conquored. Much of the conversation above deals with the lopping off of heads, and it certainly happened. But the more insidious side was that, once in power, many Muslim countries permitted people to maintain their old religion. The trick was they imposed a huge tax on non-Muslims, possibly half your earnings. All you had to do to get out of it was convert. And the truth was, in most countries the standards for being a convert were pretty low ... just declare that you believed in the Five Pillars, show up at prayer now and then, make your wife dress correctly and do as she was told, and you could get by. You didn't need to be all that devout. So most subjected people went along, because it was much cheaper and not all that hard.
So that's what we're up against, at least in the US. A few of the enemy are fanatics. Most don't really care that much unless somebody is making a point to rile them, and they are as subject to the temptations of modern life just like the next guy. We're required by our own laws to tolerate them. We're also required by our own laws not to allow Islamic control of goverment. So the question is, can we out-last them until they succumb to our evil influence?
I think probably. It will take some vigilance. The jihadists are not really the danger because they evoke such a strong negative reaction (i.e. they'll be clobbered mercilessly). According to Joe Butta, its that sneaky side that tries to tax you into submission that is the long term danger, and the T-P audience already has a dim view of being taxed into submission.
In Europe, we're seeing that strong negative reaction at work.
Re: Pope Jumps Into Politics and Science.
Yup.
The development of atomic power, though it could confer unimaginable blessings on mankind, is something that is dreaded by the owners of coal mines and oil wells. (Hazlitt)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)
What I want to do is to look up C. . . . I call him the Forgotten Man. (Sumner)