The Student Room Group

Muslims "in the crosshairs of bigotry"

Scroll to see replies

Reply 240
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by MMM1997
It does make a difference. Just because some people don't follow the rules doesn't mean the majority don't.
So the behaviour and morality of people living under Islamic systems is down to the religion as well as culture?

What about those Muslims who reject and condemn slavery, using captive women for sex, wife-beating, flogging for consensual adult sex, gender inequality and religious and social oppression of non-Muslims, as well as stoning adulterers*, and killing apostates* and gays*?
Are they following the rules, or not following them? Which are the "true Muslims"?

* Derived from sahih hadith.
Original post by alevelstresss
maybe it isn't, but 1.6 billion of its followers are peaceful



Pew Research (2014): 47% of Bangladeshi Muslims says suicide bombings and violence are justified to "defend Islam".

I would probably half that number you're citing
Original post by MMM1997
9:5 was in defence because it was against the polytheists who had broken the treaty. The treaty stated that if any side broke the treaty they would be at war so the ones who broke it i.e. the polytheists took the Muslims to war.. The defender can wait four months to allow them a chance to correct their wrong which is explained in the next verse. The conditions were that they had four months to leave because they had declared war. Or they could seek asylum which had to be granted. If any remained they were to be killed. These people were classed as traitors, and the practice for centuries in many countries including England was to kill traitors.


- Guys, we need to kill these people, what do we do?
- Yo Mo, looky here, we have this law that says we can kill traitors!
- Brilliant, we will just call them traitors and slit their throats.
Reply 243
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by Plantagenet Crown
Oh dear, I wondered when someone would bring up verse 5:32. Firstly, that command is specifically directed towards the Children of Israel, not Muslims. Secondly, if you read the VERY NEXT VERSE, 5:33, you will see the barbaric and disgusting punishments and execution methods that are outlined for anyone who wages war against Allah and his messenger.



You haven't read the Quran, have you? Why don't we take a look at 9:5?

"And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush..."

No talk of defence there at all. It is attack plain and simple.
Snap!
Original post by MMM1997
9:5 was in defence because it was against the polytheists who had broken the treaty.


where does it say this?
Original post by Tongeyyy
Pew Research (2014): 47% of Bangladeshi Muslims says suicide bombings and violence are justified to "defend Islam".

I would probably half that number you're citing


so what? are you going to install a 1984-style thought police regime?
Reply 246
Avatar for MMM1997
MMM1997
Original post by inhuman
- Guys, we need to kill these people, what do we do?
- Yo Mo, looky here, we have this law that says we can kill traitors!
- Brilliant, we will just call them traitors and slit their throats.


When you are taking verses from the Quran there are rules on which verses can be acted upon and which ones can't. This verse was specific to a time and place. The verse doesn't say that we can kill traitors. It says the polytheists who betrayed the Muslims who were traitors. It only refers to them at that time
Reply 247
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by alevelstresss
Just wondering, are all of the Muslims who haven't followed the Quran when it says "kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush" not true Muslims or something?
Ah, the lack of sophistication and nuance in the thinking of teenagers. Bless!

The issue isn't whether that verse commands all Muslims to kill all non-Muslims today (it doesn't, BTW). It is whether (as usually claimed by ill-informed or mendacious apologists) that Islam only permits fighting in self-defence. 9:5 clearly shows that the Quran contains exhortation to aggressive action against an adversary that may well be attempting to escape conflict.
QED.

Now your turn to answer a question (it would be the first time).
Are Muslims who reject and condemn things that Allah has clearly permitted in the Quran, "true Muslims" or not?
Original post by alevelstresss
so what? are you going to install a 1984-style thought police regime?


So you've said that 1.6 billion muslims are peaceful and I've quoted a figure to disprove you because supporting suicide bombings in the name of religion is NOT peaceful so your argument is that 'I can't control what people think'
Reply 249
Avatar for MMM1997
MMM1997
Original post by BaconandSauce
where does it say this?



In a history book
Reply 250
Avatar for MMM1997
MMM1997
Original post by BaconandSauce
where does it say this?




And tafsir books
Original post by MMM1997
In a history book


so not in the quran then
Reply 252
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by inhuman
The 1.6bn Muslims argument strikes again. A crowd favorite :woohoo:
It's ironic that the very people who claim there to be 1.6 billion Muslims are the same people who also claim that most of them are "not true Muslims" in some way or another, because they follow a different sect, of favour a different interpretation or school of thought.
Original post by MMM1997
When you are taking verses from the Quran there are rules on which verses can be acted upon and which ones can't. This verse was specific to a time and place. The verse doesn't say that we can kill traitors. It says the polytheists who betrayed the Muslims who were traitors. It only refers to them at that time


So even worse, it specifically says "we don't like this group of people so we will say they betrayed us and hence we can kill them".

How nice.
Original post by sleepysnooze
"most muslims aren't like that"? a 2011 UK poll suggested that 100% of muslims asked think homosexuality is "unacceptable" - and 75% of them thought people should be criminalised for insulting the prophet muhammad...and 50% thought gay people should be jailed. it's hard to not generalise with figures like those


I am against the ideology of Islam but:

1.) That was five years ago, before the rise of Daesh
2.) That 100% figure is complete garbage, my closest friends are muslim and whilst they are against gay marriage for religious reasons, completely accept homosexuality
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by frankielogue
I am against the ideology of Islam but:

1.) That was five years ago, before the rise of Daesh
2.) That 100% figure is complete garbage, my closest friends are muslim and whilst they are against gay marriage for religious reasons, completely accept homosexuality


Lol - "that figure is completely rubbish because ONE of my muslim friends accepts homosexuality"
Original post by Tongeyyy
Lol - "that figure is completely rubbish because ONE of my muslim friends accepts homosexuality"


No, all of my many muslim friends accept homosexuality
In that particular poll the sample size was around 1200 muslims so of course there will be some that will accept it but the fact is there have been many verified polls from a range of different reaearcher organisations to suggest that muslims are generally intolerable of homosexuality. That's a fact
Reply 258
Avatar for QE2
QE2
20
Original post by MMM1997
9:5 was in defence because it was against the polytheists who had broken the treaty. The treaty stated that if any side broke the treaty they would be at war so the ones who broke it i.e. the polytheists took the Muslims to war.. The defender can wait four months to allow them a chance to correct their wrong which is explained in the next verse. The conditions were that they had four months to leave because they had declared war. Or they could seek asylum which had to be granted. If any remained they were to be killed. These people were classed as traitors, and the practice for centuries in many countries including England was to kill traitors.
Sura 9 was the penultimate verse revealed, shortly before Muhammad's death. By this time, Mecca had been conquered and most of central Arabia subjugated by Islam. There was no "breaking of treaties" by the polytheists. It was a declaration of war by Muhammad, almost certainly because of his position of military supremacy in the region. Essentially, it was an excercise in forced conversion and ethnic cleansing. His "final solution".
Read Ibn Kathir's tafsir on the matter, or one of the Biographies of Muhammad (written by a Muslim - so no accusations of "bias" ) like Mubarakpuri or Lings...
"Ali proclaimed the Divine Message. The gist of it was that the idolaters were given four months' respite to come and go as they pleased in safety, but after that God and His Messenger would be free from any obligation towards them. War was declared upon them, and they were to be slain or taken captive wherever they were found."

As I said before, much of the apologist narrative on these matters is either ill-informed or deliberately dishonest, despite the "historical truth" being easily and clearly available from pro-Islamic sources. It just seems that many Muslims are satisfied to simply accept what they are told and are not interested in any objective and open-minded research into Islamic history. Luckily, history is my academic hobby (science is my actual subject), so I love doing it!
Original post by frankielogue
I am against the ideology of Islam but:

1.) That was five years ago, before the rise of Daesh
2.) That 100% figure is complete garbage, my closest friends are muslim and whilst they are against gay marriage for religious reasons, completely accept homosexuality


honestly tell me how many muslims *you* think support/accept homosexuality then. make me chuckle.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you