Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    FGM in Indonesia has nothing to do with Islam. It is purely an African cultural practice.....
    Well, Indonesia is not exactly in Africa.

    "All women interviewed in the USAID study consider FGM an Islamic practice, most of them calling it a religious duty and many affirming that an uncircumcised woman is not Muslim. There is evidence to the assumption that FGM in Indonesia was introduced by Islam starting in the 13th century and did not exist as a cultural practice before."
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by admonit)
    Well, Indonesia is not exactly in Africa.

    "All women interviewed in the USAID study consider FGM an Islamic practice, most of them calling it a religious duty and many affirming that an uncircumcised woman is not Muslim. There is evidence to the assumption that FGM in Indonesia was introduced by Islam starting in the 13th century and did not exist as a cultural practice before."
    Really? How could you not see the irony in my post? I thought it was so obvious that smileys were not necessary!
    Or did you just read the first line and hit "reply"?

    The three things I listed clearly show that FGM only occurs in Indonesia because of Islam.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    Really? How could you not see the irony in my post? I thought it was so obvious that smileys were not necessary!
    Or did you just read the first line and hit "reply"?

    The three things I listed clearly show that FGM only occurs in Indonesia because of Islam.
    OK, I'm not immune to silly posts.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Because if they were that genuinely religious and made such an effort to follow Islam to the letter even in relatively minor issues (not drinking and doing drugs etc.) then they wouldn't be killing innocent people (which would be a far bigger sin than drinking) and thus contravening their religion on a major issue.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    It's not exactly clear how the leap of logic went from "does not adhere to certain religious rules" -> "not religious"

    The compulsion to believe in a deity is still there, which should more than qualify for whether they are religious. The "killing innocents" are a sin, but if you refuse to qualify unbelievers as human/innocent, then it might seem to follow that killing them aren't the same as killing innocents.

    Islamic doctrine is like Dalek code - there's simply no room for reason (pure ideology), the less critical someone is then the more susceptible they are to it
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    1. (Original post by Aztec123)
      x?
      must of this claim could also be applied to the vast majority of muslim world - ie muslims form east to west lsiten to music, support football teams, party, mix with opposite sex etc etc. all straying form islamic edict- but it is nonsese to isolate them from the islamic status (otherwise world muslim population would be more like few hundred million rather than over a billion)
    many eventual terrorists were perhaps muslims that didnt follw too strickly but got into a more fundemental interpretation and subsequently, islamist terorrism
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    They may not be religious in the strict sense, but they still probably believe in some of it, and it often still holds some influence upon them. I don't think we should seek to downplay the link between extremism and religion.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    If it wasn't for islam these low life idiots would have stayed as low life idiots

    But the religion of peace turned them into monsters
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by swiss_cheese)
    First of all, I hope you realise I am talking about terrorists who want to inflict mass casualty on civilians and not ISIS militants, there is a distinct difference. I am talking about the radicalised, often foreign individuals who are manipulated by IS propaganda, and not the crumbling regime of IS militants in Syria. Maybe the ones in Syria do intend on purporting their interpretation of 'true Islam', but these terrorists such as Sediffine Rezgui, Omar Mateen, the Paris attackers, Brussels attackers, the truck driver - they do not.

    The reasoning behind the brutality of IS in Syria is not because they are following true Islam. They are not particularly dangerous as a physical fighting force, but their danger comes from their ability to radicalise foreigners to commit atrocities in their name. They are called the "Islamic State", not "Al-Qaeda", "Al-Shabab" - the fact that Islamic is in their name is particularly threatening because they are openly claiming to support all Muslims, as opposed to being one of these minor terrorist groups who acknowledge that their views are extreme.

    The Middle East is a desert, Syria has suffered under the Assad regime, failed western foreign policy and many other things. ISIS spawned out of this chaos NOT because they wanted to 'defend Islam' like they're the holy crusaders to save the religion. They spawned because there was chaos and room to grow, their extreme use of Islam is literally them taking the Quran and interpreting things in the most brutal way possible. It makes no sense to persecute Islam or Muslims because a small group of people exploit it to justify a brutal regime in a war torn country. But the point is, these terrorists didn't wake up one day and decide to defend Islam, they are broken, evil people who are trying to justify hatred through religious means, the source of the hatred isn't a soul-centred desire to help Muslims, the source of their hatred is against America for its foreign policy, and for Assad and anyone else in Syria - their 'call for war' against foreign cities is simply them trying to expand themselves as much as possible, because they're smart and use social media, they spread their word and now almost everyone knows about them.

    My point about Indonesia is that surely if the rhetoric that "Islam = the problem" is true, then Indonesia, being 90% Muslim, should be worse than even Syria right now? But they've had one minor terror attack recently. Therefore, Islam is categorically not the problem. The problem is corruption, war and hatred. The Middle East has had some brutal regimes, it has been subject to failed western foreign policy, it has therefore suffered conflict - and young people in conflict are generally the sort of easily impressionable people who become radicalised and do these attacks. These people don't wake up one day and say "lets kill for the sake of Islam", their entire worlds are slowly turned upside down, violence becomes the norm, and at this point they become radicalised. They do not go out killing innocent people because they want to 'defend Islam', they do it because they want to inflict as much damage as possible and to harm as many as possible - they know that attacking foreign cities will raise hatred towards Islam/Muslims and they still do it. They simply do not care about Islam, they use it as a vague way of justifying their actions - because being labelled as an 'Islamic terrorist' is more resounding than being shoved aside as a lone madman.
    I agree with you on the most part. You have clearly done your research and have valid knowledge and talk sense. As you have said Indonesia has 90% of muslims living there and there is hardly any extremism or terrorism. The reason of why the middle eastern countries have terrorism and extremism is simply down to a number of factors. The middle eastern people suffer from a brutal regime and there is chaos for the innocent people. The schools and all sense of work , family and all basic humanization has been taken away from them so all these people have taken it into their own hands. If america or any western country was under dictatorship where they were severely poor and had their homes and lives destroyed we too would become sick of our lives with no purpose and no identity. The main motive of these terrorists is to strike political awareness or strike fear in the governments and world leaders all around the world and this is solely because they have lost their sense of purpose and want to take revenge for their sufferings. The problem is the western countries and russia and other parts of the world want to eliminate and fight back on these terrorists groups rather than fixing the route cause and thats why the middle easterns hate the western countries. innocent people are mainly being killed with all these airstrikes and bombing and this is just going to make the problem much worser because those people will become sick of it and god help what will happen into the future. if we think it is bad at the moment it is only going to get worser as time goes on. innocent children are becoming terrorists and thats not just one or two , there are thousands who are even fighting on the front line firing rocket launchers and killing and destroying things around them. In there thinking If they die as martyrs surely it will be a better life than the suffering of what they are living now and they do beleive they are martyrs because if your life is in such a mess you have a right to retaliate and fight back. If you think about it the twin towers was destroyed and 99% of americans went into chaos and started brutal attacks and burning qurans and killing and name calling muslims. Imagine if you are having that on a daily basis , it will lead anyone to insanity and thats the point that these people dont understand and never will.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by tazarooni89)
    Because if they were that genuinely religious and made such an effort to follow Islam to the letter even in relatively minor issues (not drinking and doing drugs etc.) then they wouldn't be killing innocent people (which would be a far bigger sin than drinking) and thus contravening their religion on a major issue.
    i think weve had this debate before - Mohammed followed Islam to the letter even in relatively minor issues (not drinking and doing drugs etc and yet also killed people.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by banterboy)
    I dont understanbd why him beating his wife makes him less of a muslim? In Islam you're allowed to do it
    Show me a scripture where it says you can beat your wife???????????????????

    Don't make comments about a religion without proof!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by swiss_cheese)
    First of all, I hope you realise I am talking about terrorists who want to inflict mass casualty on civilians and not ISIS militants, there is a distinct difference. I am talking about the radicalised, often foreign individuals who are manipulated by IS propaganda, and not the crumbling regime of IS militants in Syria. Maybe the ones in Syria do intend on purporting their interpretation of 'true Islam', but these terrorists such as Sediffine Rezgui, Omar Mateen, the Paris attackers, Brussels attackers, the truck driver - they do not.

    The reasoning behind the brutality of IS in Syria is not because they are following true Islam. They are not particularly dangerous as a physical fighting force, but their danger comes from their ability to radicalise foreigners to commit atrocities in their name. They are called the "Islamic State", not "Al-Qaeda", "Al-Shabab" - the fact that Islamic is in their name is particularly threatening because they are openly claiming to support all Muslims, as opposed to being one of these minor terrorist groups who acknowledge that their views are extreme.

    The Middle East is a desert, Syria has suffered under the Assad regime, failed western foreign policy and many other things. ISIS spawned out of this chaos NOT because they wanted to 'defend Islam' like they're the holy crusaders to save the religion. They spawned because there was chaos and room to grow, their extreme use of Islam is literally them taking the Quran and interpreting things in the most brutal way possible. It makes no sense to persecute Islam or Muslims because a small group of people exploit it to justify a brutal regime in a war torn country. But the point is, these terrorists didn't wake up one day and decide to defend Islam, they are broken, evil people who are trying to justify hatred through religious means, the source of the hatred isn't a soul-centred desire to help Muslims, the source of their hatred is against America for its foreign policy, and for Assad and anyone else in Syria - their 'call for war' against foreign cities is simply them trying to expand themselves as much as possible, because they're smart and use social media, they spread their word and now almost everyone knows about them.

    My point about Indonesia is that surely if the rhetoric that "Islam = the problem" is true, then Indonesia, being 90% Muslim, should be worse than even Syria right now? But they've had one minor terror attack recently. Therefore, Islam is categorically not the problem. The problem is corruption, war and hatred. The Middle East has had some brutal regimes, it has been subject to failed western foreign policy, it has therefore suffered conflict - and young people in conflict are generally the sort of easily impressionable people who become radicalised and do these attacks. These people don't wake up one day and say "lets kill for the sake of Islam", their entire worlds are slowly turned upside down, violence becomes the norm, and at this point they become radicalised. They do not go out killing innocent people because they want to 'defend Islam', they do it because they want to inflict as much damage as possible and to harm as many as possible - they know that attacking foreign cities will raise hatred towards Islam/Muslims and they still do it. They simply do not care about Islam, they use it as a vague way of justifying their actions - because being labelled as an 'Islamic terrorist' is more resounding than being shoved aside as a lone madman.
    indonesia is not without its problems- like all muslims countires and pretty iuch all countries that house a significant muslim population, it has had its fair share of islamist activity and banned groups. its givernment however, like malaysia and bangladesh , have made massive efforts to surpress , sometimes violently, the spead of islamist doctirne in mainstream society - something that doesnt happen in places like pakistan and the middle east, or even in the west. the other point to mention is that indonesia and malaysia rely heavily on non muslim population for their contributions to business, economy, government policy and the courts. so despite being 'islamic' societies - governance etc largely very removed from a typical islamic government' _ thats is it hows its been there for last couple of decades, thought there are growing concerns that pressure is mounting to make politicians there more islamic ( mainly from 'benefactors' from the gulf)


    one your point that in this case, the guy was drinking etc doing things not permissable in islam jsut before attack - probably relevant to mention the saudi 9/11 attackers were seen in lapdance clubs and bars couple days before killing themselves in their islamist attack too - almost the ritual of the islamist terrorist
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 23, 2016
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.