Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by george_c00per)
    The problem I have with posts like this is that you treat Islam like it's the only religion which puts forward a bad agenda. You can interpret the Quran the same way you interpret the Bible.
    So how come the Koran is so widely interpreted to be discriminatory and violent? Why the others on a much lesser scale?

    That's what people like you don't get or want to get.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    So how come the Koran is so widely interpreted to be discriminatory and violent? Why the others on a much lesser scale?

    That's what people like you don't get or want to get.
    Maybe because our society has to make someone the scapegoat?

    The Quran is "so widely interpreted to be discriminatory and violent" in Christian countries because of the age old argument that one religion is better than the other. While I am an atheist, I completely respect that every religion has pros and cons to it, and the reason why Islam is considered to be "disgusting" is because a tiny proportion of Muslims commit crimes to innocent civilians in places such as Brussels, Paris, and London because our government is involving themselves in wars in Muslim countries that aren't anything to do with us, killing millions of innocent civilians, and ruining the infrastructure, economy, and future for the state.

    When people come to countries and kill our civilians, they're called "pigs", "creatures, and "immoral". However, when we go to their countries and do the same it's just "how life works". Surely both of these occurrences should be considered as awful, not just one of them..?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    "...such people blaspheme the Buddha. Killing them would not be wrong."
    Please provide a quotation from Buddhist scripture that justifies this? Or some incident from his life story which would suggest that was theologically appropriate? You can't can you?

    Compare and contrast the literal word of God as expounded in the Koran:

    Quran (33:57) "Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah has cursed them in this world and the Hereafter, and has prepared for them the doom of the disdained"
    Quran (33:61) - "Accursed, they will be seized wherever found and slain with a (fierce) slaughter."

    So on the one hand you have NO aspect of Buddhist scripture which offers anything but criticism of murder, and on the other you have a direct command that (can be interpreted as meaning) anyone who blasphemes again God or Mohammed is to be seized and killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting

    (Original post by offhegoes)
    I contend that Islam is no more inherently violent that Christianity. Do you disagree? If so, on what basis other than assuming that correlation implies causation?
    Yes obviously I disagree.

    We have discussed Islam's propensity to incite violence although we have barely scratched the surface. I won't go into incidents in Mohammed's life (believe me I could) because it would get this post deleted.

    By contrast, were Christians to actually follow Christ's teachings (obviously few if any do as they are so impractical), they would "turn the other cheek" if hit over the head by a psychotic aggressor. (Matthew 5:39)

    It is the difference between following the teachings of a ruthless warlord and a stoned hippy.

    (To your last point. Correlation does not IMPLY causation. But it doesn't mean there can't BE causation).
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shakeebshams)
    It's funny how non-muslims act as if they have read the quran to entirety.

    Heck, Arabic speakers NEED a literal translation of the Quran to understand it. People all over the world know this. I have yet to see a single arabic speaker that reads the quran and says that s/he understands it. Yet you guys just pick up quotes and and argue about it.

    The Quranic verse about killing all infidels is placed IN the war of Uhud. In this war there were 1000 muslims and about 10,000 infidels (The muslims won in the end) for the conquest of Makkah. This verse has no relation of going out in the street and killing others for no reason. The infidels mentioned in the verse are the opponents IN the war. That's what the opponents were called in the war of Uhud.
    In places like Iraq and Syria, the children there are mostly orphans. Their parents have been killed by airstrikes, bombings, shootings etc. Their parents, siblings and relatives have been ruthlessly murdered in front of their eyes. I believe these attacks are more like revenge in the name of religion. There have been around 500,000 deaths in the Iraq war and around 470,000 in Syria so far. Millions have been displaced. Just imagine the type of conditions these children are living in. They will be growing up with complete HATE in their minds towards the western world. They wouldn't bother reading the Quran....how would they even get access to it? Violence just breeds more violence.
    Why did your God send a message to the world that only a few people could understand?

    Wasn't that a bit irresponsible and stupid of him? Likely to lead to humans getting it wrong, killing each other?

    That is the consequence of your bizarre argument that the Koran can't be translated.

    Now if he had written it in English it would have been clear!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    Please provide a quotation from Buddhist scripture that justifies this? Or some incident from his life story which would suggest that was theologically appropriate? You can't can you?
    What I quoted you is Buddhist scrupture.


    So on the one hand you have NO aspect of Buddhist scripture which offers anything but criticism of murder, and on the other you have a direct command that (can be interpreted as meaning) anyone who blasphemes again God or Mohammed is to be seized and killed.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charlie_Hebdo_shooting


    Yes obviously I disagree.

    We have discussed Islam's propensity to incite violence although we have barely scratched the surface. I won't go into incidents in Mohammed's life (believe me I could) because it would get this post deleted.

    By contrast, were Christians to actually follow Christ's teachings (obviously few if any do as they are so impractical), they would "turn the other cheek" if hit over the head by a psychotic aggressor. (Matthew 5:39)

    It is the difference between following the teachings of a ruthless warlord and a stoned hippy.
    "Now go, attack the Amalekites and utterly destroy everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants..."

    Christian scripture doesn't sound as peaceful to me as you make it out to be.


    (To your last point. Correlation does not IMPLY causation. But it doesn't mean there can't BE causation).
    Well, of course.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by george_c00per)
    The problem I have with posts like this is that you treat Islam like it's the only religion which puts forward a bad agenda. You can interpret the Quran the same way you interpret the Bible.
    What part of that post led you to believe that I don't consider Christianity to be an unwelcome and unnecessary influence on society, or that the Old Testament doesn't contain barbaric, violent and oppressive passages?

    This thread is about Islam. If it was about Christianity, there would be more references to the Bible.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by george_c00per)
    Maybe because our society has to make someone the scapegoat?

    The Quran is "so widely interpreted to be discriminatory and violent" in Christian countries because of the age old argument that one religion is better than the other. While I am an atheist, I completely respect that every religion has pros and cons to it, and the reason why Islam is considered to be "disgusting" is because a tiny proportion of Muslims commit crimes to innocent civilians in places such as Brussels, Paris, and London because our government is involving themselves in wars in Muslim countries that aren't anything to do with us, killing millions of innocent civilians, and ruining the infrastructure, economy, and future for the state.

    When people come to countries and kill our civilians, they're called "pigs", "creatures, and "immoral". However, when we go to their countries and do the same it's just "how life works". Surely both of these occurrences should be considered as awful, not just one of them..?
    No...

    What does this have to do with "scapegoats"? There are countries on this planet that have cultural norms and values and ethics based on this book. These norms and values are not compatible with our idea of liberty and equality. That is a fact. That is not scapegoating. The question is why does this occur. And the answer to that is Islam - this is a religion that demands of its followers complete submission. That makes it incredibly hard to change a culture for the better (as has happened in Christian countries, here gays used to be demonised, too, but as we progressed we moved beyond that).

    And well yes, but the ones that think their religion is better are the Muslims...not us.

    It is not just about terrorism. And listen mate, this is not a small minority. It may be a small minority here in the west, but in their own countries, it's a fact of life. Between Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Iraq, I wouldn't be surprised to learn there are bombings or attacks every single day of the year. And then there is ISIS. And this is true throughout the world. You may say well compared to the more than a billion Muslims its small, but everywhere you look this occurs. Bangladesh is another good recent example. I mean heck, in the US its causing uproars when some refuse service to gays...there they slaughter them. It's a joke to even compare that, no?

    And of course, but you will find many of the young generation in particular are against the war there. But even so, this war was not carried out in the name of Christianity or God, their wars are the holy Jihad. You see again the difference? This is a religion where it is so easy to manipulate people because its followers must by definition of being Muslim submit to Allah. And when the holy book is a) so full of nasty things and b) so unclear to interpret apparently, it is not even surprising that there is so much **** going on in the name of Allah.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    It's the latest minority they can exploit, except this time they may not be able to "put them back in the box" afterwards and will get a taste of their own medicine.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by george_c00per)
    the reason why Islam is considered to be "disgusting" is because a tiny proportion of Muslims commit crimes to innocent civilians in places such as Brussels, Paris, and London
    No. It is considered to be "disgusting" because it permits and condones things like slavery, sex with slaves, domestic violence, and the killing of gays, apostates and adulterers.

    The behaviour of individual Muslims have no bearing on the nature of Islamic ideology. If it did, the actions of ISIS supporters would be just as representative as the actions of moderate Muslims on The Big Question.

    because our government is involving themselves in wars in Muslim countries that aren't anything to do with us, killing millions of innocent civilians, and ruining the infrastructure, economy, and future for the state.

    When people come to countries and kill our civilians, they're called "pigs", "creatures, and "immoral". However, when we go to their countries and do the same it's just "how life works". Surely both of these occurrences should be considered as awful, not just one of them..?
    Not really interested in current affairs and geopolitics then?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Must watch:

    https://youtu.be/riDlxCvFZWw

    They are all the same...
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shakeebshams)
    Hey I know you Aceadria
    Indian right?
    Nope, and my nationality is irrelevant.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    Nope, and my nationality is irrelevant.
    You've got some Hindu king or raja as your profile......Indian
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by shakeebshams)
    You've got some Hindu king or raja as your profile......Indian
    India didn't exist before 1947. Try again.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    We don't love Islam. I am not a leftist, nor a Muslim, yet I find myself defending Muslims on every thread since I joined this forum, despite having had a blog dedicated to the criticism of Islam.

    The problem is simple, we believe in individualism. We also believe that no person should be judged based on their background, a person is only to be judged by his actions. Then, we go on the internet to find people saying things like "Don't trust Muslims" and "Muslims are backward" or "They don't deserve to be here.".
    Those claims are against everything we stand for. You're judging a group of people not based on their actions, but based on the actions of a minority of them. (I am referring to Muslims in the West, you can judge Muslim in the East all you like, they are not subjected to your opinion anyway). A person is innocent and free until proven guilty, that's not the trend nowadays. A Muslim, or even a Nazi, is free to believe in whatever they want, until they act, or attempt to act on their beliefs.

    So the simple answer is, we believe in the innocence of all until proven guilty.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oShahpo)
    We don't love Islam. I am not a leftist, nor a Muslim, yet I find myself defending Muslims on every thread since I joined this forum, despite having had a blog dedicated to the criticism of Islam.

    The problem is simple, we believe in individualism. We also believe that no person should be judged based on their background, a person is only to be judged by his actions. Then, we go on the internet to find people saying things like "Don't trust Muslims" and "Muslims are backward" or "They don't deserve to be here.".
    Those claims are against everything we stand for. You're judging a group of people not based on their actions, but based on the actions of a minority of them. (I am referring to Muslims in the West, you can judge Muslim in the East all you like, they are not subjected to your opinion anyway). A person is innocent and free until proven guilty, that's not the trend nowadays. A Muslim, or even a Nazi, is free to believe in whatever they want, until they act, or attempt to act on their beliefs.

    So the simple answer is, we believe in the innocence of all until proven guilty.
    Must watch:

    https://youtu.be/riDlxCvFZWw

    They are all the same...

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by oShahpo)
    We don't love Islam. I am not a leftist, nor a Muslim, yet I find myself defending Muslims on every thread since I joined this forum, despite having had a blog dedicated to the criticism of Islam.

    The problem is simple, we believe in individualism. We also believe that no person should be judged based on their background, a person is only to be judged by his actions. Then, we go on the internet to find people saying things like "Don't trust Muslims" and "Muslims are backward" or "They don't deserve to be here.".
    Those claims are against everything we stand for. You're judging a group of people not based on their actions, but based on the actions of a minority of them. (I am referring to Muslims in the West, you can judge Muslim in the East all you like, they are not subjected to your opinion anyway). A person is innocent and free until proven guilty, that's not the trend nowadays. A Muslim, or even a Nazi, is free to believe in whatever they want, until they act, or attempt to act on their beliefs.

    So the simple answer is, we believe in the innocence of all until proven guilty.
    Very interesting post.

    But I ask you this. You are arguing we should accept all. That would imply we should accept all that say "I don't want Muslims in my country". It's a bit of a conundrum.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by inhuman)
    Very interesting post.

    But I ask you this. You are arguing we should accept all. That would imply we should accept all that say "I don't want Muslims in my country". It's a bit of a conundrum.
    Absolutely, we should accept those people. If you don't want Muslims in your country, fine, we can't force you to like people you don't like, but we simply won't allow you to act on it, for the reasons I mentioned above. You can stay away from Muslims, not marry them, not talk to them, it's your life and your choices, but we won't allow you to commit a crime based on your prejudice. We won't allow such person to discriminate against Muslims, or any innocent person, if the person is in a position of power, and we won't allow him to cause innocents damage, either physical or mental.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    Every single country in the world discriminates against against some group of people for some reason for another. Pretty much every Christian organisation in the world discriminates. The issue with Islam is that many of these Muslim-majority countries have not shaken the state and law free from religious doctrine. It isn't all that long ago that many Christian countries also discriminated in such a way. These countries need to change, but Islam itself is not the issue.

    Islam is just a religion, like Buddhist, Christianity, Judaism.

    People make their religion violent or peaceful.
    If every other countries/ religions discriminate then it does not justify Islam discriminating.

    No the issue with Islam is the teachings of bloody islam.

    Do you understand why these Muslim countries haven't shaken the law and state from religion?

    I'll tell you....it's because in these ISLAMIC countries they abide by ISLAMIC LAW (Sharia Law) they follow this law because that is what the majority of the country believes in, not because they haven't got around to separating church from state.

    The difference between Christianity and Islam is that Christianity does not tell its followers to abide by a certain legal system, whilst islam does, as I stated this is called Sharia law.

    You are evidently quite ignorant of how Islam works.

    I'd challenge you to go over to a middle eastern country e.g Saudi Arabia and start a civil rights movement for women and gays but I wouldn't want to be responsible for your death.

    All Religion is retarded full stop.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aceadria)
    India didn't exist before 1947. Try again.
    Hindustan?

    Anyway, next time you go to India, make sure to visit Thiruvananthapuram. Beautiful city fam.
    Online

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Onde)
    If being a Nazi means supporting an abhorrent ideology, I do not think this "innocent until proven guilty" shtick really works if people are labeling themselves as Nazis in the 21st century.

    Similar, if you have to accept Allah as your god and Muhammad as your ideological leader in order to be a Muslim, I think non-Muslims are quite reasonable to be wary of those who identify with a violent religion and one of the most evil people in history.
    Everyone's free to believe in whatever they want. Yea sure you've got to be wary of those who have potentially dangerous beliefs, but we can't discriminate against a person for what they think. That's one of the beliefs the whole of our modern democracies are built on.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • 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

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