Turn on thread page Beta

The lack of patriotism and sheer self-hatred on this site disgusts me... watch

    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dzeh)
    this sites full of liberal student douches

    they need a bat taking to their faces
    talk about educated arguments, must have taken you a while to put together such a complex and useful statement.

    (Original post by pendragon)
    There is a difference between student radicalism of one kind and student radicalism that leads young men to blow up their fellow citizens and be prepared to even kill their co-religionists as a result.

    There is certainly antisemitism in the Hadith, as well as distorted pictures of Jews in the Qu'ran.

    For example this is from the second most authoritative Hadith collection (and the Hadith are second to the Qu'ran in importance, and quite essential to the Islamic faith as they explain much of the background of everything alluded to in the Qu'ran):

    Hadith, Sahih Muslim, Book 41, Number 6985:

    'Abu Huraira reported Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews.'

    Of course Muslims could repudiate this part of their religious textual tradition, just as Christians repudiate ugly parts of the Old Testament, but not if they are literalists or don't reject the Hadith entirely.

    The argument that Christians and Jews are respected in Islam as 'people of the book' is largely erroneous, certainly they receive better treatment than pagans but that isn't saying much; and under Islam Jews and Christians are second class citizens who must keep quiet and pay additional taxes for the privilege of limited and private worship. At the very least the Qu'ran presents a distorted view of the other two Abrahamic religions.

    And I am aware that of course antisemitism among Muslims is not simply or even perhaps mainly a result of their religious texts (not that these help) but also bound up with Israel-Palestine, but it is nonetheless rife in the Arab press and filters into Western Muslim communities. The 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion', a Tsarist forgery, and one of the most antisemitic texts ever to be written, which was distributed by the NAZIs to demonise Jews is widely sold in various languages across the Muslim world - including in British and European mosques, Egyptian state TV even aired a series based upon the text during its prime time Ramadan highest viewing period. A level of antisemitic discourse exists prevalently among many Muslims which would not be tolerated in wider British society, and it isn't just confined to Islamists or extremists.
    Well perhaps the atrocities our countries have committed, to which we are largely blind to, are used to "radicalize" these younger generation.

    I cannot argue against your source from the Hadith as I myself have not read it. However I do take many paragraphs sourced from the Qur'an and other islamic texts with a pinch of salt since a supposed section encouraging women to be treated like animals was doing the rounds of this forum. This, upon further research appears to be a complete fabrication. However, giving you the benefit of the doubt, and saying anti-antisemitism is rife among the arab states, as you say, could be refuted by Muslims. One reason I have been disillusioned with religion is because as a child I came across a part of the bible which stated that those who haven't found god should be made to do so. Also I do not see why people act as if forcing a religion upon others is a Muslim thing? Surely people have been taught of forced Christian conversions during the colonization of the rest of the world?

    But back to the point, I cannot argue with what you have said if it proves to be true but our religion also has its ugly sides as you put it, so all this "crusading" against islam just angers me. Jews have been discriminated against by nations and religions for centuries if not
    millenniums.

    Lol i fear I have maybe wandered off topic, anyway I admire the fact that your text is not merely muslim bashing and that you do present some decent points on both sides. It is very tedious sometimes on here talking to someone who knows nothing about Islam but insist on calling it and assuming all 1.5 billion followers are evil and violent.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Libtolu)
    It is a **** hole, but everywhere is a **** hole to me and this **** hole happens to be MY **** hole.
    ok... semi-patriotism? lol
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i am who i am

    **** you
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    Well perhaps the atrocities our countries have committed, to which we are largely blind to, are used to "radicalize" these younger generation.

    I cannot argue against your source from the Hadith as I myself have not read it. However I do take many paragraphs sourced from the Qur'an and other islamic texts with a pinch of salt since a supposed section encouraging women to be treated like animals was doing the rounds of this forum. This, upon further research appears to be a complete fabrication. However, giving you the benefit of the doubt, and saying anti-antisemitism is rife among the arab states, as you say, could be refuted by Muslims. One reason I have been disillusioned with religion is because as a child I came across a part of the bible which stated that those who haven't found god should be made to do so. Also I do not see why people act as if forcing a religion upon others is a Muslim thing? Surely people have been taught of forced Christian conversions during the colonization of the rest of the world?

    But back to the point, I cannot argue with what you have said if it proves to be true but our religion also has its ugly sides as you put it, so all this "crusading" against islam just angers me. Jews have been discriminated against by nations and religions for centuries if not
    millenniums.

    Lol i fear I have maybe wandered off topic, anyway I admire the fact that your text is not merely muslim bashing and that you do present some decent points on both sides. It is very tedious sometimes on here talking to someone who knows nothing about Islam but insist on calling it and assuming all 1.5 billion followers are evil and violent.
    Sheik Bakr Al-Samarai used this verse in his sermon at Friday Prayer in Iraq:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFAkmsszTD8

    So if it were a fabrication, its one that some Muslims themselves have created and used. But it isn't a fabrication, if you look into the Hadith they are full of dangerous, violent and offensive ideas. It is open to Muslims to reject them though, for unlike the Qu'ran they do not purport to be the literal word of God.

    The problem that you find when you look into Islamic texts and the theology and ideology of the Islamists, is that there is huge scope for justifying violence against unbelievers. A lot of well meaning people in the West assume that this is all distortion of a peaceful faith. Muslims are generally peaceful, Sufis are particular peaceful, compassionate and spiritual. But a great many Muslims do not know their own religious texts very well, they remember learning Arabic in mosques as children and for the most part well meaning old imams who do not dwell upon or deconstruct the problematic passages of the Qu'ran. Its is quite possible to have an enlightened progressive outlook within Islam when you reject literalism and have a peaceful and posative interpretative framework, but most Muslims lack the knowledge to put forward such a theology in the face of Islamists who highlight that in fact the Qu'ran and the Hadith say some pretty nasty things. Embarrassed Muslims will often claim that these can't understood outside of the traditional Arabic, but that is a pretty pathetic attempt to obscure passages many Muslims would love to forget or are even unaware of.

    Its no good preaching that Islam is the religion of peace if you don't publicly reject the validity of such verses to the present situation of Muslims today and present arguments to combat the Islamists. Otherwise you are just pretending the problem doesn't exist and sticking your head in the sand.

    Getting back to your point about Christians, yes Christians did fight wars of religion and convert people by force at various times in history BUT:

    1) Jesus was a pacifist who died unresisting on the cross, and with foreknowledge of what was to come he did not flee the Garden of Gethsemane; he told people to love their enemies, let he who is without sin cast the first stone and he forgave the Roman soldiers who tormented him on the cross. Muhammad led armies into battle, and in the Qu'ran chastised those who refused to fight in a just holy war.

    2) The medieval theologian Aquinas developed a theory of just, holy war too, but he had to do so in the name of a pacifist saviour - its a good thing the medieval mind was good at handling contradictions.

    3) Islam spread by violent conquest, political domination and subordination of unbelievers to a political system that treated them as second class citizens required to pay additional taxes (albeit this was more favourable than the treatment often meted out by Christians to unbelievers at the same time). Christainity spread by a variety of means but initially as a persecuted sect for the meek and dispossessed around the Mediterranean under the Roman Empire and it was not until Constantine's conversion that it began its history of spreading through conquest by which time it had already captured much of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa by peaceful means.

    4) Muslims conquered the Christian and Zoroastrian territories of the Bzyantine and Persian Empires as well as North Africa and Southern Spain. The Crusades attempted to roll-back this Islamic conquest and regain the Christian holy city of Jerusalem following interruptions for Christian pilgrims traveling there. Certainly if Hindus had captured Arabia and Mecca, Muslims would do everything they could to reconquer their holiest city, so its rather hypocritical of Muslims to condemn the crusades so vehemently when they went around conquering other peoples territories and even under one Caliph destroyed Christianity's holiest site the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in Jerusalem where Christ was supposed to have ascended to heaven and forbade Christians even visiting the rubble for 11 years. What would Muslims do if some other religion had conquered Mecca, destroyed the Kaaba and prevented Muslims performing the Haj?

    5) The colonial Spaniards and Portuguese were the last Christians to really carry out empire ostensibly for the purpose of Christainisation. Other European colonial powers had a more ambivalent relationship between Christianity and colonial expansion; missionaries often accompanied imperial expansion (as well as proceeding beyond its bounds) but not in any firm alliance with colonial power and sometimes to the considerable annoyance of colonialists. Its not really right to speak of the French or British Empires as primarily or even significantly Christian projects, they were national projects of powers that happened to be Christian. So I don't really regard these episodes, interesting as they are as much to do with Christianity, though they certainly have something to do with its spread in Africa and anywhere were settlers where sent.

    And lastly lets get back to the Jews. Jesus and his early followers were all Jews, there was nothing antisemitic in early Christianity, and so not really in its texts. Later Christians began to become antisemitic as Christianity became increasingly distanced from Judaism and Christians began to blame Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus, and this growing Medieval European antisemitism fed into Martin Luther's theology once he realised they were not going to convert to his new movement (a restoration of the single true Church in his own view). Certainly there are strands of Christian theology from the Medieval period and today that are antisemitic, but they do not have a very strong scriptural basis. Europeans, particularly Germans and many of the countries they occupied in WWII, have more to answer for regarding antisemitism than anyone else, but as things stand today its young (Islamist or Islamist-inspired) Muslim men and not neo-NAZIs that are empirically responsible for the largest and growing number of attacks on Jews and their property. Regarding Christianity's ugly history of antisemitism it is easier to repudiate views that are not expressed in your actual religious texts, and that was the issue I was pointing out for Muslims in the Hadith.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    talk about educated arguments, must have taken you a while to put together such a complex and useful statement.
    spread those cheaks boy... yea spread 'em real good.

    gtfo kiddie!
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ahnaf.c)
    speak for yourself, not for everyone.
    You quoted me with a "." I have no idea what you are referring to.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dzeh)
    spread those cheaks boy... yea spread 'em real good.

    gtfo kiddie!
    slightly ironic that you are calling me a kiddie yet you cant even succesfully spell cheeks
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Komakino)
    By which you mean citizenship? I don't know if I've ever come across a sensible patriot, I've come across a number of contented citizens, they don't feel a particular attachment to their nation, more a satisfaction with all the things that make up their life. In my opinion the question of loving your country is best left in the background in order to detract from emotiveness, sure we can all come together when we are under attack, but otherwise there's no need for that patriotic fervour.
    It better to have some feeling of being part of the polity in which you reside, an affiliation to your country, that is what I mean by a sensible form of patriotism.

    When you refer to citizenship perhaps you mean a civic-minded affinity to the civil society and political institutions of your country, which in my view is also a kind of patriotism, but to merely posses citizenship is meaningless its just a passport - you could have several and they might not mean anything more to you than sheer convenience.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    slightly ironic that you are calling me a kiddie yet you cant even succesfully spell cheeks
    Slightly ironic you criticise me; as it is clear to all you have not grasped capital letters and full stops yet.

    omgwtf u failz kiddo
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dzeh)
    Slightly ironic you criticise me; as it is clear to all you have not grasped capital letters and full stops yet.

    omgwtf u failz kiddo
    got to love a true keyboard warrior
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by az1992)
    got to love a true keyboard warrior
    Bless.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by dzeh)
    Bless.
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Britain's a load of balls though... I'm moving to the US
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pendragon)
    It better to have some feeling of being part of the polity in which you reside, an affiliation to your country, that is what I mean by a sensible form of patriotism.

    When you refer to citizenship perhaps you mean a civic-minded affinity to the civil society and political institutions of your country, which in my view is also a kind of patriotism, but to merely posses citizenship is meaningless its just a passport - you could have several and they might not mean anything more to you than sheer convenience.
    Yes that's what I meant, if you define that as patriotism then we're agreed. I don't know that it counts strictly as patriotic feeling but anyway.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Northern Ireland is probably the final frontier of Western europe lol. This is the only place left in europe where immigrants can not get their foot in the door. people simply will not tolerate their presence, mostly because everything is seen through the lens of protestant/catholic. black people are very rare... in belfast you sometimes can't help but stare if you see one... the headscarf issue doesn't exist... its just a no no. u sometimes see groups of romanian gypsies... but they would never EVER stop and beg. it would make them a sitting target. they always seem to moving when in public and - unusual for eastern gypsies - smiling as if scared. east european gypsies have a notorious reputation for pickpocketing in europe, think barcelona. Here in northern ireland they wouldn't dare pickpocket. half the street would be on them like a lightning bolt.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    put simply, in northern ireland 'immigrant' is not a recognised way of being. sometimes you pity the black people who are stand out so much and forever watching their backs. but on a grander scale immigrants are forced to respect the locals. everything is on local terms. you wouldn't get a situation like in the rest of europe where arabs and africans infest the ghettos and the locals fear them.
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Very proud to be 50% American, not so proud to be 50% British. Why? Because i don't know what British means.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    We should be very proud of our history and traditions. I ain't ashamed of anything we have done in our history.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ajtiesto)
    Very proud to be 50% American, not so proud to be 50% British. Why? Because i don't know what British means.
    A map might help
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pendragon)

    3) Islam spread by violent conquest, political domination and subordination of unbelievers to a political system that treated them as second class citizens required to pay additional taxes (albeit this was more favourable than the treatment often meted out by Christians to unbelievers at the same time). Christainity spread by a variety of means but initially as a persecuted sect for the meek and dispossessed around the Mediterranean under the Roman Empire and it was not until Constantine's conversion that it began its history of spreading through conquest by which time it had already captured much of Europe, the Middle East and North Africa by peaceful means.


    And lastly lets get back to the Jews. Jesus and his early followers were all Jews, there was nothing antisemitic in early Christianity, and so not really in its texts. Later Christians began to become antisemitic as Christianity became increasingly distanced from Judaism and Christians began to blame Jews for the crucifixion of Jesus
    Muslims pay obligatory charity, taxes on non Muslims was for their protection and for them not to join the army of Muslims and fight, it was a just and a fair system....

    There was no subordination of non Muslims, they were free to practice their religion and if they were so badly treated why did not they leave? in fact the system was so fair that the leader of the Muslim territory (the caliph/khaleefah) was once brought to trial against a non Muslim citizen and the verdict went against the Muslim leader!!!!

    coming to the Christians and Jews story..How easily you blame Christians for becoming antisemetic as if there was no reason behind it..Jews were the one who started calling Jesus a ******* and heretic because of which the rift between Jews & Christians began...And Jews were the ones responsible for the crucifiction of Jesus (however Jesus was neither crucified nor killed but that is another story altogether, which can be proven from the Bible itself).
 
 
 
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: February 23, 2010
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?
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.