The ISIS offensive in Iraq

[No Regard]

I am sorry if I've hurt anyone’s feelings.

I would like to repost one of my earlier posts, which I feel got a bit lost in the crowd, and I consider it to be my exit from this discussion:

I would like to say that I don't point any fingers at the Islamic culture, which have a special place in my heart, especially the music. It is without doubt rich, valuable and beautiful, and it is absolutely terrible what a few shit holes are able to do with its reputation.

I would also like to point out, that I'm all for more spirituality in the world, and I try as best as I can to live a spiritual life myself. But what I don't like is people who are taking monopoly on spirituality; how some are dividing and fighting over which type of spirituality is right and wrong. This is exactly what religions do though, and therefor do they have to be criticized.

The religious paradox is very strange indeed. They all speak about the same things; the same mystical power that inhabits all things, both animate and inanimate, which we - because of the shortcomings of words - call either God or Allah or The Ground or It or Whatever. And at the same time they are killing each other with ruthlessness and complete lack of compassion. That is not spirituality.


Peace and Love

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

The problem is when our arguments are critical of governments/laws in Islamic majority governments and we apply them to Muslims/Islam. There's a very stark difference between the two.

Do I agree with all Saudi laws? No. Do I agree with the Saudi monarchy system? Also no. You'll find Saudis that don't and you'll find Muslims all over the world that don't.

First, if the laws relate to purely religious matters, such as the laws against apostasy, blasphemy, and proselytization, then it is entirely fair to conclude that they have to do with Muslims/Islam. That's a separate question from the specifics of all the other things in Saudi Arabia.

Second, it's not as if you find those laws only in one or two Muslim countries, shoved down the throats of an unwilling population by a single, oppressive theocratic government. Those laws exist in most Muslim-majority nations, including some with elected governments. Are we to believe that all of those government are defying the wishes of their people by being more strict religiously than the people want? That makes no sense. And even if it were true, then it would be entirely proper for our government to call them out specifically on that.

And third, I've posted previously the results of the Pew surveys, which polled the opinions of Muslims in those nations. And as I've mentioned, those policies generally have the support of a large minority, if not an outright majority, or the people. I even just linked the one bit of data showing that 80% of Egyptians agree that apostasy should be illegal. And if you want to argue that Egypt isn't democratic because Morsi wasn't deposed, it's not like Morsi was planning on making Egypt more tolerant of religious dissent.

Those laws/beliefs are mainstream, not fringe, and are backed by mainstream scholars of Islam.

 

[JSS2306]

And third, I've posted previously the results of the Pew surveys, which polled the opinions of Muslims in those nations.

Those laws/beliefs are mainstream, not fringe, and are backed by mainstream scholars of Islam.

This really comes into play and nobody has discounted them in any form since you've posted it. It was completely ignored. Gouri has danced around it and continue's to post long and boring retorts that deal with twisting things into "right" or "wrong" interpretations of Islam.

Breaking News: If your religion has text that can be branched off into something that could be taken LITERALLY and mass amounts of people are enslaved, burned, and beheaded because of it... then maybe your religion is complete bullshit.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

This really comes into play and nobody has discounted them in any form since you've posted it. It was completely ignored. Gouri has danced around it and continue's to post long and boring retorts that deal with twisting things into "right" or "wrong" interpretations of Islam.

I suspect the reason it was essentially ignored is because of a belief that those doctrines are justified, at least to some extent. That there is something about Islam that means banning apostasy, blasphemy, and proselytization is acceptable. Otherwise....I got nothing.

As I posted in another post to which no response was received, the lack of a gatekeeper to define what Islam (and Judaism and much of Christianity) actually "is" means that we have to define it in terms of how much support the various interpretations currently receive amongst followers/teachers of that religion. Arguing that your interpretation is correct really doesn't address the reality that other interpretations have substantial support.

Breaking News: If your religion has text that can be branched off into something that could be taken LITERALLY and mass amounts of people are enslaved, burned, and beheaded because of it... then maybe your religion is complete bullshit.

Well, other religions also have at least some text that could be branched off into something pretty bad as well. That's why you've got to focus on how they are currently practiced and taught if you want to discuss what they "are".

Of course, those practices and teaching can be changed, which is why we don't see the Catholic Church advocating the same stuff it did in, say, 1200. But unless enough adherents are willing to acknowledge the issue and advocate that the particular doctrine be changed, it's not going to improve.

 

[JSS2306]

Well, other religions also have at least some text that could be branched off into something pretty bad as well. That's why you've got to focus on how they are currently practiced and taught if you want to discuss what they "are".

Of course, those practices and teaching can be changed, which is why we don't see the Catholic Church advocating the same stuff it did in, say, 1200. But unless enough adherents are willing to acknowledge the issue and advocate that the particular doctrine be changed, it's not going to improve.

They do, the difference is we aren't dealing with their forms of extremism as we are Islam.

That's a fact. Now we have women, children, and people in general being buried alive, beheaded, burned to death, ect.

Sorry, Islam is on the shitlist of people that are free whom don't subscribe to any religion. It may suck for Muslims, but I don't have much sympathy since they are full of shit too (as is any religion).

It is what it is. They (any religious person) believes in some awful bullshit, it has an effect on the world. I have a problem whether it's Christian or Muslim.

 

[The Human Q-Tip]

Norway's Muslims form protective human ring around synagogue

OSLO (Reuters) - More than 1000 Muslims formed a human shield around Oslo's synagogue on Saturday, offering symbolic protection for the city's Jewish community and condemning an attack on a synagogue in neighboring Denmark last weekend.

Chanting "No to anti-Semitism, no to Islamophobia," Norway's Muslims formed what they called a ring of peace a week after Omar Abdel Hamid El-Hussein, a Danish-born son of Palestinian immigrants, killed two people at a synagogue and an event promoting free speech in Copenhagen last weekend.

"Humanity is one and we are here to demonstrate that," Zeeshan Abdullah, one of the protest's organizers told a crowd of Muslim immigrants and ethnic Norwegians who filled the small street around Oslo's only functioning synagogue.

"There are many more peace mongers than warmongers," Abdullah said as organizers and Jewish community leaders stood side by side. "There’s still hope for humanity, for peace and love, across religious differences and backgrounds."

Norway's Jewish community is one of Europe's smallest, numbering around 1000, and the Muslim population, which has been growing steadily through immigration, is 150,000 to 200,000. Norway has a population of about 5.2 million.

http://news.yahoo.com/norwegian-muslims-form-human-ring-around-oslo-synagogue-102527616.html

 

[DJTJ]

Breaking News: If your religion has text that can be branched off into something that could be taken LITERALLY and mass amounts of people are enslaved, burned, and beheaded because of it... then maybe your religion is complete bullshit.

So unbelievably sick of how blatantly racist you are. Quit the hate rhetoric, we get it. You hate Islam.

 

[gourimoko]

So unbelievably sick of how blatantly racist you are. Quit the hate rhetoric, we get it. You hate Islam.

It's incredible...

I mean, the guy doesn't even fucking hide the fact that he's racist.

This motherfucker actually said that Muslims (which he lied and said comprised 8.6% of the population, when they are really nowhere near that many), are the largest perpetrators of hate crimes?

Enough is enough.

 

[JSS2306]

It's incredible...

I mean, the guy doesn't even fucking hide the fact that he's racist.

This motherfucker actually said that Muslims (which he lied and said comprised 8.6% of the population, when they are really nowhere near that many), are the largest perpetrators of hate crimes?

Enough is enough.

It's not a gour post unless he spins it out of control to his liking.

Honestly, I find your posts entertaining. You use the race card almost every single time. I don't care if you're a Muslim, Christian, Agnostic, ect. ect...

I treat everyone the same but that doesn't mean I don't respect people as a fellow human being no matter religion, race, or creed.

I rest peacefully at night, gour. Don't get your panties in a twist because I feel like anyone who believe's in any religion and forces their political views on any situation are complete morons. That's the way I feel about it and that just so happens to include you. My favorite basketball player of all time is a Muslim and I harbor no ill will toward anybody unless it deals with them promoting violence and setting humanity back in some way shape or form.

You're an idiot with your wits. I can appreciate that.

So what is your explanation of the Pew polls?

 

[gourimoko]

And third, I've posted previously the results of the Pew surveys, which polled the opinions of Muslims in those nations. And as I've mentioned, those policies generally have the support of a large minority, if not an outright majority, or the people. I even just linked the one bit of data showing that 80% of Egyptians agree that apostasy should be illegal. And if you want to argue that Egypt isn't democratic because Morsi wasn't deposed, it's not like Morsi was planning on making Egypt more tolerant of religious dissent.

Those laws/beliefs are mainstream, not fringe, and are backed by mainstream scholars of Islam.

Q-Tip, the problem that I'm having with your position here is that it's all over the map, as in literally the world map, bouncing around different groups of people, in different cultures, and different views of Islam, the role of the State, the role of the citizen, and the nature of participation in government.

It seems you are jumbling nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan together and drawing conclusions blindly, without any consideration for why there may be some levels of correlation but not necessarily identical causation.

In other words, it's not necessarily Islam that is driving the more radical interpretation of Sharia.

But, if you reference the Pew Report that you cited, rather than the news reports that sensationalized the results, you'd see that the Pew Researches make the exact same conclusion that I have: that being, the primary driver for radical implementations of Sharia is not linearly correlated or caused by increases in self-identification among Muslims; but instead, with increases in heterogeneity.

In other words, Islam is not the driving force of oppressive forms of Sharia, but rather, sectarianism due to high levels of diversity in the local population.

In essence, in countries where there are few Muslims (minority), a plurality of Muslims, or a vast majority of Muslims (greater than 85%), the interpretation of Sharia law is far less strict than it is in nations like Pakistan or Egypt where Islam is a majority religion competing with other demographic groups like Christianity and Hinduism or Buddhism.

This points to non-religious sources of the variations in attitudes, such as tribal, cultural, and sectarian intolerance; rather than anything that is inherent to Islam itself.

In nations that have predominantly Muslim populations, the majority of citizens do not want to codify Sharia. This is again, evidenced by Pew Research:

"Conversely, in some countries where Muslims make up more than 90% of the population, relatively few want their government to codify Islamic law; this is the case in Tajikistan (27%), Turkey (12%) and Azerbaijan (8%)."

But of course, that would not get cited by the news reports.

And Q-Tip, I'm not saying you are misrepresenting the facts because quite honestly, anyone reading mainstream news articles would've come to the same conclusion.

 

[gourimoko]

It's not a gour post unless he spins it out of control to his liking.

Honestly, I find your posts entertaining. You use the race card almost every single time. I don't care if you're a Muslim, Christian, Agnostic, ect. ect...

I treat everyone the same but that doesn't mean I don't respect people as a fellow human being no matter religion, race, or creed.

I rest peacefully at night, gour. Don't get your panties in a twist because I feel like anyone who believe's in any religion and forces their political views on any situation are complete morons. That's the way I feel about it and that just so happens to include you. My favorite basketball player of all time is a Muslim

..... lol.

and I harbor no ill will toward anybody unless it deals with them promoting violence and setting humanity back in some way shape or form.

..... yep.

You're an idiot with your wits. I can appreciate that.

Lots of things you can call me.. An idiot isn't one of them. Try harder.

So what is your explanation of the Pew polls?

I actually read the Pew polls. Read above, they don't support the conclusion you'd like them to.

 

[JSS2306]

Q-Tip, the problem that I'm having with your position here is that it's all over the map, as in literally the world map, bouncing around different groups of people, in different cultures, and different views of Islam, the role of the State, the role of the citizen, and the nature of participation in government.

It seems you are jumbling nations like Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and Pakistan together and drawing conclusions blindly, without any consideration for why there may be some levels of correlation but not necessarily identical causation.

In other words, it's not necessarily Islam that is driving the more radical interpretation of Sharia.

But, if you reference the Pew Report that you cited, rather than the news reports that sensationalized the results, you'd see that the Pew Researches make the exact same conclusion that I have: that being, the primary driver for radical implementations of Sharia is not linearly correlated or caused by increases in self-identification among Muslims; but instead, with increases in heterogeneity.

In other words, Islam is not the driving force of oppressive forms of Sharia, but rather, sectarianism due to high levels of diversity in the local population.

In essence, in countries where there are few Muslims (minority), a plurality of Muslims, or a vast majority of Muslims (greater than 85%), the interpretation of Sharia law is far less strict than it is in nations like Pakistan or Egypt where Islam is a majority religion competing with other demographic groups like Christianity and Hinduism or Buddhism.

This points to non-religious sources of the variations in attitudes, such as tribal, cultural, and sectarian intolerance; rather than anything that is inherent to Islam itself.

In nations that have predominantly Muslim populations, the majority of citizens do not want to codify Sharia. This is again, evidenced by Pew Research:

"Conversely, in some countries where Muslims make up more than 90% of the population, relatively few want their government to codify Islamic law; this is the case in Tajikistan (27%), Turkey (12%) and Azerbaijan (8%)."

But of course, that would not get cited by the news reports.

And Q-Tip, I'm not saying you are misrepresenting the facts because quite honestly, anyone reading mainstream news articles would've come to the same conclusion.

27% is 2,214,000 in Tajikistan.

That's 2,000,000 people roughly, in one country alone, that no one has even heard of, that would want Sharia instated.

The fuck...

In 10 of 20 countries where there are adequate samples for analysis, at least half of Muslims who favor making sharia the law of the land also favor stoning unfaithful spouses.18

Some of the highest support for stoning is found in South Asia and the Middle East-North Africa region. In Pakistan (89%) and Afghanistan (85%), more than eight-in-ten Muslims who want Islamic law as their country’s official law say adulterers should be stoned, while nearly as many say the same in the Palestinian territories (84%) and Egypt (81%). A majority also support stoning as a penalty for the unfaithful in Jordan (67%), Iraq (58%). However, support is significantly lower in Lebanon (46%) and Tunisia (44%),

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/...ligion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

Dude, there's 189,000,000 Muslims in Pakistan alone and 89% think stoning for adultery is a solution.

I'm no mathematician but doesn't that mean 168,000,000 Muslims believe in stoning?

The FUCK....

 

[gourimoko]

I suspect the reason it was essentially ignored is because of a belief that those doctrines are justified, at least to some extent. That there is something about Islam that means banning apostasy, blasphemy, and proselytization is acceptable. Otherwise....I got nothing.

It was lost in the worthless posts put up by 1 or 2 really terrible posters.

To be honest, a few people have been screaming at me to RESPOND to everything they've said, otherwise I'm ignoring something and thus doing so deliberately.

You just weren't outrageous enough to respond to Q-Tip, had to prioritize.

But I responded above.

As I posted in another post to which no response was received, the lack of a gatekeeper to define what Islam (and Judaism and much of Christianity) actually "is" means

But Judaism's definition isn't up for debate is it?

We all agree that if a person says "I am a Jew," it means a great many things. For example, a man can say "I am a Jew. I am an Atheist" and both statements are true. If Judaism were only a monotheistic religion then this would be contradictory by definition.

The same is true for Islam, and I and others have tried to explain this. So it isn't that we need a "gatekeeper," we need to agree that being a Muslim is more than simply believing in the Qu'ran.

As I said, my own step-father is an agnostic pork-eating Muslim. Much of the Algerian, Iranian, Lebanese, Tunisian and Moroccan populations are very very liberal. They don't stop being Muslim because they commit sins, or lose their faith.

Islam is a religion, yes. It is also a culture, and it has historically represented a diverse nation of people. It's not accurate to say that one must be a practicing Muslim of good faith to be Islamic.

So, again Q-Tip, this point was not ignored but addressed, numerous times.

Arguing that your interpretation is correct really doesn't address the reality that other interpretations have substantial support.

Fair enough.

But the dialogue in this thread has predominantly focused on Sunni Islam, in the Middle East, and specifically with Wahhabism.

Less than 15% of the Muslim population lives in the Middle East, and less than 20% in the Middle East with Northern Africa added to it.

It's just not fair to judge Islam based on a radical minority, and discuss radical views etc, without considering other factors in these nations that have been brought up by @kosis and myself among others including Western efforts to destabilize these nations.

But even in your previous post, a few non-representative countries were singled out that are suffering from severe sectarian violence due to their unstable political situations (Egypt, Pakistan) rather than nations that have relative stability and much larger Muslim populations (India, Indonesia, etc).

Again, the point is that one has to take a look at the whole of Islam and try to find what is the root cause of radicalism. To simply say it is inherent to Islam and Sharia is just lacking in, what I think would be, a real substantive analysis of the situation.

 

[JSS2306]

So roughly 160-170 Million people of Islamic faith believe in stoning for adultery in Pakistan alone.

That's 160,000,000 with seven zeroes, right? That's only one country, right? Just making sure I'm not full of shit here. If I'm wrong, correct me. Here's the link:

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/...ligion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

That's a problem to say the least...

 

[gourimoko]

27% is 2,214,000 in Tajikistan.

That's 2,000,000 people roughly, in one country alone, that no one has even heard of, that would want Sharia instated.

The fuck...

1997 was the first year the Gallup poll recorded majority public support among the American population for interracial marriage. The last poll prior to this in 1995 had only 48% support. (48y/4na/48n)

This means that 127,000,000 Americans (using your simplistic form of extrapolation) thought interracial marriage was wrong.

The fuck....?

Dude, there's a 189,000,000 Muslims in Pakistan alone and 89% think stoning for adultery is a solution.

While a majority in Pakistan do believe this, you've made a mistake in your arithmetic.

I'm no mathematician but doesn't that mean 168,000,000 Muslims believe in stoning?

Well I do have a degree in mathematics so let me try to explain where you fucked up, even if it likely won't make a difference.

I don't know what you used as the baseline population but let's go with Google's number of 182.1M as of 2013.

97% of Pakistan is Muslim, so 176.6M Muslims.
84% believe Sharia should be the law of the land according to Pew. 148.4M
84% of those who believe in Sharia believe in stoning. 124.6M

So rather than appearing to be the entire Pakistani population, it's more like 68% of those polled, who are almost entirely likely to be adults, and I'd be curious what the gender crosstabs would show.

The FUCK....

Again, this doesn't show correlation in other predominantly Muslim nations like Turkey. Tunisia, Lebanon, Morocco, Algeria, all Middle Eastern nations where these views aren't the same. Indonesia and India, the largest two nations with Muslim populations, and there isn't correlation.

The question is why?