Islam--is our religion flawed?

[ibroX]

I've been reading this board for a while and thought I'd finally join and make a thread. I really don't know how this thread will be received, but here goes:

As a Somali living in the US, I feel conflicted. Although I have considerable affinity for my fellow Muslims, I belief that Islamic teachings are the root cause of atrocities like 9/11 or London 7/7/05. I'm not saying that all Muslims bare the blame--I'm saying Islam is what led to these events, and so long as we continue to avoid this reality we of the Islamic diaspora are putting ourselves in considerable danger.

Islam teaches--and calls for--the supremacy of Islam by any means. We recognize Jews and Christians as "people of the book" but Buddhists and Hindus and all the other religions of the world are to us beneath contempt, and if such people ever come under our power, we are quick to persecute them. Here is a conversation I had with a Muslim who is very close to me:

me: Islam teaches intolerance and hatred of different religions. It doesn't teach co-existance.

Muslim: That's not true! Islam treats Jews and Christians with respect!

me: What about Hindus?

Muslim: But that's different!

I swear I always think about this conversation. How is it different? Just because Judaism and Christianity influenced Islam we exempt them from the contempt with which we regard all other non-Abrahamic religions? Islam stridently divides the world into believers and non-believers--but Islam has a overwhelming supremacist element to it that is utterly troublesome for these non-believers. In Indonesia, Muslim extremists behead Christian school girls. This sort of barbarity--whether 9/11 or the murder of Christian school girls--doesn't seem to bother Muslims as much as some cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. Shouldn't this be a cause of concern?

Islam retards progress by making secularism nearly impossible. In order for a country to economically, scientifically and culturally prosper in needs institutions that are secular--religious sentiment must be a personal issue and not a matter of the state. Islam demands Sharia--that is, the subjugation of all aspects of life under the rule of God. No one has the choice to opt out. What are the consequences for society? Poverty, ignorance, dictatorships--countries unable to provide for the common good and their people. Here is the terrible irony: Fanatical Muslims dream of overcoming the West but they never realize that strict adherence to Islam makes such a victory impossible. Okay, say you take on the West. What do you need? Technological supremacy. How is that achieved? By secular institutions--by the respect for science and progress. But as I said earlier the Islamic doctrine
makes such achievements impossible. So these fanatics are in a considerable bind--they want to "beat" the West and spread Islam but in order to so...they must become like the West! And that process of becoming like the West is surely guaranteed to lessen their extremism!

I am tired of being represented by these fanatics. Every time they commit terrorism and mention Allah and Jihad--we of the Islamic diaspora are closer to danger. Consider Europe. Muslims there and elsewhere hope to keep breeding and gain influence by their sheer numbers. But if these Muslims keep misbehaving, aren't the indigenous European populations at some point going to say "Enough" and expel those Muslims? Consider this rational: There is no way to tell a good muslim from a terrorist, so the only option is...kicking all Muslims out. It does have a terrible logic to it doesn't it? After all, various Arab countries expelled their Jewish populations because Israel was created...and those Jews clearly didn't present any sort of threat. Whose to say the West won't behave the same when Muslims--given the prevalence of extremism in the Islamic world and the fact that Muslims might...and already do... present a threat?

Thankfully I was never really religious--even in Somalia as a boy I simply went through the motions of prayer but, for whatever reason, my heart was never in it. But I remember the shame I felt on 9/11--the shame and the guilt, because I knew that Islam was responsible.

[Shirib]

Brother

I think you have somethings messed up. You really do.

Islam teaches--and calls for--the supremacy of Islam by any means. We recognize Jews and Christians as "people of the book" but Buddhists and Hindus and all the other religions of the world are to us beneath contempt, and if such people ever come under our power, we are quick to persecute them.

This is not true. Through out all of history Islam is the religion that has not persecuted people for being different religions. Everyone says this no one was ever persecuted for not being Muslim it was simply pay the jiziya and move on.

When the Christians came to the New World, they were massacring the natives, there excuse was they were pagans, they were less than human. This was there exact reason why.

Do u know whats different Christianity doesn't get the blame for that in the media. If a Muslim would have done that u would be hearing it non stop.

If u can find an instance where Muslims were commiting a genocide of people and justifying using the Quran bring it forward.

Slavery of black Africans, by whites was the worst form of slavery ever seen by mankind. Again they used the bible, through and through to justify this.

Why does Christianity not face trial for this, while everything a Muslim does Islam is balmed, when Christianity was always the justification of this.

Same thingwith colonialism, they were civilizing savages, teaching them religion, bringing them to God, this is what was preached but Christianity is not blamed why?

Ku Klux Klan and Hitlers Natzi's were saying only the white Christian race, should rule and used the bible to justify there acts, why is this not seen as a problem with Christianity.

Muslims, Hindu's, Jainist, Sikh and Budhist people lived side by side in that area for centuries and never had any sort of major fighting until Europeans came. They were perfectly good the Moghul Empire was a Muslim Empire that ruled over the area and saw very little resistance because the laws protected and respected the other religions.

Europeans came and there laws, divided and pit the different people and religions against each other. This intolerance in this area was not one caused by religion as the different religions lived side by side in harmony for centuries but rather of European colonial laws.

=================================================================

As to your answer of Islamic Sharia. Everything u mentioned is outlined in Islamic sharia. Islam does not retard Economical and scientific growth. When the Muslim world was run by Islamic Sharia, Muslims were the leaders in world economy, science and technology. Much of Western sciences are borrowed from Muslim scientists.


I don't understand the objection to this, that u are getting at, everything can be accomplished using Islamic Sharia as it has already happened.

THERE IS NOTHING WRONG WITH ISLAM, IT IS PERFECT

====================================================================

Are u still Muslim by the way?

[yungnfresh]

Islam cannot be held accountable for the actions of radical Muslims. Islam is a perfect religion but Muslims are not perfect followers of it. If we followed the religion perfectly, like our Prophet Muhammad SAW did, then there would be nowhere u can find reasonable fault. Since he was the only man to ever practice the religion perfectly, there will always be mistakes and errors in judgment made by Muslims but you have to separate their weaknesses and shortcomings from flaws in Islam.

As for Islam teaching supremacy of our religion, it's something that's not limited to Islam alone. No religion says "this other religion is a better religion and better guided than this one, but follow us anyway". Every religion, either directly or indirectly, advocates its religious supremacy to any other religion. The reason we prefer the people of the book (Christians and Jews) and can marry them is because we all share the belief in 1 God, regardless of the name we give Him and what form we believe He takes. Hindus and other polytheists believe in multiple gods and that is the most hated thing in the eyes of Allah SWT as He is the One in need of no assistance from anyone or anything and to associate partners with Him is an insult to His Everlasting Power and All-Encompassing Ability. Logically, it's easier to reconcile faith and pave the way for conversion (which should be the ultimate goal of anyone who marries from the people of the book) with someone who believes in 1 God but differs as to the specifics of His Details. But we're not supposed to deal with the mushrikiin (polytheists) harshly or with contempt because that's not a trait of Muslims, except in matters of open war. The preferred step is to treat them with kindness and mercy because that itself is a form of da'wa. When they are under our rule, they have rights over us as well. Their right is that they are exempt from defending the land in battles as long as they pay the jizyah (non-muslim tax) and if they do pay it, we agree to allow them the freedom to practice their religion, defend them in times of war, allow them economic self-determination, and exempt them from paying the tax the Muslims pay. If they would rather not pay the jizya, then they are required to help fight invaders with the Muslims and are subject to the same requirements and duties the Muslims are with respect to the country. Think about it, Andalucia (former Spain) was a Muslim empire for thousands of year, one of, if not THE, longest running empire in history...if Muslims persecuted non-Muslims and did not give them freedom of religion, why was there always a thriving non-Muslim community there? Over time, you'd think we would have forced people to convert or at least made being a non-Muslim so difficult that people would claim to be Muslim for relief, if we were really persecuting non-Muslims under our rule.

Finally, we don't need the West's secular institutions or their science and technology. Islam was the leader in breakthroughs in alot of scientific fields (embryology, astronomy, biology, chemistry, etc.) Muslims scientists don't need to abandon religion because science supports and verifies the authenticity of religion, not the other way around.

The reason you, and alot of other people, feel this way about Islam is because of the way it's being demonized in the media. Muslims are vilified and treated as a collective group of war-mongering radicals under a hateful ideology masquerading as a religion....but read this thread where i was talkin about the hypocrisy in the actions of The Christian Identity Group, which openly advocated for the destruction of anyone non-white based on divine guidance from the Bible, and you'll see the clear double standard and unbalanced/irresponsible journalism. viewtopic.php?f=18&t=158006

Islam itself is not the problem, it's the solution


F.Y.I. Prophet Muhammad SAW was voted (by a non-Muslim panel) as the number 1 most influential man in history (even above Jesus AS) based on several factors such as being a father, a husband, a Prophet, a military leader, etc. Even non-Muslims recognize his contributions but it's our ignorant actions and deviation from Islam, coupled with media targeting, that further perpetuate the anti-Islamic sentiments you see.

[ibroX]

Brother

This is not true. Through out all of history Islam is the religion that has not persecuted people for being different religions. Everyone says this no one was ever persecuted for not being Muslim it was simply pay the jiziya and move on.

Okay--two things. Making people of different religions pay the "jiziya" IS persecution. Severe limitations were placed on those who had to pay the jiziya to perpetually remind of their inferior status to muslims--and this consideration was not extended to polytheists. How do you think Pakistanis become Islamic? Through conquest--the ancestors of those people did not choose Islam but were forcibly converted by armies of muslims.

Do you notice how in America religion is kept out of government and ALL RELIGIONS are tolerated? Why is that in Saudi Arabia you will not find a church but in America you can find hundreds of Mosques? What is it with Islam that it is always threatened by other religions but Christianity/Hinduism/Buddhism aren't?

When the Christians came to the New World, they were massacring the natives, there excuse was they were pagans, they were less than human. This was there exact reason why.

Some people argue that the Crusades were defensive in nature and a response to Muslim provocation in the middle east--I'm not really familiar with the details, but let's accept what you say: Christianity, in the long distant past, committed atrocities. Why aren't you concerned by the fact that Islam today continues to commit atrocities?

Slavery of black Africans, by whites was the worst form of slavery ever seen by mankind. Again they used the bible, through and through to justify this.

You will find hypocritical and false Christians--that is a certainty. What you forget to mention though is that slavery as an institution has effectively been ended by the West--and that the abolitionist movement was largely inspired by Christianity and the Golden Rule. Again, there is has no doubt been injustice committed by Christian nations in the past--the issue is, today, you don't find such injustice, or find Christians going about the world acting crazy and killing/threatening people BECAUSE of Christianity. I know what you people will say--what about Iraq/Afghanistan? Well, what was America supposed to do after 9/11?

Do u know whats different Christianity doesn't get the blame for that in the media. If a Muslim would have done that u would be hearing it non stop.

Actually it's the other way around. Western media does NOT for the most part engage in criticism of Islam as a religion because of their inherent belief in tolerance, though many right-wing publications are increasingly engaging in criticism of Islam.

And a reason Christianity might not a get that "blame" you want to ascribe to it is because it isn't necessarily Christianity's blame to bare--a host of other factors can explain Western slavery. Consider this: If whites in America did not have Christianity or any other religion, would slavery still have occurred? Probably. But many of the people who live in the Middle East right now did have Islam--would their societies still have those barbaric and backward qualities that are a direct consequence of Islam? No.

I shall respond to the rest of your post later.

[KlashneFolk]

[ibroX]

Islam cannot be held accountable for the actions of radical Muslims.

No, Islam BREEDS radical muslims! Consider these quotes:

* 3:151 "We shall cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve."

4:74 "Fight in the way of Allah who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoso fighteth in the way of Allah, be he slain or be he victorious, on him We shall bestow a vast reward."

* 4:76 "Those who believe do battle for the cause of Allah; and those who disbelieve do battle for the cause of idols. So fight the minions of the devil."

* 4:91 "Take them and kill them wherever ye find them. Against such We have given you clear warrant."

* 8:12 "I will throw fear into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Then smite the necks and smite of them each finger."

* 21:97 "Behold them, staring wide (in terror), the eyes of those who disbelieve!"

* 33:35-36 "Allah repulsed the disbelievers. ... He brought those of the People of the Scripture who supported them down from their strongholds, and cast panic into their hearts. Some ye slew, and ye made captive some.

* 59:2 "He it is Who hath caused those of the People of the Scripture who disbelieved to go forth from their homes unto the first exile. Ye deemed not that they would go forth, while they deemed that their strongholds would protect them from Allah. But Allah reached them from a place whereof they recked not, and cast terror in their hearts so that they ruined their houses with their own hands and the hands of the believers. So learn a lesson, O ye who have eyes!"

* 59:13 "Ye are more awful as a fear in their bosoms than Allah.

Osama and his like frequently use the Quran to justify their heinous acts--and the average non-violent Muslim can't argue with them because the extremist can always point out these type of quotes as justification. After all, who is the average non-violent muslim to say that Allah is wrong?

[yungnfresh]

Brother, you HAVE TO include the context of those lines. You can't just lift 1 or 2 verses in an entire series to make a misleading and dishonest point. THAT'S the biggest problem with the presentation of Islam from the media and also the radical elements within it.

for example:

5. You will get both your legs broken with a baseball bat

6. And beaten to a bloody pulp

7. If you ever break into my home and attack me again

8. Consider this a warning


5 & 6 sound crazy until you read 7 & 8, right?

[KlashneFolk]

We are going somewhere 8)

[RebelLion]

"Western media does NOT for the most part engage in criticism of Islam as a religion because of their inherent belief in tolerance, though many right-wing publications are increasingly engaging in criticism of Islam."

Your right western media does not engage in criticism of islam, what it does engage and encourage is fear mongering and insults against muslims disguised as criticism. Criticism would be imply that western media have done their homework on islam which they clearly have not.

Do you consider the josten muhhamed cartoon as tolerance of islam?

[ibroX]

As for Islam teaching supremacy of our religion, it's something that's not limited to Islam alone. No religion says "this other religion is a better religion and better guided than this one, but follow us anyway". Every religion, either directly or indirectly, advocates its religious supremacy to any other religion.

I agree--the problem is that Islam doesn't encourage its followers to merely be desirous of the religion spreading through out the world but rather commands its adherents to regard other non-islamic societies as worthless enemies until they become Muslim. That is wrong.

[Advo]

it's amazing how brain washing works.

[yungnfresh]

As for Islam teaching supremacy of our religion, it's something that's not limited to Islam alone. No religion says "this other religion is a better religion and better guided than this one, but follow us anyway". Every religion, either directly or indirectly, advocates its religious supremacy to any other religion.

I agree--the problem is that Islam doesn't encourage its followers to merely be desirous of the religion spreading through out the world but rather commands its adherents to regard other non-islamic societies as worthless enemies until they become Muslim. That is wrong.

That's not Islam or it's teachings. Again, you need to reconsider what you're taking issue with, Islam or the acts of some Muslims, because they are two completely different things

[ibroX]

"Western media does NOT for the most part engage in criticism of Islam as a religion because of their inherent belief in tolerance, though many right-wing publications are increasingly engaging in criticism of Islam."

Your right western media does not engage in criticism of islam, what it does engage and encourage is fear mongering and insults against muslims disguised as criticism. Criticism would be imply that western media have done their homework on islam which they clearly have not.

Do you consider the josten muhhamed cartoon as tolerance of islam?

No, when they were initially published I was angry but since then the behavior of Muslims in reaction has led me to believe that the cartoons were more than justified. Muslims needed the civic lesson about freedom of speech, and the cartoons were also justified by the murder of Theo Van Gogh and the threat of violence that Muslims always seem to be wielding over those who don't care for their beliefs.

[ibroX]

As for Islam teaching supremacy of our religion, it's something that's not limited to Islam alone. No religion says "this other religion is a better religion and better guided than this one, but follow us anyway". Every religion, either directly or indirectly, advocates its religious supremacy to any other religion.

I agree--the problem is that Islam doesn't encourage its followers to merely be desirous of the religion spreading through out the world but rather commands its adherents to regard other non-islamic societies as worthless enemies until they become Muslim. That is wrong.

That's not Islam or it's teachings. Again, you need to reconsider what you're taking issue with, Islam or the acts of some Muslims, because they are two completely different things

No they're the not. The acts of those extremist Muslims are the result of Islamic doctrine.

[yungnfresh]

"Western media does NOT for the most part engage in criticism of Islam as a religion because of their inherent belief in tolerance, though many right-wing publications are increasingly engaging in criticism of Islam."

Your right western media does not engage in criticism of islam, what it does engage and encourage is fear mongering and insults against muslims disguised as criticism. Criticism would be imply that western media have done their homework on islam which they clearly have not.

Do you consider the josten muhhamed cartoon as tolerance of islam?

No, when they were initially published I was angry but since then the behavior of Muslims in reaction has led me to believe that the cartoons were more than justified. Muslims needed the civic lesson about freedom of speech, and the cartoons were also justified by the murder of Theo Van Gogh and the threat of violence that Muslims always seem to be wielding over those who don't care for their beliefs.

so why is it ok for them to depict our holy Prophet Muhammad SAW in a cartoon with a turban made out of bombs in the name of "free speech", yet denying the holocaust or even questioning it's legitimacy and reliability in terms of death toll, is considered "hate speech" and Ernest Zundel even got deported back to Germany by a "democratic" Western country like Canada, which supported the right of the danish cartoonist to portray the Prophet SAW however he wanted? The intention of the danish article was clearly to piss off Muslims because they know how much we revere the Prophet SAW. Apparently, what's good for the goose is horrible for the gander.

http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=2932