Is Islam Really a Religion of Peace?

[Zakharra]

Islam according to the Qoran. Not according to ISIS or other extremist groups.

According to ISIS and the other groups, they are following the Qoran, it's the other groups that aren't.

[Sabby]

Islam according to the Qoran. Not according to ISIS or other extremist groups.

So how did you determine that ISIS isn't following parts of the Quran? Could you explain what teachings they got wrong?

[Oniya]

I think Formless has gone into that on a few other threads.

[Dashenka]

So how did you determine that ISIS isn't following parts of the Quran? Could you explain what teachings they got wrong?

The killing in the name of God part. That's what they got wrong.

As Oniya said, Formless has explained the Qoran. I've read the Qoran, because I had a muslim girlfriend, nowhere did I read anything terrible or evil.

But I see where this discussion is going to already (again?) so I kindly bow out. I've given my opinion that I think all religions are essentially based on peace and doing good. Every religion has rotten apples, Christianity equally as much as the Islam. Nowhere in any of both the holy books does it say you should kill in the name of your God or harm people in the name of your God.

[Sabby]

I think Formless has gone into that on a few other threads.

I was asking Dashenka since she was the one who made the claim, but she's bowed out, so I will to.

[Callie Del Noire]

We get the faith we sponsor. There is an old Indian tale of a man talking about two wolves fighting for his soul. One good and one bad. In the story, the one that wins.. is the one that gets fed.

Look at who has been getting 'fed' over the last 80+ years.

Jordan/Saudi Arabia/Qatar all sponsor radical schools of thought on Islam. Have for decades. All three have citizens who have, and still do, back certain players in the Terror games for one reason on another.

Syria/Iran/Iraq/Eqypt at one time or another have off the books supported groups with radical/extreme outlooks for intents of state or destabilizing others. Ditto Libya and other countries.

The US and the rest of the west have supported radical islamic groups for a variety of reasons. Afganistan, the 1953 revolt in Iran that ended into the institution of the Shah and on and on.

We've feed the wrong wolf.. now it's strong and long of tooth. The men who would lead the moderate faith forward? That man or woman has long been shot, stone, beheaded.

For the 'fix' everyone wants to go down.. we (Everyone) need to change how we grow things. The West needs to do something similar to the Marshall plan to grow the region into something stable, rather than looking on it as the personal play ground of this or that group making a buck off of oil. Those states IN THE REGION, need to find another way to pursue their intents. This sponsorship of bandits has clearly come back to haunt us all.

A new path is needed. One that isn't expedience over longterm outcome.

[Cheka Man]

I think the world would be better without Islam. Does anyone else agree?

[Sabby]

Though Dashenka has chosen to opt out, I'd still like to address one of her points.

But I see where this discussion is going to already (again?) so I kindly bow out. I've given my opinion that I think all religions are essentially based on peace and doing good. Every religion has rotten apples, Christianity equally as much as the Islam. Nowhere in any of both the holy books does it say you should kill in the name of your God or harm people in the name of your God.

This is simply untrue.

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/says_about/holywar.html

Unless every one of these verses has been horrifically mistranslated and misinterpreted, I'd say the book is pretty clear in it's endorsement of war against unbelievers. I do think some of the verses listed could be referring more to spiritual warfare then actually taking up arms. For instance...

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. 4:76

I can see this being interpreted as real war, but 'fighting the minions of the devil' when used in the context of idol worshipers can just as easily mean opposing the idols themselves.

Aside from a few murky verses like that, yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that you don't need to twist the books words to get a holy war going. It's no different to the Christian Bible.

[Kythia]

wb Sabby.  I didn't expect to see you in this thread again.

I read this one:

And let not those who disbelieve suppose that they can outstrip (Allah's Purpose). Lo! they cannot escape. Make ready for them all thou canst of (armed) force and of horses tethered, that thereby ye may dismay the enemy of Allah and your enemy, and others beside them whom ye know not. Allah knoweth them.

as "Lol, they cannot escape".  It was on its way to being my favourite verse ever.

Do you know whyt its been translated in to knoweth's and ye's though?  I can't see any details on the translation and it seems a pretty bizarre thing to do.

[Sabby]

I have no idea. I don't have any skills at deciphering the more subjective verses of holy books, I just pull the verses as they become relevant and try to track down the context they were written. Anything beyond that I won't pretend to be capable of. That's for historians and scholars.

Still though, sometimes the message is pretty friggen clear Make war on disbelievers for the glory of Allah. Religion of piece my curly copper locks.

[Dashenka]

I think the world would be better without Islam. Does anyone else agree?

Wow.

Somebody forgot how WWII started.

I certainly hope nobody else agrees with you. That would be rather disturbing.

[Sabby]

Wow.

Somebody forgot how WWII started.

I certainly hope nobody else agrees with you. That would be rather disturbing.

Please don't put words in peoples mouths. I would agree with Cheka, and that doesn't mean I'm sympathizing with genocide >.> It's more then a little offensive for you to even go there at all, let alone right out of the gate. I'm sure there's plenty of political and philosophical views out there YOU would think the world would be better off without, and those same views are certainly important to a number of people, so by your own logic you are being just as disturbing by wishing those views didn't exist.

We're discussing systems of thought Dashenka, the feelings of those who hold them is another discussion entirely.

[Dashenka]

I'm just staggered that a website/forum like Elliquiy, where transgenders, homosexuals and everybody else is welcomed and respected accepts such blatent discrimination against the Islam by not distantiating itself from (and thus accepting) people saying the world is better off without the Islam. Had this discussion been about the afore mentioned groups, saying the world would have been better off without them, the topic would have been locked and the person would have been banned or at least given a warning.

I've been warned, castrated and even banned for less.

I'm not even bitter or angry, just gutted that Elliquiy accepts statements like the one before. It's so sad, homosexuals are welcome but muslims are not. To me, that is discrimination or at least disrespectful towards the muslim community on this website.

Be polite, be civil, be respectful. Just because something is not expressly forbidden, does not mean that we will tolerate it. If you are constantly rude, inconsiderate, or otherwise act like a jerk, we will smack your privileges around until you get the hint and behave. If you cannot behave, you will be directed elsewhere.

[Sabby]

I'm just staggered that a website/forum like Elliquiy, where transgenders, homosexuals and everybody else is welcomed and respected accepts such blatent discrimination against the Islam by not distantiating itself from (and thus accepting) people saying the world is better off without the Islam. Had this discussion been about the afore mentioned groups, saying the world would have been better off without them, the topic would have been locked and the person would have been banned or at least given a warning.

I've been warned, castrated and even banned for less.

I'm not even bitter or angry, just gutted that Elliquiy accepts statements like the one before. It's so sad, homosexuals are welcome but muslims are not. To me, that is discrimination or at least disrespectful towards the muslim community on this website.

You're still confusing the discussion. No one is attacking anyone personally, we're talking about beliefs. Beliefs are not people and they have no rights. To even try and compare someone thinking Islam is a bad thing to homophobia is, frankly, far more worrying then anything anyone has said about the Muslim faith in this thread. I'd ask you not to accuse the entire website of being anti-Muslim simply for allowing someone to say they don't think it's that great. You don't have to agree with that statement, but you will allow it to be voiced. Once we start trying to shut people down for opinions we don't like, we open up the door for blasphemy.

If you'd actually like to make a case for why Cheka and I would be wrong, please do so. Why do you think the world is better off with the Muslim faith?

[Dashenka]

I don't understand how anybody can support the statement that the world is better off without the Islam, especially not on Elliquiy.

We all know what would happen if I were to say the world is better off without homosexuals or transgenders or whatever.

I don't care what the discussion was about, saying things like that undermine Elliquiy's beliefs and I hate to say this, if no moderator is going to say something against this, I will cancel my subscription. I'm not paying a penny more to a forum that allows discrimination or racism against Islam or any other religion for that matter.

[consortium11]

I'd say there's a pretty clear difference between wanting to remove a religion (which is in essence a series of beliefs) and wanting to remove whole section to people. Putting aside difficult questions about determinism and the like, one can decide to no longer follow or accept a religion or the beliefs it entails... one cannot simply decide to not be homosexual or transgender.

I'm assuming... and I'd argue it's a fairly safe assumption... that when Cheka Man said he wanted to remove Islam he wasn't frothing at the mouth and wishing that all Muslims were dead; he thought that the world would be a better place if they didn't follow Islam. The various threads on atheism we've had here may have got heated but I don't think anyone accused the atheist members who said the world would be better without religion of wanting to wipe out the religious, instead accepting that they thought the world would be better if those who are currently religious decided not to be.

It would seemingly shut down pretty much all debate on politics and religion if saying that one thought the world would be a better place if a certain belief was removed was viewed as a call for genocide.

On a side note, I don't think the WW2 comparison is particularly valid:

1) The Nazi's followed a racial rather than religious approach to classifying someone as a Jew; you could reject all Jewish beliefs and become the most fundamentalist Christian the world has ever seen but if your parents were Jewish you'd still be viewed as a Jew.

2) The Nazi's oppression of Jews (and other minorities) had very little to do with the causes of WW2. It's somewhat revisionist for people to argue that the Allies went in WW2 to save the Jews or to fight evil; that may have been the eventual outcome but at the time the Allies knew about the abuse and didn't really care. WW2 was far more about the last gasp of colonial empires battling with each other for geo-political supremacy then it was about the Nazi's abuse of minorities; if Hitler had never invaded Poland there's a fairly decent chance that the other countries would have left him to do whatever he wanted to minorities within his country and at most put diplomatic and economic pressure on rather than declare war.

[Beorning]

You're still confusing the discussion. No one is attacking anyone personally, we're talking about beliefs. Beliefs are not people and they have no rights. To even try and compare someone thinking Islam is a bad thing to homophobia is, frankly, far more worrying then anything anyone has said about the Muslim faith in this thread.

You know, I'd like to side with Dash on this. If someone said here that the world would be better off without the phenomenon of homosexuality, they would get reprimanded. Why is saying the same thing about Islam considered less offensive?

I don't care what the discussion was about, saying things like that undermine Elliquiy's beliefs and I hate to say this, if no moderator is going to say something against this, I will cancel my subscription. I'm not paying a penny more to a forum that allows discrimination or racism against Islam or any other religion for that matter.

Nooo! Don't do it 

[DarkAngel111]

I don't understand how anybody can support the statement that the world is better off without the Islam, especially not on Elliquiy.

We all know what would happen if I were to say the world is better off without homosexuals or transgenders or whatever.

I don't care what the discussion was about, saying things like that undermine Elliquiy's beliefs and I hate to say this, if no moderator is going to say something against this, I will cancel my subscription. I'm not paying a penny more to a forum that allows discrimination or racism against Islam or any other religion for that matter.

+1. The Statement does not go with Elliquiy Rules, No Matter what it is, Belief way of thinking etc, I was asked Do I have a problem with Homosexuals Transgenders Etc.. During the Intro Questions when I signed up. The purpose I understand was to Make sure that people do not Enter the Site who would Pass Remarks such as those Passed by Cheka, The discussion is not even about Islam anymore. Its about are we really going to Allow this kind of discussion and statements?, then there is no reason why we need to do that whole charade about approval process.

Simple Question, would I be allowed to make questions/statements like that About anyone?. It is Racism. There are no two ways to it. Discussion is important, everyone has a right to say their piece, but If I were to go on and say World would be better without black people, or Christianity, or Jews, That would not be acceptable. Neither should this be. And this was posted a Day ago. I have been warned about things in hours.

Now if you are going to say that saying things against Islam isn't Racism, then you are only kidding yourself, this is Racism. A person with Jewish parents is Jewish, His reason for this belief was they are only saying they are christian, because they want to be spared. It was completely a religion based discrimination.

[Dashenka]

I'd say there's a pretty clear difference between wanting to remove a religion (which is in essence a series of beliefs) and wanting to remove whole section to people. Putting aside difficult questions about determinism and the like, one can decide to no longer follow or accept a religion or the beliefs it entails... one cannot simply decide to not be homosexual or transgender.

On a side note, I don't think the WW2 comparison is particularly valid:

I don't see the difference.

Hitler wanted the jews removed from this world. Sabby and the other guy want the Islam removed from the world.

I fail to see the differences. They've both crossed a line on Elliquiy. What their beliefs are in private is all up to them, you should not be allowed to say this on Elliquiy, a forum claiming to be openminded to everybody.
Everybody trying to make this right by saying it's not racism, in my eyes is equally racist as the two people who said it.

[Sabby]

Hitler wanted the jews removed from this world. Sabby and the other guy want the Islam removed from the world.

No, no, no, no, no, no, and no. Stop it. I never said that and you will NOT put those words in my mouth.

You know, I'd like to side with Dash on this. If someone said here that the world would be better off without the phenomenon of homosexuality, they would get reprimanded. Why is saying the same thing about Islam considered less offensive?

1. Homosexuality is not a choice. A belief system IS a choice.
2. No one has said they would like to take Islam away from people or remove people who believe it. Point me to someone with such an opinion and I'll join you in tearing into them (intellectually, of course).

This whole comparison between criticizing Islam and gay rights is irrelevant and manipulative. You're better then this, guys.

Simple Question, would I be allowed to make questions/statements like that About anyone?. It is Racism.

Islam is NOT a race, it is a system of beliefs. Please stop trying to paint criticism of Islam as racism. It simply is not true.

[Dashenka]

No, no, no, no, no, no, and no. Stop it. I never said that and you will NOT put those words in my mouth.

You said you agreed with him.

[Sabby]

You said you agreed with him.

Yes, that the world would be better off without the belief system that is Islam. Show me where I said "I'd like to forcibly remove this belief by killing it's believers"

I am not going to be a part of any discussion where this kind of manipulation is allowed. Goodbye.

[Beorning]

1. Homosexuality is not a choice. A belief system IS a choice.

What does it matter? Both of these are things that are important to people's identity and seeing them offended is not pleasant.

[Dashenka]

Yes, that the world would be better off without the belief system that is Islam. Show me where I said "I'd like to forcibly remove this belief by killing it's believers"

I am not going to be a part of any discussion where this kind of manipulation is allowed. Goodbye.

So what's the difference in saying the world would be better off without black people, or homosexuals? Name the difference? You can't. It's racism and that's the end of it. You've crossed a line Sabby.

[Valerian]

Please be mindful of the rules of the forum and this section when posting.  Thank you.