If I detest islam, am I a racist?

[CCTAU 3,350]

Either way, I choose not to cower down to islam. The UK wants to. Will we?

Overplaying the Race Card

By Christopher Orlet

Published 9/4/2007 12:07:10 AM

Best to get this out of the way from the start: Islam is a religion and a religious ideology, not a race, therefore the recurrent charge that Islam's critics are racist is nothing more than a thin smokescreen.

Yet this truism is repeatedly rejected by Muslim spokesmen. Visit the Islamophobia Watch website and you will find among the many attempts at a definition (e.g. "the fear or hatred of Islam") this qualification:

[T]he term "Islamophobia" does not adequately express the full range and depth of antipathy towards Islam and Muslims in the West today. It is an inadequate term. A more accurate expression would be "anti-Islamic racism" for it combines the elements of dislike of a religion and active discrimination against the people belonging to that religion.

Doubtless"active discrimination against the people belonging to [a] religion" is repellant, but it is not racist. You may be anti-Islamic or anti-Christian or anti-Judaic, or like the journalist Christopher Hitchens anti-religion in toto, and still have a profound respect for all races. Indeed the equation of religion and race has long been the favorite hobbyhorse of genuine racists. Were not the Nazis adamant that Jewry was both a religion and -- first and foremost -- a race?

It is easy to understand this fixation with race. The race card is the most effective way to silence critics and undermine the credibility of one's opponent. When legitimate debate fails cry racism. In this way Muslims piggyback on the legitimate animosity toward racial bigotry.

Definitions of Islamophobia seem likely to multiply until they encompass every activity short of looking askance at a Muslim. Here is yet another definition, this time put together by the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia:

1) Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

2) Islam is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

3) Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.

4) Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilisations'.

5) Islam is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage.

6) Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand.

7) Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

8) Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal.

Clearly none of these accusations are racist -- indeed, no particular races are mentioned -- and most are either antithetical ("Hostility toward Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices toward Muslims") or self-evidently true, e.g., the charge that Islam is a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage. The commissioners for some reason deny this, apparently unaware that Islam's founder was an eminent military and political leader. Similarly the suggestion that Islam is not a monolithic bloc was refuted during the Danish cartoon kerfuffle when Muslims from all nations and sects came together as one to denounce the publication of editorial cartoons depicting Le Prophete Mahomet.

Another of the preceding sub-definitions (e.g., that "Islam is seen as inferior to the West") stupidly contrasts a specific religion with a geopolitical, historical and cultural entity. Perhaps the commissioners meant to say that the Middle East is seen as inferior to the West, or Islam is seen as inferior to Christianity or secularism? Whatever the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia meant it was unable to articulate it, which is not surprising considering its finished product. As for Islam being a barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist religion, what else would one call the traditions of forced marriage, the stoning of gays, genital mutilation, the murder of apostates, etc., etc.?

THE CHARGE OF Islamophobia invariably sends the government and police into a panic. This summer the Islamic Human Rights Commission accused British TV network Channel 4 with "Islamophobia" and stirring up racial hatred after it broadcast a documentary titled Undercover Mosque. In the film an investigative journalist secretly recorded the strange goings on at the Green Lane mosque in Birmingham, England, including fanatical imams condemning democracy, opposing integration, and praising the Taliban for killing coalition troops.

In one of history's great ironies, the local police and the Crown Prosecution Service first considered charging the radical imams portrayed in the film with criminal incitement. But after concluding that no crime had been committed, the government decided to charge the investigative journalists instead. Real life does not get any more surreal than this.

Government officials claimed the documentary "distorted" the truth, employed "selective quoting," and used words and phrases "out of context." It is unclear how the filmmakers misrepresented Dr. Ijaz Mian's statement that "You cannot accept the rule of the kaffir [derogatory term for non-Muslim]. We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the other." Or Abu Usamah's remark that "We hate the Kaffir! Whether those kaffir are from the UK or the US!" But then as Andrew Anthony speculated in the Observer, perhaps Messrs Mian and Usamah were innocently rehearsing for a stage play.

Maryam Namazie, spokesperson of the Council of ex-Muslims of Britain, has argued that the UK media has been too soft in its coverage of Islam. The political Islamist movement in Britain and Europe, she says, has engineered a "victim status," whereby criticism of Islam is being equated to racism against Muslims. "Criticizing a belief is not racism, it is not the case that Muslims are being vilified." Meanwhile the attitude in Britain, according to Channel 4's Kevin Sutcliffe, has degraded into one of "if you don't like the message shoot the messenger."

The upshot is that if you offend the Muslim community, you will suffer for it -- if not via death threats, then by lawsuits, fines or the loss of a broadcasting license. In this atmosphere it would seem prudent to simply keep your mouth shut. Happily a few journalists are still willing to risk threats, criminal prosecution and their careers to discover the truth.

LINK

[Captain Liger 0]

I hate islam and the people who practice it. There... I said it.

[bojack34 2]

I guess I'm a racist.

[TexasTiger 13,031]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Either way, I choose not to cower down to islam. The UK wants to. Will we?

Overplaying the Race Card

By Christopher Orlet

Published 9/4/2007 12:07:10 AM

Best to get this out of the way from the start: Islam is a religion and a religious ideology, not a race, therefore the recurrent charge that Islam's critics are racist is nothing more than a thin smokescreen.

Yet this truism is repeatedly rejected by Muslim spokesmen. Visit the Islamophobia Watch website and you will find among the many attempts at a definition (e.g. "the fear or hatred of Islam") this qualification:

[T]he term "Islamophobia" does not adequately express the full range and depth of antipathy towards Islam and Muslims in the West today. It is an inadequate term. A more accurate expression would be "anti-Islamic racism" for it combines the elements of dislike of a religion and active discrimination against the people belonging to that religion.

Doubtless"active discrimination against the people belonging to [a] religion" is repellant, but it is not racist. You may be anti-Islamic or anti-Christian or anti-Judaic, or like the journalist Christopher Hitchens anti-religion in toto, and still have a profound respect for all races. Indeed the equation of religion and race has long been the favorite hobbyhorse of genuine racists. Were not the Nazis adamant that Jewry was both a religion and -- first and foremost -- a race?

It is easy to understand this fixation with race. The race card is the most effective way to silence critics and undermine the credibility of one's opponent. When legitimate debate fails cry racism. In this way Muslims piggyback on the legitimate animosity toward racial bigotry.

Definitions of Islamophobia seem likely to multiply until they encompass every activity short of looking askance at a Muslim. Here is yet another definition, this time put together by the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia:

1) Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.

2) Islam is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.

3) Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.

4) Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilisations'.

5) Islam is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage.

6) Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand.

7) Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.

8) Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal.

Clearly none of these accusations are racist -- indeed, no particular races are mentioned -- and most are either antithetical ("Hostility toward Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices toward Muslims") or self-evidently true, e.g., the charge that Islam is a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage. The commissioners for some reason deny this, apparently unaware that Islam's founder was an eminent military and political leader. Similarly the suggestion that Islam is not a monolithic bloc was refuted during the Danish cartoon kerfuffle when Muslims from all nations and sects came together as one to denounce the publication of editorial cartoons depicting Le Prophete Mahomet.

Another of the preceding sub-definitions (e.g., that "Islam is seen as inferior to the West") stupidly contrasts a specific religion with a geopolitical, historical and cultural entity. Perhaps the commissioners meant to say that the Middle East is seen as inferior to the West, or Islam is seen as inferior to Christianity or secularism? Whatever the Commission on British Muslims and Islamophobia meant it was unable to articulate it, which is not surprising considering its finished product. As for Islam being a barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist religion, what else would one call the traditions of forced marriage, the stoning of gays, genital mutilation, the murder of apostates, etc., etc.?

THE CHARGE OF Islamophobia invariably sends the government and police into a panic. This summer the Islamic Human Rights Commission accused British TV network Channel 4 with "Islamophobia" and stirring up racial hatred after it broadcast a documentary titled Undercover Mosque. In the film an investigative journalist secretly recorded the strange goings on at the Green Lane mosque in Birmingham, England, including fanatical imams condemning democracy, opposing integration, and praising the Taliban for killing coalition troops.

In one of history's great ironies, the local police and the Crown Prosecution Service first considered charging the radical imams portrayed in the film with criminal incitement. But after concluding that no crime had been committed, the government decided to charge the investigative journalists instead. Real life does not get any more surreal than this.

Government officials claimed the documentary "distorted" the truth, employed "selective quoting," and used words and phrases "out of context." It is unclear how the filmmakers misrepresented Dr. Ijaz Mian's statement that "You cannot accept the rule of the kaffir [derogatory term for non-Muslim]. We have to rule ourselves and we have to rule the other." Or Abu Usamah's remark that "We hate the Kaffir! Whether those kaffir are from the UK or the US!" But then as Andrew Anthony speculated in the Observer, perhaps Messrs Mian and Usamah were innocently rehearsing for a stage play.

Maryam Namazie, spokesperson of the Council of ex-Muslims of Britain, has argued that the UK media has been too soft in its coverage of Islam. The political Islamist movement in Britain and Europe, she says, has engineered a "victim status," whereby criticism of Islam is being equated to racism against Muslims. "Criticizing a belief is not racism, it is not the case that Muslims are being vilified." Meanwhile the attitude in Britain, according to Channel 4's Kevin Sutcliffe, has degraded into one of "if you don't like the message shoot the messenger."

The upshot is that if you offend the Muslim community, you will suffer for it -- if not via death threats, then by lawsuits, fines or the loss of a broadcasting license. In this atmosphere it would seem prudent to simply keep your mouth shut. Happily a few journalists are still willing to risk threats, criminal prosecution and their careers to discover the truth.

LINK

[TDAuburn 2]

I've started my own religion... it's called TDAuburnism. Anyone that doesn't believe in TDAuburnism is an infidel. Our religious leaders have declared we must kill all infidels. What, I'm not welcome in this country?

It's not Islam, or the countries that practice it... it's the fact that they want to kill all of us. That's not being intolerant or racist... it's called survival.

[Tigermike 3,055]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist? Islam is practiced by millions and by all ethnic groups. Islam is not restricted to any ethnic group is it?

I detest cooked spinach but I am not a farmer racist.

In fact I would go so far to say that anyone who practices Islam is a racist. With that fact in mind it is surprising that dims wouldn’t be for the war just to defeat racism.

rac·ism -–noun

1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.

3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racist

But this pretty much sums up my thoughts on democrats. “,,,,,,,,why should millions of plainly deluded folks be allowed to sink the civilized world, in the face of clear and present danger?”

[CCTAU 3,350]

I think he means by my comments on other threads. (hence the :poke) I do not shy away from being proud of who I am. I am not ashamed of being born white. I do not hold it against anyone else that they are not. I do however feel that if they use the fact that they are not of majority color to get special treatment, that it is wrong. In todays world, if you say anything not in agreement with another race, you are automatically racist.

As far as islam goes, it is not a race thing, but a religion thing. Therefore, how can it EVER be racist to not like islam?

And I totally agree with this:

But this pretty much sums up my thoughts on democrats. “,,,,,,,,why should millions of plainly deluded folks be allowed to sink the civilized world, in the face of clear and present danger?”

Even though it makes me racist against dimocrats.....

[AURaptor 1,126]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

No, TT, YOU might have concluded that anyone who doesn't fully accept every religion ( except Christianity ) and embraces diversity, no matter what, is a racist, but that doesn't make it so. That would be the general m.o. of most Libs, at least. However, as the article correctly points out, Islam isn't a race, so by definition alone, one can't be a racist merely for hating Islam.

[FootballFanatic 4]

I detest Mormanism but it hasn't developed the amount of violence in the last 30 years that Islam has.

Of course, there is no religion spared the pointing finger of violence and hatred. Christianity spent 100's of years terrorizing foreign people and forcing itself on them with the idea of being the one true religion.

Weather you agree or disagree with christianity as the correct religion, it still forced its beliefs on millions of people at the point of a sword or musket.

Grey area is a pita because its always hard to deal with when you have a resolute position.

[AURaptor 1,126]

I detest Mormanism but it hasn't developed the amount of violence in the last 30 years that Islam has.

Of course, there is no religion spared the pointing finger of violence and hatred. Christianity spent 100's of years terrorizing foreign people and forcing itself on them with the idea of being the one true religion.

Weather you agree or disagree with christianity as the correct religion, it still forced its beliefs on millions of people at the point of a sword or musket.

The difference between Islam & Christianity is that the latter has gone through a reformation period, while Islam is still pretty much stuck in the 1200's. And while it's all well and good to bring up the atrocities done in the name of Christianity in the past, we're living in the present, which makes Islam's terrorism all the more relevent.

While the religion of Mormanism seems ridiculous to me personally, those I've known are decent folk. A bit kooky, but still nice.

I have no idea what the " Grey area is a pita" comment was suppose to mean.

[TexasTiger 13,031]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist?

I never said it did. I just said it's not exactly like the verdict is still out on whether or not he's racist. He's said he won't vote for man because he's black. Most reasonable people recognize that as racist. So for him to ask the question, "Does this make me racist?" is really moot at this point.

[bojack34 2]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist?

I never said it did. I just said it's not exactly like the verdict is still out on whether or not he's racist. He's said he won't vote for man because he's black. Most reasonable people recognize that as racist. So for him to ask the question, "Does this make me racist?" is really moot at this point.

I have put up with your lies long enough. Now why don't you be a man and show one thread where I said I would'nt vote for a man because he his black. I would vote for J.C. Watts in a heartbeat. Get your crap straight before you make another post about me. I said I would'nt vote for Obama because I believe the church he is a member of practices racism.

[TexasTiger 13,031]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist?

I never said it did. I just said it's not exactly like the verdict is still out on whether or not he's racist. He's said he won't vote for man because he's black. Most reasonable people recognize that as racist. So for him to ask the question, "Does this make me racist?" is really moot at this point.

I have put up with your lies long enough. Now why don't you be a man and show one thread where I said I would'nt vote for a man because he his black. I would vote for J.C. Watts in a heartbeat. Get your crap straight before you make another post about me. I said I would'nt vote for Obama because I believe the church he is a member of practices racism.

Hey, nutjob-- learn to follow a thread. I've put up with your craziness long enough. I was replying to CCTAU, Mr. Hypersensitive.

Why don't you be a man and apologize?

[bojack34 2]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist?

I never said it did. I just said it's not exactly like the verdict is still out on whether or not he's racist. He's said he won't vote for man because he's black. Most reasonable people recognize that as racist. So for him to ask the question, "Does this make me racist?" is really moot at this point.

I have put up with your lies long enough. Now why don't you be a man and show one thread where I said I would'nt vote for a man because he his black. I would vote for J.C. Watts in a heartbeat. Get your crap straight before you make another post about me. I said I would'nt vote for Obama because I believe the church he is a member of practices racism.

Hey, nutjob-- learn to follow a thread. I've put up with your craziness long enough. I was replying to CCTAU, Mr. Hypersensitive.

Why don't you be a man and apologize?

Ok, I must apologize TT. I remember you and I having this conversation on a previous thread about Obama and I, Hell I don't know what I was thinking. I think I need to get some sleep.

[TexasTiger 13,031]

I thought you already had agreed that you were racist. I'm not sure we are still looking for evidence.

Just for clarification how does his asking the question “If I detest Islam, am I a racist?” make him a racist?

I never said it did. I just said it's not exactly like the verdict is still out on whether or not he's racist. He's said he won't vote for man because he's black. Most reasonable people recognize that as racist. So for him to ask the question, "Does this make me racist?" is really moot at this point.

I have put up with your lies long enough. Now why don't you be a man and show one thread where I said I would'nt vote for a man because he his black. I would vote for J.C. Watts in a heartbeat. Get your crap straight before you make another post about me. I said I would'nt vote for Obama because I believe the church he is a member of practices racism.

Hey, nutjob-- learn to follow a thread. I've put up with your craziness long enough. I was replying to CCTAU, Mr. Hypersensitive.

Why don't you be a man and apologize?

Ok, I must apologize TT. I remember you and I having this conversation on a previous thread about Obama and I, Hell I don't know what I was thinking. I think I need to get some sleep.

No problem, brother. Sweet dreams-- may visions of Auburn touchdown celebrations dance in your head.

[autiger4life 3]

It's not Islam, or the countries that practice it... it's the fact that they want to kill all of us. That's not being intolerant or racist... it's called survival.

Okay, before we all sound like a bunch of bumbling idiots lets keep in mind the Muslims who want to kill us are a small sect of Islam, not the religon. I know everyone is going to start saying how all Muslims hate us and all of that but it just isn't true. A lot of middle easterners may hate us but that is for our politics and wars, not our religon. So though I don't think you are a racist for hating Muslim's I do think you are characterizing a lot of people based off of a small group of people.

I'll put it like this. I am sure we can all think of some people who call themselves Christians who we would never want to represent Christianity. Heck, Eric Rudolph bombed the abortion clinics in the name of God and a lot of people supported that. That is a pretty similar thing, bombed innocent people. I sure hope that no one thinks that he is what a Christian is.

I guess the other part to my post is this: if we all hate Muslims because they aren't God fearing people who believe in our Bible and our God, then isn't it kinda slapping God in the face since he told us to love everyone and show everyone compassion especially our enemies? I am not trying to question anyones faith, but I don't think we are doing God or Christianity a favor by hating these people, instead we are turning them off to Christianity which is the opposite of our goal.

[quietfan 233]

It's not Islam, or the countries that practice it... it's the fact that they want to kill all of us. That's not being intolerant or racist... it's called survival.

Okay, before we all sound like a bunch of bumbling idiots lets keep in mind the Muslims who want to kill us are a small sect of Islam, not the religon. I know everyone is going to start saying how all Muslims hate us and all of that but it just isn't true. A lot of middle easterners may hate us but that is for our politics and wars, not our religon. So though I don't think you are a racist for hating Muslim's I do think you are characterizing a lot of people based off of a small group of people.

I'll put it like this. I am sure we can all think of some people who call themselves Christians who we would never want to represent Christianity. Heck, Eric Rudolph bombed the abortion clinics in the name of God and a lot of people supported that. That is a pretty similar thing, bombed innocent people. I sure hope that no one thinks that he is what a Christian is.

I guess the other part to my post is this: if we all hate Muslims because they aren't God fearing people who believe in our Bible and our God, then isn't it kinda slapping God in the face since he told us to love everyone and show everyone compassion especially our enemies? I am not trying to question anyones faith, but I don't think we are doing God or Christianity a favor by hating these people, instead we are turning them off to Christianity which is the opposite of our goal.

AMEN!

The only thing I would add is that actually Muslims DO believe in our God--for them, the God of Abraham, Moses and Jesus is also the God of Mohammed. (They do deny the divinity of Jesus Christ, but so do the Jews.)

As far as saying Islam is stuck in the Middle Ages...I sort of wish that were true. In the Middle Ages, most Islamic countries were more tolerant of the other religions (at least other "People of the Book"), more civilized, better educated and cleaner than any Christian kingdom in Europe.

[TDAuburn 2]

It's not Islam, or the countries that practice it... it's the fact that they want to kill all of us. That's not being intolerant or racist... it's called survival.

Okay, before we all sound like a bunch of bumbling idiots lets keep in mind the Muslims who want to kill us are a small sect of Islam, not the religon. I know everyone is going to start saying how all Muslims hate us and all of that but it just isn't true. A lot of middle easterners may hate us but that is for our politics and wars, not our religon. So though I don't think you are a racist for hating Muslim's I do think you are characterizing a lot of people based off of a small group of people.

I'll put it like this. I am sure we can all think of some people who call themselves Christians who we would never want to represent Christianity. Heck, Eric Rudolph bombed the abortion clinics in the name of God and a lot of people supported that. That is a pretty similar thing, bombed innocent people. I sure hope that no one thinks that he is what a Christian is.

I guess the other part to my post is this: if we all hate Muslims because they aren't God fearing people who believe in our Bible and our God, then isn't it kinda slapping God in the face since he told us to love everyone and show everyone compassion especially our enemies? I am not trying to question anyones faith, but I don't think we are doing God or Christianity a favor by hating these people, instead we are turning them off to Christianity which is the opposite of our goal.

I'll ignore the bumbling idiots comment. But, fair enough... I understand it's a particular sect. That narrows the number to a group of muslims that want to kill all Christians. Still, this muslim sects Jihad, their belief, is to kill Christians. So, I'll amend my earlier statement.... " That's not being intolerant or racist (toward the particular sect of muslims that want to kill us and maybe cut off our head and show it on video)... it's called survival.

Yes, Eric Rudolph murdered people in the name of Christianity. The difference is that he was following his own sick mind... not the teachings of Christian faith.

Good point about loving your enemies... I struggle with that. Whether I love them or hate them, they want to kill me... therefore, survival is the correct word.

[Captain Liger 0]

What the hell ever. They ALL want you dead. ALL of them to include the ones that claim to be peaceful and the ones that aren't actively making bombs, emplacing bombs, contributing money to their cause and blowing themselves up in the name of Allah. I don't particularly care how many books you've read and how enlightened you think you are on the subject of Islam. When there's not one Christian left alive in this world the entire Muslim world will rise up and celebrate. But, please, continue to go to bat for those that aren't openly practicing and preaching jihad as I'll take comic relief any way I can get it.

[quietfan 233]

Yes, Eric Rudolph murdered people in the name of Christianity. The difference is that he was following his own sick mind... not the teachings of Christian faith.

Of course, one can argue that this is exactly what the Taliban, Al Quada, Osama Bin Ladin, et al, are doing--following their own sick interpretation of Islamic teachings. That doesn't make all Muslims murderers or terrorists.

The Koran preaches tolerance for other "Peoples of the Book", i.e., Jews & Christians. It also forbids the murder of innocents--unarmed civilians, women, children, etc. I don't know how Bin Ladin & Co. reconcile that with car bombs, suicide bombings, 9/11, etc., but like Eric Rudolf, they do not represent the true teachings of their religion, IMHO.

Why be intolerant of all Muslims because of the actions of a few psychos?

[FootballFanatic 4]

The difference between Islam & Christianity is that the latter has gone through a reformation period, while Islam is still pretty much stuck in the 1200's. And while it's all well and good to bring up the atrocities done in the name of Christianity in the past, we're living in the present, which makes Islam's terrorism all the more relevent.

While the religion of Mormanism seems ridiculous to me personally, those I've known are decent folk. A bit kooky, but still nice.

I have no idea what the " Grey area is a pita" comment was suppose to mean.

The Grey area is a Pita comment is basically a statement refering to the idea that Islam itself is a detestable religion. Its not as cut and dry as that.

People overplay much of the negatives of Islam and down play the good. If you look at the bible right now and are making effort to shed a bad light on Christianity you can easily find numerous points of attack that would cast a horrible light on the Christian.

The only difference between Islam and Christianity is the $$ the people who practice it have.

Look at this country, the more rural and economically depressed the Christian the more extreme his religious views. The oddest and most diehard nutjobs are from extremely rural economically depressed areas. The Islamists that focus on the negatives and use violence to push their views are the often coming from a finaincially depressed region or background.

Basic human survival determines much of a persons outlook on life. The more money and opportunities you have the less you feel like doing harm. Poor people blame others for their hardships, rich people look inward for their errors. Its a basic behavioral science.

Our religious reform came about when our society began to prosper financially. Europe was benefitting from brisk trade and exploration of the world. Education became more and more common as the middle class began to learn to read. The world was growing. The Middle East still spent much of the last 200 years embroiled in wars and conflict within their own lands.

The problem with Islam isn't soley the religion, its the entire financial and social status amongst those who follow Islam.

The problem is a huge gray area where not one issue can be focused on to fix the problem. Unfortunately there are too many people with hate and anger that are using the Koran to incite violence. Its unfortunate and sad but in reality its no different than the Catholic church giving papal pardons to the soldiers going to take jerusalem so the sins they commit in taking the land were forgiven. Those soldiers committed horrible attrocities in the name of god.

Things are never as cut and dry as they seem.

[Captain Liger 0]

Why be intolerant of all Muslims because of the actions of a few psychos?

Because deep down they're all psycho; it's only a minority of them that act upon their psychotic beliefs. There's a great deal of power and persuasion within the Muslim community. If there's something going on within it that the majority doesn't like then it doesn't take long for effective solution to take place and curb it. The Muslim community at large has the power to stop these idiots from flying planes into buildings and blowing themselves up in crowded markets but they do NOTHING about it. They sit idly by and watch. Until these so called "peaceful" Muslim leaders actually step up and take charge and espouse the "peace" they are so adamant about I will never respect them and I certainly will never be "tolerant" of them. Islam is a sham religion but they demand worldwide that you non-believers respect them and their God (remember the political comic?). They also preach against consuming alcohol. I've seen so many drunk Muslims I can't keep count of how many I've run across. Homemade liquor is always for sale in Baghdad and the duty free shop at the airport there has it in plain view. Give me a freaking break. If they're not going to follow that rule then why follow what is written about accepting "peoples of the book?"

Some of you can believe what you want but I'm warning you, you're playing with fire by being so accepting of these people. Better to keep your distance, trust me.

[CircleDrill 178]

Islam is not a race. Hate Islam all you want, and you are not a racist.

Whether you are a bigot is debateable. Not judging, just clarifying the definitions.

Ask yourself a couple of questions: What have predominantly Islamic countries contributed to the world other than natural resources (which come from nature and not Islam) in the past 2000 years? Who was Mohammed?

I struggle to answer the first question. I am not educated enough to do so, but there may be someone here who can.

The second answer is that Mohammed basically had two "phases" to his life. A prophet phase, then a warrior phase. It is the warrior stuff that is troubling. Some historians have proposed that he lost his mind and went mad during this time. One thing is for sure, it is full of hate.

I am not an Islamic expert. If I am mistaken, please correct me.

[AUman43 5]

The real problem is that Islam is so INTOLERANT of other religions and are OBLIGATED to "whack" all non-believers in Islam. Winston Churchill predicted future problems with this religion in the 1920's or 1930's in a paper he wrote. Apparently Christians have learned the live with their sectarian differences and just go their separate ways in their separate churches. Mulsims have not! BTW, I suppose I'm a racist as well..

[quietfan 233]

What have predominantly Islamic countries contributed to the world other than natural resources (which come from nature and not Islam) in the past 2000 years?

Well, going back about 1400 years, to the life of Mohammed, they gave us algebra, "zero" as a place-holder in the modern decimal system, the foundations of modern optics, considerable discoveries in astronomy, and advances in medicine and metallurgy. Besides inventing and giving Europe all of those things, they also were the conduit through which Chinese discoveries like paper, gunpowder, and the compass reached Europe. Ditto for the game of chess from India. And finally, they were a priceless source of historical records, science, and literature from the ancient Greeks and Romans that had been lost to Europe during the Dark Ages.

And while the Roman church was telling an illiterate Europe that only the priest should have access to the Bible and only in obscure Latin, the great Islamic Empires (Ottoman, Abbasids, Muslim Spain) were instituting the beginnings of universal literacy in the belief that every Believer should be able to read the Prophet's words for him/herself.

On the other hand, I can certainly understand a little sense of "What have they done for us lately?", since it does seem like for the last few centuries they've only exported oil, dates, antiquities, and terrorism. (Of course, the antiquities of West's museums were frequently just stolen rather than voluntarily exported.)