My issue with Islam

[RCnal]

I want to start by prefacing the fact I am talking about Islam, and not Muslims.
It may seem strange to separate the two, but in reality there is a big separation.
It's easy to find posts and news against muslims anywhere. I feel muslim persecution is completely wrong. These are people too. Quite frankly if you live in North America, the odds of you ever meeting an extremist Muslim who lives in here is minuscule at best. Most muslims are peaceful, loving people. They are just like the Xtians who haven't read the whole bible, or if they have, they've simply glossed over the negative parts of it. Muslims tend to ignore all the calls for the death penalty in the Koran.

This is where the problem begins though. The Koran itself, much like the bible is a terrible book which has been sold as the word of god. Had these books simply been sold as literature, there wouldn't be much issue. However, that isn't the case.

So the Koran has 109 verses alone on holy war. What calls for it, ways to conduct it, and so on. It has misogyny, rape, pedophilia, and plenty of reasons to kill. Now for the 99.999% of people who read or are taught form the book, these points mostly go ignored. Just ask a Muslim about one of these verses and most likely the response given begins with a stutter, that stutter indicating they are digging for a way to either justify, or to move past this very glaring issue.

The big issue is that 0.0001% of people. I know it seems like a really small percentage, but with the population of Islam around 1.5 Billion people, that begins to cause a problem. Estimates by world wide intelligence agencies approximate the number of religious extremists who identify themselves as a part of one of the many extremists sects to be around 200,000 members. 200,000 out of 1.5 Billion. Very, very small percentage. So what's the issue?

Look at this from another perspective. I have a new cure all pill. It cures cancer, aids, you name it. There may be mild side effect, some people may even become slightly bigoted from it. However, guaranteed, 1 out of every 7500 people who take the pill will become a murderous lunatic who will kill anyone who doesn't conform to their ideals. So, out of 7500, most would be normal, some will be jerks, some become bigots, but only 1 will go on a rampage. On top of that, these people will seek out one another and form a group who's sole purpose is to eradicate anyone not like them. If this pill were real, would it ever see the light of day at your nearest drug store? Would you risk taking such a pill? That pill is the Koran. Most people are fine, some jerks, but 1 in 7500 become extremists.

For sure the bible has it's fair share of these very issues.
The koran, much like the bible, has built these fail safes into itself as to prevent people from asking questions. Just even thinking of it could be considered a sin and cause for punishment. It has even convinced millions of women that they are not the equals of men and should act accordingly. There is even a verse stating if a woman does not succumb to her husbands desire that she will be cursed that night.

At some point the world has to admit that these teachings are dangerous. There is just too much of a risk for someone to become an extremist when you have so many followers. Imagine if the Pope today came out and stated that Xtians should kill gay people, of course a majority of folks would ignore this command, but what of the bottom 1% of the geniuses who will follow word for word? Is it worth the risk?
Now what's the solution? Well, education would be best, but it's going to take a lot of work by the rest of the world to do so.

Thoughts, replies...

[Mr.Obvious]

Only reason and education can hope to pierce the dark void of ignorance.
And sadly these cannot be forced, only accepted. Therein lies the difficulty of progress.

[pr126]

Who is considered an extremist and why?

Where did you get the 0.0001% from?


http://youtu.be/g7TAAw3oQvg

[RCnal]

A consider an extremist anyone who follows the doctrine to the letter. The thing is with Islam, an extremist will be a killer, same for Xtians. There are several other religions which an extremist wouldn't be a murderer or a bigot. Take Jainism for example, they are complete pacifists. The extremists in that religion don't even eat meat byproducts, and are completely concerned with even accidentally killing insects. They believe all life is precious. The more moderate ones are vegetarians, and just go about their day without worrying about insects. Some of them aren't even vegetarians which people could consider them as a reformed type of Jain. There are a couple others like this.
An extremist muslim will want to punish anyone with death for apostasy, and all other non believers. I've argued this before, by a muslim, or xtian to not fully follow their doctrine to the letter means they are living in conflict with it. They are good people, but are in fact poor versions of muslim or xtian. The extremists are only doing what they are told to do in their holy texts. They don't actually believe they are doing evil, instead they are doing god's work.
There's my definition.

[pr126]

When "judging" Christianity, people here refer to the OT, and the worst chapters from it,  as if the NT has never existed.

In Islam it is impossible to make any changes to the religion because the Quran is the immutable word of Allah, and mere humans cannot alter is, modify it. It would be blasphemy punishable by death.

[Baruch]

Altering any holy text = death ... same for OT, same for NT.  If you chose to live in fear, you have already surrendered.

Holy texts aren't meant to be guides to proper behavior.  Lay people don't know this, because lay people are ... idiots.  The clergy knows this, because clergy aren't ... idiots.  There is an automatic disconnect between clergy and lay people over this.  Usually the clergy keep their mouth shut, move on, hopes the lay idiots move on to something else.  If clergy (the educated kind of course) were straight with the laity, they would be fired or killed.  Being clergy is like getting on the tiger.  The problem isn't getting on the tiger, the problem comes when you try to get off ;-)

So one can argue (literal interpretation) of text A is better than (literal interpretation) of text B.  Much of the NT is better than the Koran.  The Koran is very similar to the OT, it comes from similar people.  The NT wasn't written by illiterate fishermen from Galilee.  The clearest example of how it came about, are the trippy parts of the Gospel of Mary (of Mandala, Freudian slip).  People were doing this kind of thing in Boulder Colorado in the 60s-70s.  Peace, man.

[gentle_dissident]

The Koran itself, much like the bible is a terrible book which has been sold as the word of god. Had these books simply been sold as literature, there wouldn't be much issue. However, that isn't the case.

The company training manual should be free.

The clergy knows this, because clergy aren't ... idiots.

I was talking to a Christian missionary and other heavily dipped folks at Library Thing. I learned that the educated Christians are taking the whole Bible as allegory, except for the divinity of Jesus. They state that the lambs shouldn't be let in on this joke for their own good.

[RCnal]

Who is considered an extremist and why?

Where did you get the 0.0001% from?


http://youtu.be/g7TAAw3oQvg

I forgot which site I was on, the number of actual people the UN estimates is a part of extremist Islam is just around 200K. So taking 1.5 Billion, which is a ratio of 1/7500. If you have any updated sources I'd love to have them. I know the Muslim population is a number which is floated around to be between 1.5 and 1.7.

[Baruch]

Another point ... Muslims are not homogeneous.  No huge group is.  Indonesian Muslims are almost pacifist (because before they became Muslim, they were Buddhists and Hindus).  African-American Muslims are primarily African-American in terms of their problems.  Real Arab Muslims (Bin Laden being a perfect example) are the most WASP of WASP folks within Islam.

[pr126]

I forgot which site I was on, the number of actual people the UN estimates is a part of extremist Islam is just around 200K. So taking 1.5 Billion, which is a ratio of 1/7500. If you have any updated sources I'd love to have them. I know the Muslim population is a number which is floated around to be between 1.5 and 1.7.

The UN is run by the Islamic countries. The UN has become irrelevant a long time ago.
I would not put any credibility in their assessment.

We are quite happy repeating the panacea "Most Muslims Are Peaceful" ad nauseam.
And that's all we need to know. Go back to sleep.

[Nonsensei]

The UN is run by the Islamic countries. The UN has become irrelevant a long time ago.
I would not put any credibility in their assessment.

If a source refutes your views, its automatically invalidated because its controlled by the "enemy". No evidence required. After all, they said something you don't agree with so what further evidence do we need that they're wrong?

[pr126]

If a source refutes your views, its automatically invalidated because its controlled by the "enemy". No evidence required. After all, they said something you don't agree with so what further evidence do we need that they're wrong?

Applies to both sides.

[Nonsensei]

Applies to both sides.

Theres another tactic. If you can't refute a criticism, focus on bringing your opposition down to your level so the criticism is moot and you no longer have to address it.

[Baruch]

The UN is run by the Islamic countries. The UN has become irrelevant a long time ago.
I would not put any credibility in their assessment.

We are quite happy repeating the panacea "Most Muslims Are Peaceful" ad nauseam.
And that's all we need to know. Go back to sleep.

The UN was toast when the Soviet Union was given three votes in the General Assembly, and a permanent seat on the Security Counsel.  The Truman administration used the UN one time, and let it become irrelevant after Korea.  Letting Communist China in, in place of Taiwan, and on the permanent Security Counsel made it less relevant than the Senate of the Old Republic from Star Wars.  Might as well have made Jar Jar an ambassador ;-)  This is why you have SA as lead on the UN human rights counsel now ... shear absurdity.

[pr126]

Theres another tactic. If you can't refute a criticism, focus on bringing your opposition down to your level so the criticism is moot and you no longer have to address it.

I don't see why I should argue to you that the UN has become a useless organisation that is expensive to run, for selfish corrupt people whose whole ambition is to make a good living out of it.