X. Benedict Posted December 7, 2006 Share Posted December 7, 2006 Given the history of Islam, I'd have to disagree with your inclusion of it in that assertion. Mohammed claimed to receive messages from Gabriel at a point in his life where he was a modestly successful trader. From what I know, this wasn't a counter action to any injustice percieved or otherwise. I can't begin to say he did or did not speak with an angel, but there is no evidence to support your claim that the religion was founded as a reaction to violence or oppression. The first bit of conflict seems to have come when Mohammed was telling the Meccan's that their god's were false and they apparently didn't care for that. He got scared, fled to Medinia and got together some worshippers. He was pretty pissed at the way he was treated in Mecca and plotted revenge against them while slowly gaing power in Medina. While in Medina he preached tolerance but the proclaimed jews should be killed as they openly began to call him out about his contradictory teachings. So, he had all the jews in medina killed. Swell guy. All the while he was organizing raids on Meccan caravans, of which he supposedly led a great number. Then there were some peace treaties with the Meccans to allow the pilgrimage (which was a pagan tradiotn prior to Mohammed incorporating it into Islam... wow, just like Christmas! Nice!) but then once he was powerful enough, he broke the treaty and was basically in control of most Arab tribe. Then he died. 859975[/snapback] I don't think there is necessarily a contradiction. The genesis of Muhammed's community was in stark opposition to the dominant culture of Mecca, his original community is said to include women, junior sons, and those outside of the tribute economy of Mecca. I am no islamist expert, but the early community of islam would fit into the context of being a social revolution even in secular terms apart from any Revelation that the Guy-not-to-be-cartooned experienced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I don't think there is necessarily a contradiction. The genesis of Muhammed's community was in stark opposition to the dominant culture of Mecca, his original community is said to include women, junior sons, and those outside of the tribute economy of Mecca. I am no islamist expert, but the early community of islam would fit into the context of being a social revolution even in secular terms apart from any Revelation that the Guy-not-to-be-cartooned experienced. 860010[/snapback] A context similar to the one Jesus arose out of, if many scholars are to be believed. In particular, the oppression of women by religion seems to really arise out of social and political power plays much more than the religion itself. To that effect, religion is a tool rather than a basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I don't think there is necessarily a contradiction. The genesis of Muhammed's community was in stark opposition to the dominant culture of Mecca, his original community is said to include women, junior sons, and those outside of the tribute economy of Mecca. I am no islamist expert, but the early community of islam would fit into the context of being a social revolution even in secular terms apart from any Revelation that the Guy-not-to-be-cartooned experienced. 860010[/snapback] But that isn't necessarily a response to oppression as much as it is Mohammed being savvy enough to try and attract the disenfranchised to his cause. He'd take anyone who listened, including a bunch of criminals and thugs who helped him to carry out violent actions such as caravan raids, beheadings and assassinations. Heck, he killed poets who were critical of him in their prose. Then if the word of God was in conflict with his actions, Mohammed would luckily have more revelations that would make his actions acceptable again. I guess what I'm getting at is that Islam wasn't so much the result of people being oppressed as it was someone making a power grab for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 It's great to see that the lessons of political correctness, multiculturalism and moral equivalence have taken hold of some of you. Why is it that whenever one cites a CURRENT DAY atrocity in the name of islam, apologists come out of the woodwork to dredge up the evils committed in the name of other religions (especially the most evil of them all - Christianity!) that occurred over a millennium ago? Are you all channeling chicot now? (BTW, the article is not about "conversion", it's about BEHEADING people - muslims in particular - who get lax in their devotion!) In the eyes of the Left, no matter what horrors are committed by muslims, they can be excused because the imperialist West and Christianity are always, always more intrinsically evil. How will islam ever experience any kind of reformation when its worst practices are glossed over and dismissed as a "cultural thing" and no collective pressure or condemnation from the rest of the world is exerted to shag their asses out of a 7th century mentality? Make no mistake: stoning, beheading, and burning people alive are not quaint little cultural quirks akin to the Amish use of horse and buggy, folks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 It's great to see that the lessons of political correctness, multiculturalism and moral equivalence have taken hold of some of you.Why is it that whenever one cites a CURRENT DAY atrocity in the name of islam, apologists come out of the woodwork to dredge up the evils committed in the name of other religions (especially the most evil of them all - Christianity!) that occurred over a millennium ago? Are you all channeling chicot now? (BTW, the article is not about "conversion", it's about BEHEADING people - muslims in particular - who get lax in their devotion!) In the eyes of the Left, no matter what horrors are committed by muslims, they can be excused because the imperialist West and Christianity are always, always more intrinsically evil. How will islam ever experience any kind of reformation when its worst practices are glossed over and dismissed as a "cultural thing" and no collective pressure or condemnation from the rest of the world is exerted to shag their asses out of a 7th century mentality? Make no mistake: stoning, beheading, and burning people alive are not quaint little cultural quirks akin to the Amish use of horse and buggy, folks! 860199[/snapback] Maybe if you weren't so shrill it would be easier to have this discussion with you. As it is, it doesn't appear you're interested in one. You're interested in broadcasting a point that 1) you've already repeated ad nauseum here, and 2) you are not interested in having challenged. So why post it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Because people have their heads in the sand and fail to see thatwe are at war with these islamofascists. Did you hear Bush yesterday? The parallels to pre WWII are uncanny. The s**t will hit the fan soon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Because people have their heads in the sand and fail to see thatwe are at war with these islamofascists. 860258[/snapback] Then maybe we should learn how to fight them and stop prosecuting this war like blithering idiots. And that includes not alienating a majority of the one billion people who practice Islam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Maybe if you weren't so shrill 860233[/snapback] "Shrill???" Please specifically point out what in my comment qualifies as "shrill"? You're interested in broadcasting a point that 1) you've already repeated ad nauseum here... 860233[/snapback] While the overall topic is the same [that islam, The Religion of Peace™, is committing atrocity after atrocity after atrocity the world over, while the mainstream media largely ignores it], each incident is unique - and islam seems to provide an unending stream of material. 2) you are not interested in having challenged. 860233[/snapback] Challenged? I cited a news article and let it speak for itself. What specifically is being challenged? Are you challenging whether or not the article is true? So why post it?860233[/snapback] Gee, I don't know... perhaps to see if anyone is bright enough to see a CONSISTENT PATTERN here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 It's great to see that the lessons of political correctness, multiculturalism and moral equivalence have taken hold of some of you.Why is it that whenever one cites a CURRENT DAY atrocity in the name of islam, apologists come out of the woodwork to dredge up the evils committed in the name of other religions (especially the most evil of them all - Christianity!) that occurred over a millennium ago? Are you all channeling chicot now? (BTW, the article is not about "conversion", it's about BEHEADING people - muslims in particular - who get lax in their devotion!) In the eyes of the Left, no matter what horrors are committed by muslims, they can be excused because the imperialist West and Christianity are always, always more intrinsically evil. How will islam ever experience any kind of reformation when its worst practices are glossed over and dismissed as a "cultural thing" and no collective pressure or condemnation from the rest of the world is exerted to shag their asses out of a 7th century mentality? Make no mistake: stoning, beheading, and burning people alive are not quaint little cultural quirks akin to the Amish use of horse and buggy, folks! 860199[/snapback] Your blabbering has no relevance to my post at all. In fact, if you had bothered to read it, I made a parallel between the actions of a few in power during Christianity and the actions of the extremists (who are not the majority of muslims) of whats occurring with Islam at the present time. Furthermore, I made the point that the extremists and the ones in power are overrepresented by talk/the media/etc. Yet you continue to do nothing but lump all of Islam together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 "Shrill???" Please specifically point out what in my comment qualifies as "shrill"? 860282[/snapback] I DON'T KNOW. Why don't YOU tell ME???[/Moose] While the overall topic is the same [that islam, The Religion of Peace™, is committing atrocity after atrocity after atrocity the world over, while the mainstream media largely ignores it], each incident is unique - and islam seems to provide an unending stream of material. 860282[/snapback] You post Yahoo's pickup of an AP wire, and the MSM is not reporting it. OK. Challenged? I cited a news article and let it speak for itself. What specifically is being challenged? Are you challenging whether or not the article is true? 860282[/snapback] I'm challenging your point, "IslamBad!", which is always your point, and you are not interested in having it challenged. Gee, I don't know... perhaps to see if anyone is bright enough to see a CONSISTENT PATTERN here? 860282[/snapback] Lord help us, we're not that bright. Thanks for showing us the way. IslamBad! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I DON'T KNOW. Why don't YOU tell ME???[/Moose] You post Yahoo's pickup of an AP wire, and the MSM is not reporting it. OK. I'm challenging your point, "IslamBad!", which is always your point, and you are not interested in having it challenged. Lord help us, we're not that bright. Thanks for showing us the way. IslamBad! 860287[/snapback] Well this does bring up some points. Can a religion be bad? Just because a large number of people practice it, and do so without causing violence, does that make it a "good" religion? One of my longstanding criticisms of Islam in general has been that I think a peaceful religion cannot be based upon the actions of an individual who is violent. I also believe that muslims who practice a peaceful variant are ignoring the violent and expansionist history of their religion (much like Jews and christians ignore the ugly parts of their respective scriptures). Everyone likes to cite the examples of other religions at this point, but this discussion is about one religion in particular. Kepp in mind that I'm not saying "ChristianityGood", but I'm trying to understand why people associate Islam with peace, when the actions of it's founder clearly indicate otherwise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 You post Yahoo's pickup of an AP wire, and the MSM is not reporting it. OK. I'm challenging your point, "IslamBad!", which is always your point, and you are not interested in having it challenged. Lord help us, we're not that bright. Thanks for showing us the way. IslamBad! 860287[/snapback] I said the mainstream media "largely ignores it", which it does. You won't see any of this on the network nightly news broadcasts. And you will read more articles about the "atrocities" of Gitmo than you will about Christian teachers in Thailand being burned alive. Lord help us, we're not that bright. Thanks for showing us the way. IslamBad! 860287[/snapback] You're welcome. Don't let your schooling interfere with your education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moose Posted December 8, 2006 Author Share Posted December 8, 2006 Your blabbering has no relevance to my post at all. 860286[/snapback] Whatever makes you think I was referring to your post? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Whatever makes you think I was referring to your post? 860305[/snapback] If not me, then who? AD? We were the only two pulling parallels to Christianity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 I said the mainstream media "largely ignores it", which it does. You won't see any of this on the network nightly news broadcasts. And you will read more articles about the "atrocities" of Gitmo than you will about Christian teachers in Thailand being burned alive. 860302[/snapback] News is about difference that makes a difference. The Gitmo situation makes a difference in American news because it is a story that includes direct American involvement. It will always get more press in the U.S. than a story about Christian teachers in Thailand or death squads in the Sudan, until there is either a U.S. link to it, or until the situation becomes just to big to ignore (in which case, it usually means the U.S. gov't is getting involved, or, barring that, Bono ). It's not that the less reported news is not important; or even that there's a news bias towards anything other than information that will garner greater audience interest, and generate more revenue for advertisers. Like it or not, the same capitalism we want to protect also drives a certain kind of reporting. Your time is being sold. If you want to change that you can start looking for alternative sources and this will be recognized. Many already have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 News is about difference that makes a difference. The Gitmo situation makes a difference in American news because it is a story that includes direct American involvement. It will always get more press in the U.S. than a story about Christian teachers in Thailand or death squads in the Sudan, until there is either a U.S. link to it, or until the situation becomes just to big to ignore (in which case, it usually means the U.S. gov't is getting involved, or, barring that, Bono ). It's not that the less reported news is not important; or even that there's a news bias towards anything other than information that will garner greater audience interest, and generate more revenue for advertisers. Like it or not, the same capitalism we want to protect also drives a certain kind of reporting. Your time is being sold. If you want to change that you can start looking for alternative sources and this will be recognized. Many already have. 860313[/snapback] I think the first part of your post needs to keep in mind the 2nd part more. Americans can relate better to Americans, which is why that type of news sells more. Even if something does involve the US overseas, unless it is negative or inexpensive news to produce, we will not hear about it. Any Islamic actions which are positive and peaceful with the US won't get much media time simply because of how the media works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Americans can relate better to Americans, which is why that type of news sells more. Even if something does involve the US overseas, unless it is negative or inexpensive news to produce, we will not hear about it. 860316[/snapback] Fine point. I think the first part of your post needs to keep in mind the 2nd part more. 860316[/snapback] You want a piece of me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chilly Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 You want a piece of me? 860322[/snapback] How bout we use that aggression go kick the offensive line's ass instead? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 It's great to see that the lessons of political correctness, multiculturalism and moral equivalence have taken hold of some of you.Why is it that whenever one cites a CURRENT DAY atrocity in the name of islam, apologists come out of the woodwork to dredge up the evils committed in the name of other religions (especially the most evil of them all - Christianity!) that occurred over a millennium ago? Are you all channeling chicot now? (BTW, the article is not about "conversion", it's about BEHEADING people - muslims in particular - who get lax in their devotion!) In the eyes of the Left, no matter what horrors are committed by muslims, they can be excused because the imperialist West and Christianity are always, always more intrinsically evil. How will islam ever experience any kind of reformation when its worst practices are glossed over and dismissed as a "cultural thing" and no collective pressure or condemnation from the rest of the world is exerted to shag their asses out of a 7th century mentality? Make no mistake: stoning, beheading, and burning people alive are not quaint little cultural quirks akin to the Amish use of horse and buggy, folks! 860199[/snapback] Uh, how about "THOSE WHO REFUSE TO LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT." As far as there being no collective condemnation from the rest of the world, that's certainly a factor but there's only so far you can push before the results are far worse than the initial reason you got involved in the first place. It's pretty close to the same thing as raising a teenager. The more you blather at them not to do something, the more likely they are to do it. No one has ever been able to handle freedom when they've had it thrust upon them. They have to earn it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yall Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 No one has ever been able to handle freedom when they've had it thrust upon them. They have to earn it. 860341[/snapback] A lot of people said that about the Japanese after WW2. They may be the exception (and granted it's not as though under the Emperor it was an entirely totalitarian regieme as we know it) but there was an underlying somewhat racist sentiment that those sandle wearing goldfish tenders wouldn't be able to handle democracy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts