Muslim pluralism problems

There is a way in which post-feminism America tends to be obsessed with "oppression of women" by Islam. Anything which would not please Bella Abzug is oppression. To be sure, poppression of women does happens in some Muslim countries.

But in many Muslim countries, it is simply the fact that women and men have different roles, something which was accepted even in America until the sixties.

If you look at the movie Keltoum's Daughter and by comparison Half Moon, you can see the enormous difference in the way in which women are treated in the two movies. Men seem quite harsh towards women in Keltoum's Daughter, an Algerian movie, but in Half Moon, a Kurdish-Iranian movie, a woman is one of the central figures and her singing plays an important role in the movie.

What are the right relations between men and women? I don't know but Americans should not take for granted that the "feminist truth" is the whole truth. What feminists say is only PART of the truth. Just for fun, look at

http://www.theonion.com/content/news/women_now_empowered_by_everything

Ahh...Islam, the religion of "peace."
Yes, if you're content to live in a 7th century mind-set and enjoy hacking your enemies to pieces and subjugating women, and if you insist that everyone else think and do exactly the same as you, then you can find peace as a Muslim.
=============
Ah, it is not so simple. Pakistan, Indonesia and Bangla Desh, all Muslim countries, have had woman heads of state. Where are the women heads of state in the US or France? Also, women outnumber men in Iranian universities. Things are complex and we need to keep open the dialog among different sorts of HUMANS.

Alientch said:

“They (Muslims) have to go back to the Crusades thousand years ago to justify their butchery.”

Muslims use the Crusades of thousand years ago as their pet peeve. They pretend not to be aware of the causes of those wars. They were a feeble and belated response by some Europeans to three hundred years of wanton assault on the Christian lands.

The first Crusade began in 1095… 460 years after the first Christian city was overrun by Muslim armies,457 years after Jerusalem was conquered by Muslim armies,453 years after Egypt was taken by Muslim armies, 443 after Muslims first plundered Italy, 427 years after Muslim armies first laid siege to the Christian capital of Constantinople, 380 years after Spain was conquered by Muslim armies,363 years after France was first attacked by Muslim armies, 249 years after Rome itself was sacked by a Muslim army, and only after centuries of church burnings, killings, enslavement and forced conversions of Christians.

The third crusade is going to be a duzzy !

Posted by: PIA9

--------------------------------

It's already here thanks to Lord Cheney on behalf of big oil, Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, Blackwater and AIPAC. The mention of Christians attacking Muslims or Jews attacking Muslims is Huckabee blasphemy.

No mention, of course, that "...religious discrimination, conflict and violence cut across all the world's religions affecting Muslim.." and other minorities in America where homophobia, hateful Huckabee/Palin religious intolerance, Catholics hiding criminal pedophile clergy and a push for "Christian" theocracy through divisive political and cultural wedge issues touted by RNC Fox News and Limbaugh propaganda are on the increase.

The day Donohue and O'Reilly Catholics and Huckabee "Christians" prohibit anyone else from using the name of Jesus is the day it will arrive here, too.

Abraham was the original Satan set out to destroy mankind with divisive religious differences.

InTheMiddle,

"Failing to recognize that human beings are spirtual beings as well as physical beings is irrational."

Wrong; refusing to believe something that most likely is not true is quite rational; mindlessly believing something that most likely is not true is irrational.

"If there is a spiritual realm..."

You demonstrate with that statement that you doubt your own beliefs.

Good for you--now go with it.

PSolus

Failing to recognize that human beings are spirtual beings as well as physical beings is irrational. If there is a spiritual realm, then we should seek to learn about it and our place in it.

HOGWASH ... I SAY HOGWASH

The Writer attempts to persuade us ALL whether we are Muslim, Hindu, Buddist, Atheist or Christian...

That there is NO RIGHT and NO WRONG !!!

That's like saying 2 + 2 = Any Number You Want it to BE !!

I Say Hogwash !!!

Wow, thanks for even having this blog. So many news agencies don't even want to discuss the issue. I wish some agency would research how many people have been killed in the last 30 years by jihadists and how many have been killed by budhist extremists and how many by christians. People tend to paint all extremists the same, but i don't think the body count is at all equal.

Wow, thanks for even having this blog. So many news agencies don't even want to discuss the issue. I wish some agency would research how many people have been killed in the last 30 years by jihadists and how many have been killed by budhist extremists and how many by christians. People tend to paint all extremists the same, but i don't think the body count is at all equal.

Christians, Muslims, & Jews all worship the same god. Yet their actions and attitudes argue against their dogma, much less his existence.

Their hatred for each other is a powerful argument for the existence of evil however.

Religion and power have always been a dangerous combination. On the Christian side, I cannot think of a single example where good has resulted when Christians have unchecked political power. This happens at the congregational level all the time, and gets magnified in terms of consequences the more power is actually wielded. So-called 'Christian' empires from Rome to Byzantium to the kingdoms of Western Europe and Russia decidedly do not reflect the ethics of the New Testament once spiritual authority and the power of the state become confused. We become, shockingly, just as repressive and intolerant as anybody else who aspires to political power, and have been known to use appalling means to preserve that power when it seems threatened. Christians at their worst have tended to be Christians in control, historically speaking. Especially when we begin to see it as our God-given call to enforce whatever the latest definition of 'true religion' might be. Orthodox, Roman Catholics and Protestants have all had their turn, and political power tends to bring out the worst in us all. Christians at their best have tended to be Christians in situations where access to power was limited and, because of the real threat of persecution, it became costly or dangerous to maintain Christian faith. I see the same dynamic at work in Islam, Judaism, Hinduism and even Buddhism. The same could be said for modern ideologies such as Marxism. There seems to be a perverse tendency shared by all around to feel threatened by a lack of conformity and to justify whatever means it takes to ensure the outward maintenance of whatever is considered orthodox. Even relativists will resort to astonishing displays of tyranny and repression when they perceive their power threatened by people who may hold more exclusivist or fundamentalist views, as any casual observer of politics in academic institutions can note. What is it about us as individuals and communities that conspires to make hypocrites of us all? In much of what I'm reading here, I hear a lot of self-justification going on. We reserve the right to assume the best about us and the worst about them. A little more realism on all sides would change the unfortunate tenor of these sorts of discussions. It might even force us to realize that it's not what 'they' are doing to 'us' that is ultimately the problem. Rather, the real problem appears to be what all of us are capable of, if just given the chance.

Here is an excellent example (and right here at WaPo) of someone who is starting to see the problem more clearly:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/11/AR2010011103063.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

"The case of Bayrak and her ilk also suggests the need for another kind of anti-terrorism strategy. Too often, we still consider public diplomacy to be a sort of public relations activity, the "promotion" of American values. Instead, we should think about it as an argument. The Bayraks and Balawis of this world are engaged in constant debates -- in Internet chat rooms, in the halls of publishing houses, in mosques. Are they hearing enough counterarguments? Are we helping the people who make the counterarguments? I suspect that they don't and I'm certain that we aren't -- nearly a decade after Sept. 11 -- and that has to change. Intellectuals may wear glasses and read books, but neither prevents them from throwing bombs -- or from strapping them inside their underwear. "

@KentuckyWoman2:
"But since these Muslim terrorists do not wish to play nice in the sandbox of life, then there has to be a way to isolate them and prevent them from doing harm to others, as they have expressed is their intent."

You go from trying to isolate the Muslim terrorists to wanting to isolate ALL Muslims, and the reason is simple because there is no way to isolate the terrorists easily. Now there are a billion plus Muslims on this planet, and an awful lot of them are very friendly and helpful towards us. There are an awful lot of very very genuinely good humans among the Muslims.

The problem is that the world is very small these days, and there is a civil war going on in Islam and we have been dragged into it and the modern weapons are very destructive. We can try but there is no way that I can see how we can stay out of this civil war of Islam. This war cannot be resolved by guns and bombs. Guns and bombs can only buy us time and minimize the amount of killings and deaths that the Jihadis want to wreck. However, this war can be won by making the Muslims among us and around the world confront the problems within Islam and dealing with the issues that it has with modernity.
What that means is that instead of trying to polite and PC and uttering gibberish like "Islam is peaceful" or "Islam has been hijacked" etc., we need to start treating the Muslims as adults and just like ourselves and speaking directly and frankly to them and holding them to civilized standards. Unfortunately, so far Europeans and even the American Governments have been giving into the violent blackmail of the Muslims and trying to avoid participating in an honest examination of Islam. If we want to win this war then we better engaging intellectually honestly with the Muslims and talking openly and honestly about what we think of Islam. Let the Muslims get used to the civil notion that no religion, ideology, or personality including their prophet is beyond honest examination and criticism.

And yes we do need a more intelligent policy of immigration and visas for Muslims outside USA than the insane policy of handing out "diversity immigration visas" to Yemenis as USA has been doing recently.

" It's much easier for the world to keep an eye on these Muslim terrorists if they are all located within one geographical area. If all non-Muslim countries of the world did this, they wouldn't have to worry about terrorism within their borders.

And we'd know where all the terrorists were, instead of wondering if we're living next door to one - or more.

POSTED BY: KENTUCKYWOMAN2 | JANUARY 11, 2010 11:29 PM
------------------

The muslims I have met did not try to hold me hostage, cut off my head, call me 'infidel', throw rocks at me, or anything like that. They were fairly civil people. They have a religious practice and belief system that I don't share, and they don't share mine, which is mainly that religion is a formalized version of superstition. I can't say as that I hang out with many muslims, don't hang out with that many christians for that matter, either. Matter of fact, I kind of tend to steer clear of organized religion, gods, and their respective fan clubs. I think everyone needs a hobby, and if yours is believing in the Invisible Man, well, more power to you. But, I'm not giving you any money, and your religious beliefs don't entitle you to run around bossing other people around, telling them how to live, killing them, or anything like that.
Whether you're religious or not, if you don't see the merit of respecting others, of living generally civilly among others, regardless of their beliefs and differences from your own, then you need to crack some books, and learn about the world, because there's one place that antagonism, violence, and religious feuding lead, and that's to war. There's a lot of devout people in the world, and I don't wish to offend them, but likewise, I don't wish to be persuaded by them, indoctrinated by them, or attacked by them. There's room in the world for heathens, too, and as long as they're otherwise happy with what goes on with these religious institutions, if the books balance for all that donation money, isn't going to buy guns or something overseas or here at home, then I'm all for the continuation of religion in society. But, in the event that people start getting wrapped around the axle about it, or wrapped around someone's finger, or whatever goes on there to deprive people of their normal cognitive abilities when they're under the influence, well, that's about the time that government, and the People, need to start studying the phenomenon, and find out just exactly what's going on, there, and who's trying to do what, in the name of the Invisible Man. If they can get you to believe in something intangible, what ELSE can they get you to do, with your hands, with your wallet, and so forth? Think for yourself, kind of keep one eye open while you're down on your knees, there, and remember that not all people that present themselves as clergy, clerics, and so on, are necessarily reputable, honest, or of good intention.

Excellent post by martymartel3. In the discussion about Islamic terrorism, the biggest bull in the china shop is the history of Islam in India and sadly most Westerners are almost ignorant of it, it appears. Not only is the reign of Islamic terror that lasted nearly ten centuries not well known outside India, but it's been suppressed ever since India gained independence by the leftist/socialist leaning Congress party which has been in power for all but about five years since independence.

Most Westerners know about the caste system practiced by Hindus. What they don't know is the super-caste system practiced by Muslims. When the Muslims arrived in India, they figured the local Kafirs were not "people of the book", they didn't have a messiah who revealed them the truth, so they decreed that their lives were expendable. After all there can only be one model for religion, a messiah carrying a message from God, any other school that considers that the ultimate Truth is self-evident ("While we consider these truths to be self-evident... ?") has to be crazy right ?

Islamic terror is not an aberration that's just a response to the situation in the middle-east. No, it's not a bug, it's a feature, a salient one.

anyone who has read even parts of the koran and can say that it is a peaceful religion can't possibly know what he or she has been reading. the koran says to 'kill the infidels'. it also says that 'no muslim should kill another muslim' - they don't live up to that one either. if jihads are done in 'the name of allah' - then, i say again - 'islam is not a peaceful religion'.

Well, my unpopular stance is that Islam is a violent religion and its members should be geographically isolated to ensure the safety of the rest of us.

In my perfect world, everyone should have the right to believe in the faith of their choice and practice it to the extent that they do not infringe upon the religious or civil rights of others.

But since these Muslim terrorists do not wish to play nice in the sandbox of life, then there has to be a way to isolate them and prevent them from doing harm to others, as they have expressed is their intent.

Since we cannot put Muslims in a cage, I think we should simply deport all foreign-born Muslims and refuse all foreign-born Muslims entry to the U.S.

Domestic, give all american-born Muslims the choice of staying here, but giving up the public practice of Islam, or leaving the country.

Tear down all the mosques, forbid public prayers, and forbid large gatherings of Muslims. Special permission can be given for weddings, etc., as long as a guest list is given to the local Homeland Security beforehand and each guest is checked by Homeland Security, who will also be present at any large gathering - whether it be a wedding, a funeral, a graduation, a family reunion, etc.

That might seem draconian, but I guarantee you that if we did this, we wouldn't have to worry about bombs on airplanes, or sleeper cells being activated within the U.S.

Terrorism would be severely curtailed.

It's much easier for the world to keep an eye on these Muslim terrorists if they are all located within one geographical area. If all non-Muslim countries of the world did this, they wouldn't have to worry about terrorism within their borders.

And we'd know where all the terrorists were, instead of wondering if we're living next door to one - or more.

Allah - The term Allāh is derived from a contraction of the Arabic definite article al- "the" and ʼilāh "deity, god" to al-lāh meaning "the [sole] deity, God" (ho theos monos).

Originally Jews like Arabs considered their god to be first among many gods - for the Jews it was Elohim and then in the time of Moses God reveal Himself as Yahweh or "I AM".

The notion of "I AM" includes the notion of Allah and after Jesus resurrection - St. Thomas the Apostle, calls Jesus "The only Lord, the Only God".

In english translations the Greek is usually translated to my Lord and my God. But a quick browse of a Greek to English dictionary shows the fuller meaning. Of course, Lord meant for the Jews Yahweh, the Holy name that they were not allowed to speak since it was so holy.

Judaism and Christianity both pre-date Islam and therefore any notions that are true about God can either be arrived at by pure logic as Aristotle, Xenophanes, and Plato did or come from the study of Jewish or Christian texts.

Both Christians and Jews believe in only one God - Christians three persons and Islam and Judaism one person.

Now if Muslims were reasonable people then this explanation might interest them and they might want to know more - but God has made his beloved muslim people very stubborn and so Christians and Muslims will be arguing and fighting it out until Our Lady of Fatima puts a stop to it.

Almost within living memory (a mere generation ago) there was widespread cannibalism and head-hunting among the Malay throughout the countries now known as Malaysia and Indonesia. The spread of Islam has not done a whole lot to improve the situation among that group.

Going back over 600 years Han Chinese led by Admiral He, a Moslem eunich reclaimed desolate land ~ some of it stripped bare right down to the rock by tsunami and volcanic action ~ and turned it into the base of operations for the great Chinese Treasure Fleet.

Admiral He's life is supposedly the basis for the stories of Sinbad the Sailor. Even now there are Malays who continue to dispute that claiming that he couldn't be a good Chinese and a good Moslem ~ which may be true, but he was both.

He was also quite courageous.

Without the Chinese presence throughout the archipelago it's quite likely the Malays would still be taking heads and hunting monkeys ~ and not much else.

It's Muslims who are attacking everybody around them and we have to work to understand them? WTF? They have to go back to the Crusades thousand years ago to justify their butchery. Yeah, maybe there is No God but God but Muhammad is definitely NOT his Prophet!

Esposito is a shill for the Saudi Arabian Islam. He is not an independent thinker, and he is not credible when analyzing Islam or Islamic civilization. He cannot afford to displease those who pay his bills.

@EdByronAdams:
"The ironic thing about the dispute over the word "allah" is that is not a Malay word, but an Arabic word but the Malays see multigenerational Han as "immigrants" and Arabic words as native. Go figure."

Not much to figure really. V. S. Naipaul figured it out nicely in his books Among the Believers, and Beyond Belief: Islamic Excursions among the Converted People. Islam is a very very effective Arab imperialism. The converted people reject their own civilisation and history and start dreaming of the sands of Arabia as sacred. Arabic is sacred because it is the language of the Quran, for the converted a muslim half way across the globe is closer and dearer than a Kaafir (non-muslim) biological father or brother. It really is as simple as that.

Ahh...Islam, the religion of "peace."

Yes, if you're content to live in a 7th century mind-set and enjoy hacking your enemies to pieces and subjugating women, and if you insist that everyone else think and do exactly the same as you, then you can find peace as a Muslim.

"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch."

Uh oh, I think that on that day I shall be stubble, because I doth do wickedly oft times; in fact, I doth done wickedly just 5 minutes ago.

"How exactly will that ban evolution?"

Maybe that's the reason why stupidity must self-destruct. There is really no way out from their idiocy but to self-destruct.

That is part of intelligent design. A self-cleansing intelligent design. The intelligent system will purge itself from things which is not functioning right.

In other words, evolution is designed to self-destruct along with idiotic false doctrines like false religions.

"For, behold, the day cometh, that shall burn as an oven; and all the proud, yea, and all that do wickedly, shall be stubble: and the day that cometh shall burn them up, saith the LORD of hosts, that it shall leave them neither root nor branch."

Mr. Esposito says" Regrettably, a significant number of Muslims, like very conservative and fundamentalist Christians and Jews, are not pluralistic but rather strongly exclusivist in their attitudes towards other faiths and even co-believers with whom they disagree." Regrettably the only religion killing people based on the teaching of their holy book is islam. Mr Esposito seems to be an apologist, shocking,

Seems to me the real issue is not one faith versus another, but intolerant extremists of all stripes against "the rest of us".

Not that long ago, those dudes that killed all those Jews considered themselves to be good Christians.

Strangely enough, there are numerous scriptures in the Old Testament that glorify violence every bit as much as anything in the Qur'an.

Every religion has its dysfunctional portions of scripture and its minority of dysfunctional adherents. Intolerance is the real enemy, no matter where it rears its head.

"Gag teachers who proudly proclaim that their great great grandpa was a chimp. Send them to the zoo instead to teach their cousin chimps about that."

How exactly will that ban evolution?

"Exactly how does one ban evolution?"

Gag teachers who proudly proclaim that their great great grandpa was a chimp. Send them to the zoo instead to teach their cousin chimps about that.

Is there a Muslim country at present who is NOT engaged in domestic turmoil over their Islamic values? Egypt is controlled, tightly controlled, by a virtual dictatorship that is fighting the Muslim Brotherhood who would bring Sharia Law to that country.
Saudi Arabia is also fighting it's own terrorists from within. Iraq, of course, is what Iraq is at the moment. Iran is also in turmoil over which interpretation of Islam should prevail. Jordan is also fighting it's internal terrorist enemies.
Palestine? Well, forever since 1948. Indonesia seems to be in a relative state of calm but they also are fighting those who would bring Sharia Law to their nation.
Pakistan is perhaps the most dangerous to all the rest of us because their internal troublemakers are after nuclear weapons in possession of the "state" government.
It seems the whole world of Islam is in upheaval. This is NOT the fault of the West or Christians or Jews or Bhuddists or Hindus.
Personally, I believe it is a consequence of Islamic people's conflict between any "state" government and the government of their God. They don't work together in the mind of a devoted Muslim. It has not helped, of course, that practically all the "state" governments have uniformly been corrupt and have followed the tenets of the Koran not at all. Except for denying women their human rights, in that, they are all in agreement.
It is a myth that the religion of Islam is a compassionately, passive, tolerant religion. It nurtures violence in the name of their aggrieved slights from the whole rest of the world. They see themselves as victims, and victims only, and they use their victimhood as an excuse for aggression towards everyone else.

"BANNING EVOLUTION AT ONCE, can actually prevent doomsday..."

Exactly how does one ban evolution?

And, are you talking about banning it retroactively, 3 to 4 billion years?

Muslims trying to force their Koran in this Country has a display of the thinking involved.

Attempted honor killing in Arizona: Muslim runs down daughter for becoming too "Westernized"
read more here:

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/10/attempted-honor-killing-in-arizona-muslim-runs-down-daughter-for-becoming-too-westernized.html

Terrorism (like this church burning), in different forms , will always be present with us unless the seeds of terrorism like false religions (Catholicism, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, Judaism, liberal Protestantism), gay marriage, fornication, DARWINIAN EVOLUTION, and atheism continue in their stupidity.

It's not gonna get better. The worst is still yet coming when the stupidity that I mentioned above will rear their very ugly heads.

The good news is that when these things self destruct, the days ahead will be a thousand years of peace.

Sadly for many people, which includes the liberal gay-marrying evolutionist (leftist democrat) parts of America, and America's (future) enemies around the world, that thousand year peace will only happen in their absence.

Stupidity is self-destructive and doomsday is a result of a world GONE MAD.

A single plant leaf is a solar cell, a battery, a food maker, an air cleaner, a medicine,etc ALL merged into one single leaf and yet THE IDIOTIC EVOLUTIONISTS CAN PROUDLY CLAIM THAT THERE IS NO INTELLIGENT DESIGN TO THAT.

And yet this kind of stupidity is taught around the world. Expect the worst as the fruit of that madness will consume them like a voracious wild animal or BEAST.

God is not at fault here. Man's destruction is SELF-INFLICTED.

BANNING EVOLUTION AT ONCE, can actually prevent doomsday but you can't let a crazy man cure himself. In other words, it's not going to happen until they self-destruct with their stupid doctrine.

It's nice that there's an endowed center for Muslim-Christian understanding at Georgetown University. But I have to wonder how many such endowed chairs exist at universities in Muslim-majority countries versus Christian-majority countries.

However, it should be noted that the idea of pluralism based on equality is a very new concept in human history and it remains to be seen if it can actually work. And of course it's pretty hypocritical for Americans to insist that Muslims need to be accepting of full rights for Christians and Jews in their countries, without also insisting that Jews be accepting of full rights for Muslims and Christians in Israel.

Duzzy- of all creation, the one and only person God looks up to, and obeys.

Let's all go to sensitivity training so as not to offend the decapitators and dictators of Islam. Yes, if there is another crusade, it will be a "doozy."

The third crusade is going to be a duzzy !

InTheMiddle,

I agree; simply believing any of the things that you list is irrational.

However, investigating and understanding how the world actually works, instead of simply believing the many superstitious beliefs that have been passed down over the centuries, is quite rational.

The Politically Correct police will not want to hear this but the truth is that the Qur'an is anti Jew and Christian. Therefore Isalm is the problem:

Sura 5:51:
“O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: they are but friends and protectors to each other. And he among you that turns to them for friendship is of them.” This friendship makes any Muslim a enemy of their own and deserving of the same fate as the unbeliever. This is because God does not guide an unjust people."

Sura 9:5
"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful."

WHO ARE THE IDOLATERS?

Sura 930-31
"And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah. That is their saying with their mouths. They imitate the saying of those who disbelieved of old. Allah (Himself) fighteth against them. How perverse are they! They take their priests and their anchorites to be their lords in derogation of Allah, and (they take as their Lord) Christ the son of Mary; yet they were commanded to worship but One Allah: there is no god but He. Praise and glory to Him: (Far is He) from having the partners they associate (with Him)."

Answer: Jew and Trinitarian Christians

Psolus:

I agree. Irrational beliefs such as 1) There is no Creator 2) One cell beings with the capacity for reproducing themselves came about by accident in a primordial puddle 3) Incredibly complex beings such as humans evolved through billions of mutations from these one cell beings. 4)Human beings who emit .01 percent of CO2 into the atmosphere are causing global warming as opposed to sun spots and other forces of nature.

Those are pretty irrational beliefs, I agree. But you are free to have them.

Espizoto:
You are not an impartial observer of the Islamic scene since you are bought and paid for by a Saudi prince.
An Arab proverb says”No one can make a dear out of a monkey”. No matter what you and other apologists claim, it is obvious to whoever had any sense that Islam is supremacist and exclusivist to the core. A vivid idea of how this cult looks at the Christians and Jews, not to mention the Hindus and Buddhists, just go through the Omar Pact.
http://www.bible.ca/islam/islam-kills-pact-of-umar.htm

The Muslimp rophet had on his deathbed asked his followers to “cleanse” the Arabian peninsula of Christians and Jews. This is the extent of hatred this man had for the other. Can you blame his followers for what they are doing in Egypt and Malaysia?

Muslim's attacking Christians? There is a FAR greater problem with Hindu's attacking Christian's! In India, in the past two years, hundreds of Christian's have been murdered by Hindu mobs. Churches have been burned down, along with mosques, pastors and their families butchered, the women raped, children purposefully blinded and disfigured.... There are ten cases of this for every Muslim attack, but no one wants to report on it - except for the BBC.

1. In this world, superstitious beliefs have nothing to do with reality.

2. However, there will always be people in this world who believe in superstition.

3. Therefore, people who believe in superstition must be tolerated, by people who do not believe in superstition, as well as by people who believe in different superstitions.

4. Also, people who believe in superstition must be protected, from people who do not believe in superstition, as well as from people who believe in different superstitions.

5. Finally, people who believe in superstition must be prevented from attempting to force other people to live in accordance with their superstitious beliefs.

well i can say that this is not true why ? because here we see only muslims have been attacked by the so called war of terror which is war against islam by the ather side i as muslim i condemn and i judge against the attacks to the cristians in egypt because in islam according to the quran werse 255 who says : there is no violence in religion so those who does this attackes in the name of faith are not true muslims but gruppes of criminals who everythink what they dont like they seee it as that must beee perrished so dont acccuse all muslims !! its not logical thank you wherry much for taking in consideration my facts

Political arm of Islam has been waging a war against non-believers ever since it came into existence.

The case of India really proves this point.

Muslim invaders began entering India in the early 8th century, on the orders of Hajjaj, the governor of what is now Iraq. Starting in 712 the raiders, commanded by Muhammad Qasim, demolished temples, shattered sculptures, plundered palaces, killed vast numbers of men.

Millions of Hindus have been killed in India at the hands of Islamic invaders ever since 712 AD.

The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history. In sheer numbers, they are bigger than the Jewish Holocaust, the Soviet Terror, the Japanese massacres of the Chinese during WWII, Mao’s devastations of the Chinese peasantry, the massacres of the Armenians by the Turks, or any of the other famous crimes against humanity of the 20th Century. But sadly, they are almost unknown outside India.

The significance of these events lies not just in the horrible numbers involved, but in the fact that the perpetrators of these massacres were not military thugs disobeying the ethical teachings of their religion, as the European crusaders in the Holy Land were, but were actually doing precisely what their religion taught. (And one may note that Christianity has grown up and no longer preaches crusades. Islam has not. As has been well-documented, jihad has been preached from the official centers of Islam, not just the lunatic fringe.)

In his book The Story of Civilization, famous historian Will Durant lamented the results of what he termed "probably the bloodiest story in history." He called it "a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within."

In the days when they ruled India, the British, pursuing a policy of divide-and-rule, whitewashed the record of the Muslims so that they could set them up as a counterbalance to the more numerous Hindus.

Political arm of Islam has been waging a war against non-believers ever since it came into existence.

The case of India really proves this point.

Muslim invaders began entering India in the early 8th century, on the orders of Hajjaj, the governor of what is now Iraq. Starting in 712 the raiders, commanded by Muhammad Qasim, demolished temples, shattered sculptures, plundered palaces, killed vast numbers of men.

Millions of Hindus have been killed in India at the hands of Islamic invaders ever since 712 AD.

The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in history. In sheer numbers, they are bigger than the Jewish Holocaust, the Soviet Terror, the Japanese massacres of the Chinese during WWII, Mao’s devastations of the Chinese peasantry, the massacres of the Armenians by the Turks, or any of the other famous crimes against humanity of the 20th Century. But sadly, they are almost unknown outside India.

The significance of these events lies not just in the horrible numbers involved, but in the fact that the perpetrators of these massacres were not military thugs disobeying the ethical teachings of their religion, as the European crusaders in the Holy Land were, but were actually doing precisely what their religion taught. (And one may note that Christianity has grown up and no longer preaches crusades. Islam has not. As has been well-documented, jihad has been preached from the official centers of Islam, not just the lunatic fringe.)

In his book The Story of Civilization, famous historian Will Durant lamented the results of what he termed "probably the bloodiest story in history." He called it "a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within."

In the days when they ruled India, the British, pursuing a policy of divide-and-rule, whitewashed the record of the Muslims so that they could set them up as a counterbalance to the more numerous Hindus.

Looking ahead, the future of the nation state will be replaced by multi-national corporations.
For such complex relationships to exist across ethnic/religious divides, I see secularism as the future tool for creating harmony between groups.
Secularism, is a construct successfully tried in America and Europe.

Why waste time looking for pluralistic explanations in this or that religion....

"Many call for a reinstatement of the "protected" (dhimmi) status in the past in which Christians and Jews could practice their faith and be guided by their religious leaders in exchange for payment of a tax. Although in the past this was progressive as compared to Christian practice..."

Only a Salafist can argue that it was progressive policy to force people to pay a tax to practice their religion in their OWN localities. Islam is the enemy.

Muslims are disgusting period thier so called religion is a front for terrorism and hatred they espouse disgust and they are the single worse blight and curse on humanity what a sad and horrible situation
thay epitomize pure unaldulterated evil.

Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.
Thomas Jefferson

There was an out cry recently over the Swiss referendum and the City of Colgne's reaction to building a giant mosque. Yet as one who has traveled through the Gulf states - I know these bastions of liberal Islam restrict the number and type of churches or other relious structures; do not permit churches to be prominently displayed; and they limit design and placement of churches or any non-Islamic temple. So why should the West be more liberal than "liberal" Islamic practice?

What radical Islam wants is free reign to do as it pleases - anywhere (Sharia law in the UK?) - but total restriction on other religions in Islamic countries. Christian and Jewish minorities have historically been second class citizens in Islamic countries. The flight of hundreds of thousands of Jews from Arab countries to Israel in the 1940s and 1950s and their historic treatment is in large part responsible for their total reactionary attitude towards peace with the Palestinians and their electoral support for hard liners.

The situation will not change until moderate Islam takes on the radicals now dictating global Islamic thought and sponsoring Jihad.

John - another useful idiot.

If the West pulls out of the middle east, can anyone assure me that the terrorist will stop killing westerners?....Who will stop them if we show kindness and promote peace...all they want is everyone to convert or be under the rule of Sharia.....Hello Crusaders!!

Watersville (January 11, 2010 10:51 AM)writes:

"A good start for all would be to recognize the fact that the Koran was written and compiled by human beings--like the Holy Bible, old and new testaments alike. Once this is recognized, it would be possible to see the various temporal motivations of its scribes and editors."

I think this is exactly right. Even for what would be considered moderate moslems, the notion that the Koran is the direct word of Allah is a problem when it comes to interacting and integrating with secular societies and cultures. Christianity, to my mind, does not suffer the same problem, although fundamentalist Christians would like to have this otherwise.

Islam is not only a religion, in so much as it is a blueprint for the entire culture and all its aspects. Our culture fought its internal wars over this long ago and it is high time the same happened in Islam. Only, we western, industrialized and secular democracies have no business jumping into the fray on one side or another. Islam must do it for itself.

Islam is in desparate need of a Reformation.

There is little chance of anything changing within the Islamic world. The Koran is very specific on most issues of the society and not much is left for interpretation. Koran makes it very easy for Muslims to be intolerant. Historically, the advance of Islam had been stopped only by the force of arms and this is true today. If we, in the West don't intend to convert, then we won't have a choice but to fight. Liberals who don't believe that will understand once it becomes obvious to them that their most cherished freedoms and behaviors are mostly punishable by death under Islamic law.

For the sake of argument, imagine that the radical extremist population of any particular faith is .000001 of that faiths overall population. Now imagine that the majority of the faithful live out their lives attempting to love their God and love their neighbor and support good works. Now come to the realization that this is exactly what is happening and has been happening for thousands of years. Infinitesimal minorities are responsible for atrocities and have been throughout time. It seems that living life in peace and faith is just not the stuff of headlines and doesn't provide inspiration for moral outrage among the opposing extremists or the faithless.

The religious problems go back a long ways in history, and fundamentalist Christians caused a lot of the problems. One of my more infamous ancestors coined the phrase, "Kill them all, let God sort them out," when he ordered the massacre of the entire population of a town because someone told him there were some heretics in the town (Christians with beliefs contrary to the fundamentalist beliefs). That was followed by the so-called Crusades into the Middle East. I know enough about my Crusader ancestors to know that at least some of them were bandits hiding behind religion while they lined their own pockets. I do not trust fundamentalists of any religion because they have their own motives (seeking power, seeking wealth, seeking women). I have no doubt that some of them are criminally insane, but they seem to attract followers by making them promises of salvation (although some followers have their own motives, e.g., loot,etc.). Things have not changed much in the past 1,500 years.

The comments posted here again, as usual, suggest the great amount of religious intolerance that exists among many of various faiths. It also shows the truth of the old maxim, "the first casualty of war is truth." We begin by demonizing one another; which makes it easier to destroy the "demon" represented by another faith undestanding. We are no longer dealing with human beings, simply fighting the realm of the demonic. Who can be against that?

I thank Mr. Esposito and all who work for a more tolerant world. It is always an uphill battle - there are always people in the world who are willing to let hatred guide them, who feel they alone have God in their pocket, and feel that they have the right to destroy those who do not believe as they do; and there are many more who, because of their own insecurity and fear, follow them. None of the great religions need be intolerant, as Mr. Esposito points out. We can choose tolerance and love of the neighbor, or choose intolerance, hatred nd narrow-mindedness. And that is not only a choice to be made within the great religions, but - as the example of many writers of this blog remind us - a choice that also needs o be made among the non-religious, who can be just as intolerant and hate-filled.

Dr. Esposito, thank you for this thoughtful and fair-minded comment.

Every human identity group is unfortunately prone to outbursts of terrible chauvinism -- whether it's national, religious, racial or some other identity factor. Why did Angolans attack Togo's soccer team? Or Egyptians attack Algeria's? Or soccer hooligans in Britain attack practically anyone? It seems to be an innate feature of the most primitive part of the human brain.

Unfortunately, fundamentalist religion tends to reinforce this tendency, making it even harder for us to rise above it.

ESPOSITO founded the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University and is its current director. The center has received a $20 million endowment from Saudi Arabian Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal "to advance education in the fields of Islamic civilization and Muslim-Christian understanding and strengthen its presence as a world leader in facilitating cross-cultural and inter-religious dialogue."[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Esposito

"There was no fighting between Christian and Muslims before Iraq and Afghanistan Wars began eight years ago by President George W. Bush"

First, please inform the Armenians.

Next, look at a calendar. 9/11/01 preceded the invasion of Iraq and the military action in Afghanistan.

Thank you.

Are Christians attacking Muslims world-wide? The answer to that is YES! Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, both countries have Christians prostelyzing by US troops, and US civilians over Msulims. IF Christians left Muslims alone there would be no fighting. There was no fighting between Christian and Muslims before Iraq and Afghanistan Wars began eight years ago by President George W. Bush

Patrick

Founding director, Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding, Georgetown University

WoW! what a title!

Understanding?
The core of the Muslim Religion wants all infidels dead. They have said it many times. What part of "dead" do you feel you need to understand better?

If you are a Muslim and you feel that peace is a better option, do not worry:
After they kill all of us, they will kill you too.
For you are weak in the eyes of Allah and also an infidel.

See it’s that simple. You don’t need a Phd.

The clan of Ishmael claims the right that was denied them.
All who are apposed must die.
That is the root of the conflict.

If this seems crazy, well.... that’s because it is!

The Yemeni Jews? Rabbi Moshe Ya'ish al-Nahari (1978 - December 11, 2008), murdered by a maniac Islamist military officer screaming "Convert or die!"

The thirty-year-old rabbi left a widow with nine children, John. Her husband's killer was found "mentally unstable, unfit to stand trial."

Human rights groups got wind of it, and the murderer, who had boasted of his murder, was brought back to court. The murderer's family offered the widow $25,000 (US currency), an enormous sum of money by YEmeni standards, blood money, for the life of the murderer.

The widow preferred justice. The insane trial is going on now.

The Yemeni Jews are villagers, John. They are shoe repairers, cabinet makers, artisans. They have been under siege by lunatic Islamists funded by your sponsors, The SAUDIS, although they have not been given the 20, 000, 000 that you have.

They live far apart from one another, that is, those who are still there. AT last count there were 355. Down from 75,000.

They had lived in Yemen for 2500 years. They are unique in the Diaspora. MOst have been taken to Israel, some to the United States.

They do not speak either modern Hebrew or English.

They did not want to leave their country. Neither did my family want to leave Iran.

Neither did the three million MIddle Eastern Jews in exile wish to leave.

When the murderer of the Rabbi is executed, his young widow and their nine children will leave. There will be very few left.

For 20,000,000 you are sleeping with outright evil.

I posted last week on the persecution of Christians in Egypt, Pakistan, and a few other countries. OnFaith noticed, evidently. What a disappointment that they brought you on to comment.

Or, perhaps, at bottom, they care as little about the Christians as they do about Jews. Why else bring a man on who takes 20,000,000 from the God-loathing Saudi Arabians?

To say that Esposito is a dreamer is beyond the pale. Look, John, I'll make it really simple for you as far as religions are concerned.
Since day one of man inventing a god to worship, there's been conflict between him and the guy in the next cave who invented his own god. If both guys believe that their god is the one and only (which is the case with virtually any religion), there's bound to be conflict. And because worshipper A takes great offense at worshipper B dissing his god, the only way to really resolve the situation is for A to off B.
If the millennials of the worshipping of gods, spooks, talisman, witches and other sorts of fictitious, ethereal beings has shown us anything, it's that man is incapable at remaining non-violent toward others who don't believe in a particular god.
Witness 9/11. Witness the Crusades, the Inquisition and the Reformation.
Witness what's going on right now in Third World countries as Catholic missionaries willfully deny condoms to those suffering from AIDS thus resulting in thousands of needless deaths by those tricked into worshipping a "caring god".
The only way to world peace is the abandonment of worshipping a god or gods. There's just too much room for violent conflict otherwise.

This article failed to mention the Christians burned to death inside churches during the last elections in Kenya.

Sure, there is Islamophobia - and for good reason. Everywhere in the world there are muslims there is violence and intolerance - propagated by the muslims.

While it is true that most muslims are not terrorists or fanatics this is irrelevant. The religion is being driven by the radicals; and all the others are too complacent or frightened to do anything about it.

A good start for all would be to recognize the fact that the Koran was written and compiled by human beings--like the Holy Bible, old and new testaments alike. Once this is recognized, it would be possible to see the various temporal motivations of its scribes and editors. This might help clear up the Koran's mixed messages; a desire for peacefulness and pluralism versus an insistence on universal acceptance of Islam or annihilation.

The problem is that Muslim societies are extremely backward, retrograde societies. The most "pious" among them are fighting against change and modernity. Combine that with the fire-breathing proclamations against "the infidel" in the Qu'ran and especially Sunnah, and in its present state, one can only expect violence and intolerance in Muslim States.

The main tension in Malaysia is between the majority Malays and the minority Han, who form an urban, coastal bourgeoisie. In that country, the majority has established quota systems to directly aid the majority against the minority in education and civil service jobs.

It isn't surprising that it is a hotbed of other tribal feelings as well, and since the Christians are Han mostly, the larger animosity in the nation transfers to religion as well.

The ironic thing about the dispute over the word "allah" is that is not a Malay word, but an Arabic word but the Malays see multigenerational Han as "immigrants" and Arabic words as native. Go figure.