Muslims

[trish]

Christianity was the first proselytizing religion. The pagan religions died off because they were crowded out by the ever expanding "good news" of Christianity. Islam too is a proselytizing religion and it is currently displacing the less aggressive flora and fauna in the Southeast Asia. I don't think aggressively proselytizing religions like Christianity and Islam are likely to die out until some far far future date. More likely they will continue to schism and mutate into more and more bizarre sects (Mormons, Ahmadiyya etc.). Some of these sects will diverge so extravagantly form the main branches they will come to be regarded as new religions. If a new species is even more aggressive than the original it may displace the original. If every Christian on Earth eventually converted to some polyandrous, polytheistic, mutation of Mormonism called Quixillism, will you say that Christianity died or that it lives on through Quixillism?

I would love to see a day where all this silly, yet dangerous nonsense would just peter out and go away. One would think that reason and art would be sufficient to fascinate and soothe the human soul. But apparently not.

[Faldur]

We in Australia have nothing like these Bible bashing weirdo's lol

Really? One of the items on my bucket list is to attend a service at Hillsong, Sidney.

[Stavros]

We in Australia have nothing like these Bible bashing weirdo's lol
What about Mel Gibson's father, didn't he develop some of his whacky alternatives to Catholicism in Sydney?

[russtafa]

Yeah but nobody pays attention to these nut jobs.Religion is thought to be very uncool in Aus

[tsnajwa]

Yeah but nobody pays attention to these nut jobs.Religion is thought to be very uncool in Aus

omg i honestly hope you are a troll at this point russtafa.. or you are a total nihilist. if you want to fight against something useful protest abbos in Aus..

[yodajazz]

...Those who defend Quran-burning on the basis of free speech miss the point. For a start, it's not free. It requires someone to go out, buy a book, buy petrol (not even cheap at the moment, never mind free), light it, film the whole thing and then distribute the proceedings to whatever little clique they call their friends, or more widely on YouTube or some other "social" medium. This is an overt, conscious action, motivated by malign intent. It is not the product of open, free-spirited discourse, but an aggressive, premeditated provocation.

Nor is it actually speech. It's not opening a dialogue or building an argument. Quite the opposite. It's a deliberate act of destruction; the destruction of a dialogue and argument constructed by others. If you don't like Islam, fine. Write a book about why. Don't burn one.

...

Good post. I felt that this part should be re-highlighted. And it supports my beliefs on the current situation. Islam and all religions are ideas. The way to influence ideas, is with other ideas. Burning a Koran does just the opposite, by shutting down dialogue.

In some recent months I became involved in an intense debate, about the meaning, of passages in the Koran. I was able to find passages about humane treatment of women, children and the elderly, and prohibition against killing. One passage even says there should be no compulsion in religion! There are many passages however, that talk about war and punishment, both by man and by God. But these can be reframed, by looking at the context, of the specific situation, and that of more universal principles. I see large parts of the Koran as being about the very specific things going on with the Prophet's life. What is specific to the situation, and what are more universal principles, have always been the subject of debate, and scholarship among Muslims. General ideas have changed over time, and schools of thought, grow or diminish over the centuries.

This is why I see understanding and dialogue as the answers to the issues of today. And it makes a difference, what non-Muslims believe about Islam, because I see all thought, as part of a general human conscienous. These thoughts influence our beliefs in how we live our everyday lives. An example would be the current understanding that the world is round.

Maybe sometime we could get to the discussion of actual ideas within religions, and their meaning for our lives. For example I believe that the stories in the Bible are more important as allegories, rather than historical accuracy.

So as far the original post, you can see, why I believe that Koran burning is definitely the wrong approach to human solutions.

[russtafa]

omg i honestly hope you are a troll at this point russtafa.. or you are a total nihilist. if you want to fight against something useful protest abbos in Aus..

What are you talking about.Are you for real

[Faldur]

Why do we have two threads talking about the same thing? Can we get back on manbearpig or something?

[TJ347]

Good post. I felt that this part should be re-highlighted. And it supports my beliefs on the current situation. Islam and all religions are ideas. The way to influence ideas, is with other ideas. Burning a Koran does just the opposite, by shutting down dialogue.

What if one is not interested in dialogue? How many times have you heard someone make a statement and end it with "case closed" or "period, end of sentence"? These people are not interested in dialoguing... They've spoken on the issue, and are done with it. Dialogue is not necessary to legitimize speech. Accordingly, if I burn a Quran, I have "spoken" as to my thoughts on the Quran. In all likelihood, if I were interested in dialoguing about it I would have taken another route, and while the manner I choose may offend some, it is still my right as an American to choose that manner.

Clearly, this is something that is hard for some people from other countries to understand, but then we don't have the same governmental systems. Now then... What is the relevance of an American criticizing on the parliamentary system of government unless he has lived under such a system and thus has an actual point of reference? Everything he says would be hypothetical or theoretical. This is similarly the relevance of the 2nd Amendment being criticized by an Englishman who may never have been to the US, has never been subject to US law, and based on what he has said himself, doesn't have any right to free speech as it is defined in the US, speaking on any topic dealing with the US government or law. Feel free to continue to do so to your heart's desire, but recognize that only one of us has any actual right to do so under the laws of our respective governments.

I do agree though that Quran burning is not free speech, but again, I define this in the American manner as opposed to the reasons mentioned, which is to say that it's not free because Americans have died, are dying, and will die for us to continue to enjoy that right here. It would be nice, given that Americans also died to liberate people in other nations, if they could enjoy those same rights, but when people don't value freedom, what can you do?

[russtafa]

muslims want to dominate the cultures they settle in and overwhelm that culture