And was a survey done in the Secular West done on harsh punishments, sucide bombings, gender discrimination, support for extremism?
Let's take the lowest percentage(3% in Turkey in 2008)who sometimes/often)support sucide bombings as a benchmark.
What is 3% of 1.5 billion?
450,000(?) Muslims worldwide sometimes/often support sucide bombings?
If you were to take a guess, what percentage of Bahai would support suicide bombings?
I wonder what percentage of Chrisitans in the countries surveyed would support harsh punishments, gender discrimination or extremism?
I believe that in the year 2010 Islam was a major news story in the Zionist Controlled Western media. As the survey pointed out this was largely due to the 10th anniversary of when the psuedo-Muslims bombed the WTC and due to Pastor Terry's "threat" to burn an English Translation of the Quran.
I am looking at the Zionist Controlled media and see that yet another not-real so-called Muslim-American as been arrested in a terrorist plot.
And was a survey done in the Secular West done on harsh punishments, sucide bombings, gender discrimination, support for extremism?
Evidently no. Is someone disputing that the secular West would not look better if compared under the same variables? The Pew Forum surveys simply show the great diversity existing within the Islamic world as well as a long-term trend of secularization. It may serve to bust some highly exaggerated and monolithic myths about what Muslims think or don't think. Obviously you have not taken these myths by face value and accept the diversity as shown in the surveys. Give another 30 years and the secular West may not be as much "ahead" of the Islamic world while Islam would still very much remain the majority religion in the very same countries.
I wonder what percentage of Christians in the countries surveyed would support harsh punishments, gender discrimination or extremism?
In order to make a fair comparison, the researchers should take a similar sampling of Christian-majority countries the world over: US, Ethiopia, Peru, Poland, Russia, UK, Norway, Zimbabwe, Brazil, DR Congo, Ukraine, The Philippines. I'm pretty sure we'd get a very fascinating mosaic of views ranging from archaic to post-modern.
According to several surveys (don't have time to dig them out now), European support for violent resistance by the Palestinians is quite high. Their argument is the same as that of the Muslims who support the resistance: The Palestinians don't have tanks and fighters, so suicide bombing is the best they've got. In the Pew Forum report, those Muslim countries that had comparatively larger minorities supporting suicide bombing were Lebanon, Nigeria, Jordan and Egypt. In the cases of Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt the support should be seen in their geopolitical context. In the case of Nigeria, a Taliban-like extremely hardline Islamist group, Boko Haram, has managed to get a foothold in some parts of the Muslim north, capitalizing on illiteracy, ignorance and historical tensions between the Christians and the Muslims in Nigeria. This form of extreme Islamism is rather novel in Nigeria. Ustaz Mohammed Yusuf, the founder of Boko Haram, thinks the earth is flat and to think otherwise is falling victim to sinister Western propaganda. Even the Afghan Taliban didn't consider the earth flat. By comparison, at the time of the Abbasid Caliph Al-Ma'mun (ca 830 AD), a group of Muslim astronomers and geographers commissioned by the Caliph calculated the earth's circumference quite accurately at 24,000 miles.
For the record, I personally do not consider suicide or the targetting of innocent civilians justifiable under any circumstances.
With kind regards,
LilWabbit
"All things have I willed for you, and you too, for your own sake."
Evidently no. Is someone disputing that the secular West would not look better if compared under the same variables? The Pew Forum surveys simply show the great diversity existing within the Islamic world as well as a long-term trend of secularization.
The same "variables" do not exist. I would also add that there is great diversity, perhaps even a greater diviersity in the secular west than in the non-secular east. Hopefully the alleged long term trend toward secularization the Islamic world will continue.
Obviously you have not taken these myths by face value and accept the diversity as shown in the surveys. Give another 30 years and the secular West may not be as much "ahead" of the Islamic world while Islam would still very much remain the majority religion in the very same countries.
If by "myths" you mean that all or even most Muslims are "Islamist" I knew that before I saw the surveys. However I also know that it is a myth that there are no Muslims who are "Islamist".
I wonder what percentage of Christians in the countries surveyed would support harsh punishments, gender discrimination or extremism?
In order to make a fair comparison, the researchers should take a similar sampling of Christian-majority countries the world over: US, Ethiopia, Peru, Poland, Russia, UK, Norway, Zimbabwe, Brazil, DR Congo, Ukraine, The Philippines. I'm pretty sure we'd get a very fascinating mosaic of views ranging from archaic to post-modern.
Are you implying that the survey you cited was not "fair".
In order to make a "fair" comparision the reasearchers should take a similar sampling of ALL Christian majority countries and ALL Muslim majority countries and compare the results.
According to several surveys (don't have time to dig them out now), European support for violent resistance by the Palestinians is quite high.
Assuming that there are surveys that show Eurppean support for viloent terrorist attacks against innocent(?)Israeli citizens is quite high, do you think that is a good thing?
Their argument is the same as that of the Muslims who support the resistance: The Palestinians don't have tanks and fighters, so suicide bombing is the best they've got. In the Pew Forum report, those Muslim countries that had comparatively larger minorities supporting suicide bombing were Lebanon, Nigeria, Jordan and Egypt. In the cases of Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt the support should be seen in their geopolitical context. In the case of Nigeria, a Taliban-like extremely hardline Islamist group, Boko Haram, has managed to get a foothold in some parts of the Muslim north, capitalizing on illiteracy, ignorance and historical tensions between the Christians and the Muslims in Nigeria. This form of extreme Islamism is rather novel in Nigeria. Ustaz Mohammed Yusuf, the founder of Boko Haram, thinks the earth is flat and to think otherwise is falling victim to sinister Western propaganda. Even the Afghan Taliban didn't consider the earth flat. By comparison, at the time of the Abbasid Caliph Al-Ma'mun (ca 830 AD), a group of Muslim astronomers and geographers commissioned by the Caliph calculated the earth's circumference quite accurately at 24,000 miles.
For the record, I personally do not consider suicide or the targetting of innocent civilians justifiable under any circumstances.
Evidently no. Is someone disputing that the secular West would not look better if compared under the same variables? The Pew Forum surveys simply show the great diversity existing within the Islamic world as well as a long-term trend of secularization.
The same "variables" do not exist.
As far as I understand the Westerners also have views on democracy, gender segregation, suicide bombing and harsh punishments. The same variables (views on the foregoing issues) exist. The values these variables may receive is likely to differ. Hence the term "variable".
I would also add that there is great diversity, perhaps even a greater diviersity in the secular west than in the non-secular east.
Actually I do not think the Western views on democracy and gender segregation vary quite us much as those within the Islamic world. Their views on suicide bombing and harsh punishments may well vary more. However the Christian views, if we take a good global sampling, on all of the above are likely to vary more than within the Islamic world.
Hopefully the alleged long term trend toward secularization in the Islamic world will continue.
It appears that the trend has been far faster than the earlier wave of secularization in the Christian West that occurred for the most part in the 19th and early 20th centuries. One Muslim-majority country, namely Turkey, happened in fact to belong to the same earlier wave of Western secularization.
If by "myths" you mean that all or even most Muslims are "Islamist" I knew that before I saw the surveys.
As I pointed out earlier, I am aware that the Pew surveys may not offer much new information to a more probing and well-versed mind. The intended audience is elsewhere. I'm also sure this board would warmly welcome if non-Muslims such as yourself would share their balanced understanding more frequently. Sometimes, unwittingly, an otherwise well-rounded thinker may come across more hardline simply because he only reacts when he disagrees with something, leaving others in the dark as to what the person really thinks.
However I also know that it is a myth that there are no Muslims who are "Islamist".
If "Muslim" is defined in a secular way as 'anyone who regards himself a Muslim', I do not think that anyone in this forum or elsewhere seriously believes such Muslims are never Islamists. It would be futile to attempt to dispel a myth that is not very widespread, particularly in this forum.
It is my understanding that the contention has been more semantic. The discussion has centered on the proper *definition* of "a Muslim". The resident Muslims on this board are ever keen (and understandably so) to remind that the Quranic definition is the right one -- a Muslim is one who submits to the Willl of God as the Will of God is articulated in the Qur'án (rather than preferring other, non-divine, sources over the Qur'án). Obviously someone who does not believe in the divine origin of the Qur'án cannot be expected to embrace such a definition. But perhaps it helps to be ever aware that this is the way the Qur'án defines Islam. Perhaps a secularist such as yourself could accept that for our Muslim friends on this board, a sincere Muslim is one who tries, with a humble posture of lifelong learning, to understand and to obey the Qur'án in its totality. It is my understanding that BDboy, Miraj, Ibn and others here believe a true Muslim does not regard any other source text or a clergyman as more valid than the actual verses of the Qur'án, and that the Qur'án is for them quite unequivocal on the error of suicide and the killing of innocent civilians. A truly Quran-believing Muslim rarely, if ever, supports a "crusade" to kill the unbelievers and to impose a hardline shari'ah interpretation on others.
In order to make a "fair" comparision the reasearchers should take a similar sampling of ALL Christian majority countries and ALL Muslim majority countries and compare the results.
Assuming that there are surveys that show Eurppean support for viloent terrorist attacks against innocent(?)Israeli citizens is quite high, do you think that is a good thing?
It is not a good thing. Neither is such an assent to violent Palestinian resistance in Europe "high" in terms of representing any majority in any European country. By "quite high" I only meant "high" as compared to the US. Such views (i.e. "sometimes suicide bombing may be the last resort, and as such acceptable, in the absence of tanks and fighters") are often advanced in the European left and amid urbanized youth that have become politically active and who appear to be palpably furious at Israel. The mainstream media here in Europe is conspicuously more critical towards the Israelis than the Palestinians. I am not saying it is a good or a bad thing. Just an observation made over the past 20 years.
With kind regards,
LilWabbit
"All things have I willed for you, and you too, for your own sake."
As far as I understand the Westerners also have views on democracy, gender segregation, suicide bombing and harsh punishments. The same variables (views on the foregoing issues) exist. The values these variables may receive is likely to differ. Hence the term "variable".
I am not going to dispute that Westerners have different views on democracy, gender segregation, suicide bombing and harsh punishments.
However I claim that there is more democracy, less gender segregation, fewer if any suicide bombings and less harsh punishments than in the East.
I would also add that there is great diversity, perhaps even a greater diviersity in the secular west than in the non-secular east.
However the Christian views, if we take a good global sampling, on all of the above are likely to vary more than within the Islamic world.
Why do you say that?
Why is that you think that there would be more differences between the Islamic World and the Christian World?
What are the differences between "Christian" views and "Muslim" views with regards to suicide bombings, gender segregation, democracy, and harsh punishments.
It appears that the trend has been far faster than the earlier wave of secularization in the Christian West that occurred for the most part in the 19th and early 20th centuries. One Muslim-majority country, namely Turkey, happened in fact to belong to the same earlier wave of Western secularization.
The trend towards secularization in Christian majority countries came long before the trend in secularization in Muslim majority countries. The trend towards secularization in Christian majority countries began at early that the 16th century in the United States, France and Great Britain.
Turkey did not start the trend towards secularization until 1922 when Mustafa Kemal overthrew the Islamic Ottoman Empire and established the Republic of Turkey. He abolished the last Caliphate in the Islamic World.
As I pointed out earlier, I am aware that the Pew surveys may not offer much new information to a more probing and well-versed mind. The intended audience is elsewhere.
But yet you use those polls. I would also add that polls are reflect opinions and opinions change.
I'm also sure this board would warmly welcome if non-Muslims such as yourself would share their balanced understanding more frequently. Sometimes, unwittingly, an otherwise well-rounded thinker may come across more hardline simply because he only reacts when he disagrees with something, leaving others in the dark as to what the person really thinks.
There are hardlined Muslims and there are hardlined Non-Muslims. Both suffer from a lack of balance. But hardlined Muslims are Muslims.
If "Muslim" is defined in a secular way as 'anyone who regards himself a Muslim', I do not think that anyone in this forum or elsewhere seriously believes such Muslims are never Islamists. It would be futile to attempt to dispel a myth that is not very widespread, particularly in this forum.
I think that at least one person in this forum does not think or believe that there is any such thing as an Islamist or Islamism because there is no "Quranic" defination for either. That such words are made up by ignorant "Westerners" who do not know anything about Islam.
So far as this ignorant Western Secular humanist is concerned a Muslim is a person who believes that they are following the Quran, the Ahadith and the doctrines and dogmas of Islam.
It is my understanding that the contention has been more semantic. The discussion has centered on the proper *definition* of "a Muslim". The resident Muslims on this board are ever keen (and understandably so) to remind that the Quranic definition is the right one -- a Muslim is one who submits to the Willl of God as the Will of God is articulated in the Qur'án (rather than preferring other, non-divine, sources over the Qur'án).
I do not think that the Quran is the "only" literature that Muslims use to articulate and define what it is to be a Muslim. It may be the "primary" literature that Muslims use but it is not the "only" thing that make a Muslim a Muslim.
It is my understanding that Muslims believe and or think that the Quran is the "LAST" message from Allah and that Muhammad is the last "Messenger" from Allah. They make this conclusion from their reading and understanding the Quran as well as non-divine sources like the ahadith and other commentaries.
It is also my understanding that Bahai disagree with this conclusion.
Obviously someone who does not believe in the divine origin of the Qur'án cannot be expected to embrace such a definition.
My defination of what is a Muslim is
A Muslim, is an adherent of Islam a monotheistic Abrahamic religion based on the Quran, which Muslims consider the verbatim word of God as revealed to Prophet Muhammad "Muslim" is the Arabic term for "one who submits to God". ALL of these things are what define what it is to be a Muslim.
Perhaps a secularist such as yourself could accept that for our Muslim friends on this board, a sincere Muslim is one who tries, with a humble posture of lifelong learning, to understand and to obey the Qur'án in its totality. It is my understanding that BDboy, Miraj, Ibn and others here believe a true Muslim does not regard any other source text or a clergyman as more valid than the actual verses of the Qur'án,
I never have nor will I ever make the claim that any Muslim, "true" or "false" makes the claim that any literature is MORE valid than the Quran.
and that the Qur'án is for them quite unequivocal on the error of suicide and the killing of innocent civilians. A truly Quran-believing Muslim rarely, if ever, supports a "crusade" to kill the unbelievers and to impose a hardline shari'ah interpretation on others.
and that the Qur'án is for them quite unequivocal on the truth and virtue of martyrdom and the killing of quilty civilians . A truly Quran-believing Muslim will always support a "a just Jiahd" to kill quilty unbelievers who oppress innocent believers. The Quran is quite unequivocal that those who occupy lands that are Islamic and steal the resources of Muslims are not innocent but guilty unbelievers.
Are you implying that the survey you cited was not "fair".
Not at all. I was merely responding to you that the "Christian" views on the same subjects may be quite as diverse if not more diverse.
Or they "may" be equally diverse.
Since the researchers did NOT take a similar sampling of ALL Christian majority countries and ALL Muslim majority countries and compare the results then the results are NOT FAIR.
Those who lost for "causes" in Islamist fanaticism have it all wrong. Islamism is not a reaction to anything (fill in the blank... Western colonialism, Jewish resettlement of its ancient homeland, incident x, incident y, incident z). Rather it is an old ideology trying to rear its ugly head in the modern world.
Islamism is belief in the restoration of the caliphate -- as the great moral and religious institution is always was.
Islamism is the belief that Islam is ascendant in a world of decadence, including decadent Christians, Jews and non-Islamist muslims.
Islamism is fanatic belief in the triumph of Mohammed -- but focusing on the jihadist, domineering, autocratic, totalitarian elements of his creed.
Islamism has various forms -- there is Iranian Islamism, Hamas Islamism, Hezbollah Islamism, now what appears to be a rising Turkish Islamism, etc. Whatever the form, it is on the offensive. Any claimed injustices done against it are in reality merely triggers to justify what it would do anyway. Indeed, that is why it seeks to provoke conflict where it can, as in the recent flotilla provocation.
In any event, the point is that people should not be fooled by appearances. Islamism is not a reactionary phenomenon. It is very proactive, although it prefers (when weak) to do so in superficially reactionary steps.
Islamism is not about peace and justice. Peace and justice are tools in its box to advance its program of domination and apocalypse. That is why it is such a dangerous phenomemon. As bad as this ideology was in the past there is no comparison to it potential in the present. It's one thing to put all that hyped-up cries for death to infidels on the tip of a sword; it's an entirely different matter to put it on the tip of a nuclear warhead.
I just realized, a year and a half later, that someone changed my title -- against my will and without my knowledge.
My title was: Islamism - an ideology not a reaction
It was a perfectly good title. The idea was that Islamism, which is another name for militant-radical Islam, was not an invention of modern times in reaction to colonialism or even the emergence of the state of Israel. It was an ideology that existed independent of modern reactions. Modern situations may have triggered this ideology but did not create them.
In any event, when you read my original post the title someone changed it to makes no sense. I want to officially say that I did not create that title. I had a different title and different point in mind.
Would you then say that Islamism is - an ideology About Islam?
I know one thing: There are a billion Islamic people in the world today, and there will be about 2 billion by the time we're dead. They're not going to give up their religion. (Chris Matthews)
Yes, I would say that Islamism is an ideology that has it roots in Islam.
If its roots are in Islam then it is Islam. Why not then call it Islam rather than Islamism?
I know one thing: There are a billion Islamic people in the world today, and there will be about 2 billion by the time we're dead. They're not going to give up their religion. (Chris Matthews)
For My Mother: In Praise of a Life Lived
Chasing an Elusive God
Why Christianity Is Dying But Spirituality Is Thriving?
On the Frontlines An interview with Yael Eckstein, Senior Vice President of the ...
Ray Liotta, Seth Green Join an All-Star Cast in Indie Film ‘The Identical’ “We want to bring films with a redeeming value to the world. One of ...
A Life of Hope The fact that you’re standing here today with breath in your lungs ...
Habits for a Heart Healthy Lifestyle Heart disease is a top killer worldwide -- but our lifestyle choices ...
Emotional Equations Using brilliantly simple math that illuminates universal emotional ...
Are You a Compulsive or Binge Eater? Do you struggle with your weight? Find out more about compulsive and ...
Faith, Freedom and Rocker John Schlitt “We are making choices on greed and stupidity. The truth is that our ...
Robert Griffin III: Not the Average Rookie Washington Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III continues to wow ...
Green Powders to Add to Your Diet Now Green powders are a great way to boost your health, keep your energy ...
Natural Deodorants That Actually Work What's that smell? Not us! We’ve been on a mission to find the best ...
Birth of a Habit How long does it take to form a new habit? How long should it take ...
Madly In Love With ME “I will never settle for less than my heart and soul desire.”
Is It Love If You're All Cranky When You Give It? Love is the answer to everything in life.
Living A Meaningful Life You are what you love and you love whatever you give your attention ...
"The Bible" a Labor of Love for Famed Producer, Wife The five-week, 10-hour TV special was nurtured by "Touched by an ...
Who Should Be Allowed to Pray for President Obama? It seems preposterous, but there’s a major debate over who is worthy ...
