English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i mean it seems that the muslim community goes over the top at the drop of a hat,remember the danish cartoon,should they chill out? i follow no religion

2006-09-17 00:09:07 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

11 answers

What follows below is my response to a friend’s email concerning the same issue as what is being discussed in this forum:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Its one thing for the common street hoodlum, or radical foot soldier, in Muslim countries, to be enraged by the comments made by the Pope. I don’t expect many of them to take time to deliberate the issue, or subsume the Pope’s comments in the proper context. They are reactionary beings. However, you would think that Imams’ and other Muslim clerics would me more academic in their reception of comments made by other religious leaders, affording their colleagues on the other side of the religious spectrum a fair hearing. Instead these so called learned men of Muslim upbringing are just as reactionary as the ruffians on the streets of Palestine, or the insurgents attacking their own people in Iraq.

It’s bizarre that both Jews and Christians are called to make concessions and penance to placate Muslim sensitivities, and yet any offense to Christian ideals or people by Muslim authorities is met with deafening silence. When Christian churches are burned to the ground, when our iconography is desecrated because of Islamic militancy, and when death threats are levied on our most revered religious figures, no one in our ranks cries out for apologies or even reparations. No calls for the destruction of Mosques; no command for the assassination of Muslim leaders; and no vitriolic statements from our religious leaders are made concerning Muslim clerics. Even when the more radical fringe of Christendom – men like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson – make inflammatory remarks concerning Muslims and Islam, there is a large outcry from both mainline Christianity and the western secular media denouncing their statements as inane and immoral.

It is the Muslim world that has failed dismally in their efforts to do the same. We always point the incriminating finger at those within our fold that act in a manner that is in discord with what we believe to be the noble thing to do. Muslim “moderates” standby quietly giving tacit approval to the aggression of their more “radical” brethren.

Muslims constantly lament the disproportionate military response to 9/11 that Bush has made. Many in the Christian wing and in the rest of the western world have called him on it, and criticize him constantly for it. Yet when Muslim people attack Christian churches for something as trivial as a cartoon or an insensitive statement made by another Christian, no one talks about the Muslim disproportionate reaction. At least our attack of Afghanistan and Iraq, though focusing on the wrong people, returned violence for violence. Muslims, in reaction to mere rhetoric, returns temporarily hurtful words with violence. Words are eventually forgotten; a loss of life has repercussions that never really go away. You tell me who is responding in a more disproportionate fashion? Who in this scenario is responding more unjustly?

I wonder if Muslims realize how utterly feeble minded they look every time they respond like this? I am curious if “moderate” Muslims are cognizant of the fact that the more they remain mute concerning the wrong doings of their radical counterparts, the more the rest of the world will see them as one in the same? For my part, I a little doubtful as to how divergent “moderate” Muslims are ideologically from their “radical” colleagues. Both of them believe that Muhammad is the supreme prophet, one who supersedes even Jesus in divine significance. Muslims of both “radical” and “moderate” stripe believe that Muhammad is also the ultimate paradigm of human behavior; a model that should be emulated as close as possible. Both, if truly candid, must acknowledge that Muhammad, UNLIKE Jesus, who is the Christian’s primary example for living, was a military commander that took part in violence, order assassinations, and engaged in all the brutality associated with a military enterprise. He ordered the execution of those whose only sin was to ridicule him. These are historical facts attested to in their Qu’ran, Hadith, and secular Arabian history. Maybe the so called “moderate” Muslims don’t vocalize dissent against the “radicals” in their midst because they know, in their heart of hearts, that those the world likes to marginalize as “radicals” really represent the manner of behavior Muhammad would have condoned. The “moderates” remain silent, so as not to underscore their secret agreement with “radical” tactics and their own cowardice at not acting on principles they agree with.

I am disappointed at my Pope for apologizing for statements that are truthful. The truth is always offensive. Jesus made statements to the Pharisees that were infused with controversy. He never apologized for them, despite how inflammatory they might have been. There is no need for Pope Benedict XVI to qualify his statement with an appeal to proper context. Even as an isolated statement, the statements by the Byzantine emperor, that the Pope was quoting, are a truthful assessment of Islam’s prophet. The Catholic Church needs stop being politically correct. The Catholic Church needs to cease abiding by a culture of appeasement. Why should the Pope apologize for the narrow minds of those who cannot read a statement in its context, or who cannot admit to the dark side of their faith? Contrition and forgiveness are foundations to the Christian faith, but to be contrite, when one is not at fault, makes a mockery of reconciliation. If the church continues to be spineless like this, even I will want to leave it.

2006-09-17 07:37:09 · answer #1 · answered by Lawrence Louis 7 · 1 0

They seem to not be able to handle the truth, Maybe they need to be segregated from everyone else til they can handle being a part of the rest of the world.

2006-09-17 07:13:39 · answer #2 · answered by Sean 7 · 2 0

He quoted a verse that read that Islam spread out over the world because the Prophet Muhammad used violence to do it.

2006-09-17 07:11:19 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Do not expect a rational response from those disconnected from reality.

2006-09-17 07:15:06 · answer #4 · answered by bonzo the tap dancing chimp 7 · 0 0

Yes, they are overreacting.

They appear to be the Rodney Dangerfield's of the unwashed.
Self-appointed.

2006-09-17 07:12:10 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

here is part of his speech

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5348456.stm

the offfending parts are taken out of context as he is relating a historical argument between two scholars

2006-09-17 07:15:09 · answer #6 · answered by angle_of_deat_69 5 · 0 0

Look, people believing in Catholicism has been decreasing, what better way to get back into the news.

2006-09-17 07:11:53 · answer #7 · answered by Ya-sai 7 · 0 3

If Osama has freedom of speech, why not Pope?

2006-09-17 07:11:57 · answer #8 · answered by harish_usa 4 · 3 2

How can Islam be called the religion of peace when it was spread by the sword?

Answer:

It is a common complaint among some non-Muslims that Islam would not have millions of adherents all over the world, if it had not been spread by the use of force. The following points will make it clear, that far from being spread by the sword, it was the inherent force of truth, reason and logic that was responsible for the rapid spread of Islam.


1. Islam means peace.


Islam comes from the root word ‘salaam’, which means peace. It also means submitting one’s will to Allah (swt). Thus Islam is a religion of peace, which is acquired by submitting one’s will to the will of the Supreme Creator, Allah (swt).


2. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace.


Each and every human being in this world is not in favour of maintaining peace and harmony. There are many, who would disrupt it for their own vested interests. Sometimes force has to be used to maintain peace. It is precisely for this reason that we have the police who use force against criminals and anti-social elements to maintain peace in the country. Islam promotes peace. At the same time, Islam exhorts it followers to fight where there is oppression. The fight against oppression may, at times, require the use of force. In Islam force can only be used to promote peace and justice.


3. Opinion of historian De Lacy O’Leary.


The best reply to the misconception that Islam was spread by the sword is given by the noted historian De Lacy O’Leary in the book "Islam at the cross road" (Page 8):

"History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated."


4. Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years.


Muslims ruled Spain for about 800 years. The Muslims in Spain never used the sword to force the people to convert. Later the Christian Crusaders came to Spain and wiped out the Muslims. There was not a single Muslim in Spain who could openly give the adhan, that is the call for prayers.


5. 14 million Arabs are Coptic Christians.


Muslims were the lords of Arabia for 1400 years. For a few years the British ruled, and for a few years the French ruled. Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who are Coptic Christians i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword there would not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.


6. More than 80% non-Muslims in India.


The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.


7. Indonesia and Malaysia.


Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims. May one ask, "Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?"


8. East Coast of Africa.


Similarly, Islam has spread rapidly on the East Coast of Africa. One may again ask, if Islam was spread by the sword, "Which Muslim army went to the East Coast of Africa?"


9. Thomas Carlyle.


The famous historian, Thomas Carlyle, in his book "Heroes and Hero worship", refers to this misconception about the spread of Islam: "The sword indeed, but where will you get your sword? Every new opinion, at its starting is precisely in a minority of one. In one man’s head alone. There it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it, there is one man against all men. That he takes a sword and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. You must get your sword! On the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can."


10. No compulsion in religion.


With which sword was Islam spread? Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Qur’an says in the following verse:

"Let there be no compulsion in religion:
Truth stands out clear from error"
[Al-Qur’an 2:256]


11. Sword of the Intellect.


It is the sword of intellect. The sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Qur’an says in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse 125:

"Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord
with wisdom and beautiful preaching;
and argue with them in ways that are
best and most gracious."
[Al-Qur’an 16:125]


12. Increase in the world religions from 1934 to 1984.


An article in Reader’s Digest ‘Almanac’, year book 1986, gave the statistics of the increase of percentage of the major religions of the world in half a century from 1934 to 1984. This article also appeared in ‘The Plain Truth’ magazine. At the top was Islam, which increased by 235%, and Christianity had increased only by 47%. May one ask, which war took place in this century which converted millions of people to Islam?


13. Islam is the fastest growing religion in America and Europe.


Today the fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The fastest growing religion in Europe in Islam. Which sword is forcing people in the West to accept Islam in such large numbers?


14. Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson.


Dr. Joseph Adam Pearson rightly says, "People who worry that nuclear weaponry will one day fall in the hands of the Arabs, fail to realize that the Islamic bomb has been dropped already, it fell the day MUHAMMED (pbuh) was born".

2006-09-17 07:10:55 · answer #9 · answered by Shiny 3 · 1 4

i think whatever response from muslims is presented- it is JUSTIFIED..

Do not say dirty bsht lie- will not get reaction..

2006-09-17 07:11:35 · answer #10 · answered by Suomi 4 · 1 4

fedest.com, questions and answers