What about step two?

Question

Not to long ago I asked the question if religion shoud stay out of politics and the most of you agreed with me.
Would step two not mean: There are no Muslim terrorists? There are terrorists of different nationalities. Name them by their nationality but do not badmouth a religion. Also when this religion is misused by them.
It's the same for Jews. Not all Jews agree with the way of Israel handles things.
Would you agree with mention nationalities instead what religion people belong to?

Please note there are also other terrorists like in Spain,Ireland etc. They never got called catholic terrorists.

Please do not get me wrong. I do NOT stand up for any terrorist acts, but I am bothered that Muslim terrorists are generalized and Islam in general is badmouthed.

Take care

Answer 1

I expect that a lot of people are not going to like my response to this question, including perhaps you h, so I apologise if this makes uncomfortable reading.

In my view, principles such as 'politics and religion need to be separate' and 'freedom of speech is a fundamental right' are beautiful ideals, but sadly our world is not so simple.

For example, I cherish freedom of speech, but to defend it by suggesting that 'words are just words' would totally ignore the fact that words can be used to order or incite violence, or for harassment or verbal abuse, for propaganda which preys on people's impressionableness, or for revealing secrets which might compromise national security. The pen is mightier than the sword they say, and words can truly be weapons.

As for politics and religion, it seems to me that a nation's poltical system has to reflect the religious beliefs of its people, as otherwise the two may end up being incompatible. Both Judaism and Islam are much more than simple religions, as they both comprise entire codes of civil law which govern almost every aspect of daily life, so it would be very easy for secular and religious laws to clash.

America's bid to spread democracy around the world is failing because it still hasn't realised that you can't apply a one-size-fits-all form of democracy to everyone. Freedom for homosexuals to kiss in the streets would not be welcome in Mecca the way it is in San Francisco!

It is also a fact that religions often have a unifying cultural identity which transcends national borders. The word 'umma' means the 'worldwide nation of Muslims', and although Jews don't have a special word for the 'Jewish nation', it is a fact that many Jews define themselves by their Jewish identity much more than by their country of nationality.

And in case you hadn't noticed, the State of Israel was founded as a safe haven for people of a specific faith! To take religion entirely out of the equation would destroy its very purpose of having been created.

So I'm very sorry to say that I don't think politics and religion can truly be separated, even though it would make things much simpler if they were.

And as a consequence, calling terrorists 'Iraqi terrorists' or 'Afghan terrorists' might be politically correct, but it would ignore the fact that many of them now act in a common transnational cause - groups calling themselves 'Islamic Jihad' or 'Army of Islam' do so as they want to be able to claim that they represent the global nation of Muslims.

I know that most Muslims do not endorse their activities, so they don't deserve to be badmouthed along with them. But it would certainly help us bridge our differences if the large majority of Muslims would denounce them more loudly and clearly than they currently do.

Answer 2

The issue rests on how one defines Islam. You claim that terrorists mis-represent Islam, while they would say the same of you. Is Islam the Sunni interpretation or the Shi'a? Who has the right to declare what Islam is? Similarly, there is Catholic Chritianity, Protestant Christianty etc., yet we cannot say one is Christian and the other not. As of right now, there is no Arab terrorist entity that does not invoke Allah at some point. Hezbullah invokes Him in its name. Hamas claims to be true to the religion and accuses Fatah of sin. There is no denying that these terrorist groups attract their constituents based on the religion and justify their actions based on the religion. They define themselves as Islamic groups, and so they are defined by others as Islamic terrorists. This is not true of Catholic terrorists, and even if it was there is an objective source for the definition of Catholicism: the pope. The same cannot is not true of Islam, and so if one groups defines itself as Islamic they are called Islamic.
By the way, many people do say "Palestinian Terror" instead of "Islamic Terror".

Answer 3

When religion is stepped out of politics and affairs of an state, it is called Secularism. And if the political parties and any social movements accept that standard and do not involve religion in their practices, there will not be any way to call any type of movement or any political party; Islamic or Muslim or Jewish.
But right now, it is very difficult to achieve that level in the region.

Answer 4

H, I respect you for the answers you give & because your questions in the main are relevant & interesting .

When the terrorists stop declaring that they are acting in the interests of proclaiming jihad or war against the rest of humanity , then maybe this question can be answered in a positive way .

Unfortunately, this extremism is damaging any bridge between people of Islamic beliefs & the rest of humanity & until a message of peace , love & tolerance is preached throughout the Islamic world I for one cannot accede to your request .

Answer 5

I dont know really how to answer your question, because I think politics makes war not religion, all religions have the same basic beliefs of peace. But they are blamed in order to induce more hate and more war and to then cover up their greedy crimes. But for ex the UK fought with ireland over land, the french fought in many arab and african countries over land, diamonds, oil. People left the UK to obtain more land in Canada , war with the native people, Americans , war with the native people, again over land. Almost all the Caribean were once UK owned, for land. what else? hmmm America in Iraq, oil and in my opinion to be a neighbor of Iran for future endeavors, Afghanistan also to be a neighbor if Iran, Pakististan is an agent Of USA, Lebanon is supported by USA the list goes on the meddling creates more war. Russia over Afghanistan, land. Ghangis Khan, land and over a woman. Alexander the great, land. wow, the list goes Uk sent people to Australia, land, UK was once in control of all the middle east , land, the list goes on and on and on and on...................Peace!

Answer 6

by talking on the subject of terrorism politics and religion do you think it would be better to talk about some thing besides this cause it does not make peace work when it is all mention. creates problems online like that chris b group

Answer 7

the college instructor asked little Johnny why he grew to become into previous due for college. Little Johnny stated that each and every of the rain had made each and every thing so muddy that for each step he took he slipped decrease back 2. the instructor asked him if that grew to become into actual how did he ever arrive in school. Little Johnny stated, nicely instructor, I in basic terms grew to become and headed decrease back living house."

Answer 8

Agree with Londener in Israel ,
and in addition the Arab world should state loudly as the American-Arabs do they should state that terrorism is wrong and they should condemn the terror groups which work in their countries - just like all the other European, Australian, American, and Asian states(notice I didn't put Africa) fight against terror groups in their countries

Answer 9

Well with "muslim terrorism" is a bit confusing i beleive the term is a bit distorted and many people dont really understand it.

Onother such ambigous term is islamofascit. its alot more complicated then that.

Most notably in the struggles in palestine for self determination and that is what it is really.

The palestinians are ruled over the israelis and in turn the palestinian populace is ruled over by two main militias who are not very good in getting things done.

The palestinians litterally living in an open air ghetto where freedom of movement is impossible thanks to the occupation.

Naturally the palestinains lash back against the occupation and when conventional war is not possible they take a very desperate way out namely sucide bombings.

This is directly caused by the occupation and and lack of change, they remain within an open air ghetto, frustrated and angry and that destitute feeling of nothing changing.

IF you where in such a situation, would you not invoke gods name?

I certainly would..

Answer 10

I agree that there are many terrorists but Muslim terrorists do it in the name of their god, and they call others who aren't Muslims " not believers"