So, one of the three most important issues of our time I see is liberating Muslims from the yoke of Islam. Because Islam turns people into jihadist, bigots, malicious fanatics, parasites who suck the blood of the "infidel". I find the status of "infidels" (aka non-Muslims) in Islamic doctrine very troubling. They are treated like second class citizens (and often lack any citizen rights under Sharia law but are virtual slaves) and are heavily discriminated against. They are seen as pray for the taking. That's me and you, mind you. You see how dangerous and despicable such a world view is. So, I think it would for the greater good of the planet if Muslims converted to more peaceful belief systems. Or be treated how they treat others, to say the least. Thoughts?
I would see the move back and disappearance of Islam rather in positive way (if it's not to be replaced on a culture based on drugs, gangsta rap and other degenerate things), but you can't convert people out of their religion by force. However, I don't think that non muslims should accept them on their own territories, or at least accept them as citizens.
I think there's a lot of meta-thought to be had here, and in a sense, I think that's where the real disagreement in the west takes place. We need to think carefully about what the problems are, how to prioritise those problems and how to figure out real solutions to those problems. In my opinion, calling for Muslims to simply abandon Islam with an argument like the one above is a pipe-dream. It's akin to thinking that the solution to ones money problems is finding a winning lottery ticket. It is true that it would solve the problem, but it is so implausible that it doesn't even constitute a step towards a real solution. So let's consider what the real problems, priorities and solutions are. I would say, and maybe you would agree, that the problems we want to solve most include Muslim terrorists and Muslim human rights violations (there's more to it than just concluding that, but I'm willing to look past that for the sake of brevity). Now, do you think it is more plausible to get a potential terrorist to leave Islam altogether, or to get them to become a moderate muslim? As I've mentioned in earlier in the post, I consider the former laughably implausible. The latter, is hard, but I think much more achievable (indeed, it was largely the situation before western intervention in the Middle East). So my conclusion is that the step that we need to focus on is making it easy to be a moderate muslim a firm step away from extremism. Now let's consider your post again. I've established that at least I think it doesn't do anything positive for our problems. Instead, it detracts from the solution I have suggested in two ways. First, it makes western people not want to commit to the actual solution. Secondly, it makes muslims more suspicious of the west and more likely to push muslims away from moderate Islam. I mean, imagine if you read the mirrored post: "You see how dangerous and despicable the west is. So, I think it would for the greater good of the planet if Westerners converted to Islam. Or be treated how they treat others, to say the least". My guess is that you would be less inclined to convert to Islam after reading such a statement, so hopefully it is clear why your statement makes muslims less likely to convert from Islam. In the end, in the western world, there is basically no debate over whether Islam is good. The real debate is over what are we going to do about it. However, one of the sides seems to pretend that the question is about whether Islam is good. In my opinion, that side works with less than half of the information available to them.
Time to mass the christian armies and defeat the lowly heretics once and for all. Call it a crusade in the name of the lord to slaughter the Muslim scum and liberate the holy land from their evil grasp. Bonus points for eliminated those pesky jews right in the middle. Course no other religion treats some people like second class citizens, or promotes hatred and exclusion of others. They doesn't create bigots, malicious fanatics, parasites who suck the blood of the "unbelievers". Nah, its only the big bad muslims. The OP is a ironic bit of religious bigotry, though.
Sorry, I forgot to address that one. Which is pretty easy in fact. Let's hear it from the lion's mouth, shall we?
I would probably agree with what you're trying to say, but I'm not sure I would phrase it like that. In particular, I don't think everyone has the same understanding of what it is included in Islam as you do. There are plenty of people who consider themselves muslims who don't do the terrible things. Attacking those people only shows the Muslim world that we're hypocrites who don't really care about the issues but just knee jerk against the word. And that image is one of the biggest obstacles in actually making lasting improvement in the world, because it comes across as an unfixable problem. Since when is Erdogan an authority on all of Islam? Even if there was a muslim pope or something, people won't always agree with them.
OK, you don't want a hard-core Muslim talking about Islam, so let's see a non-Muslim talking about Islam.
Orthodox Islam needs to reform from authoritarianism. It needs to embrace the concept of peace being the result of a lack of violence as opposed to its current established perspective that peace is the result of a lack of disobedience.
The best case would be a fundamental discovery that could not be denied showing the error of such a belief system.
For fully-developed adults to believe in something without any proof whatsoever? It must be genetic - there can be no other logical explanation.
My argument is not based on whether it was said by a Muslim or non-Muslim, I don't know where you got that impression. You posting a non-Muslim talking about the same thing only cements my impression that you have failed to grasp or even consider the arguments I have made. The point is that polarisation causes more of the bad Islam, not less. It is possible to address the issues within Islam in a less polarising manner, and that includes not painting people with the same brush. That's not to say we should ignore the bad which is there, just that we shouldn't alienate those who are taking steps in the right direction.
Many of the Islamic terrorist and murderers in France were second or third generation immigrants. So what does that tell you? We can't put a police oficer by every Muslim in the West. Besides, I find the mere dogmas of Islam, particularly Sharia law, regarding non-Muslims (i.e. infidels), women, gays, etc. VERY troubling. So if the theory is wrong, how could the practice be right?
Christians point to the Bible as supporting many of these same ideas. And, they are right - at least in that they find verses to which they adhere.
The problem is lack of education in the principles on which this nation and western democracy was founded and critically - on the difference between a Muslim who is an Islamist (wants to force religious beliefs on others through physical violence (Law - Sharia Law) and a Muslim who is not an Islamist. This is the fault of the Mainstream Media, PC progressives, our education system, and the religious right.
Amen. It goes deeper, too. My congresswoman got visciously attacked in 2002 for suggesting we should examine what motivated OBL. It was considered supremely antiAmerican to see his acts as anything but just what Muslims do.
Did you watched what president Trump said in the OP video? It's not just about good Muslims and bad Muslims. It's Islam in general.