I'll find myself responding only to comments that are relevant to the thread topic, so as not to get bogged down in endless side issues. I do find it irritating that once again a conversation about Islam has attracted several posters who instead of engaging in the topic will do what they can to deflect attention away from the issue; despite my request in the OP to avoid posting if one has nothing to contribute to the question of the thread. What is it about this topic that causes otherwise intelligent people to go into this mode of hostile emotion, senseless spam-posting, distortion of facts, and sheer delusional thinking? Why does it freak you out so much when other people are having a rational conversation about an important topic?
I am of course very much in favour of different opinions within the range of the issue of the thread, and I will gladly answer any questions about Islamic history and theology.
In the end my point is that it's super easy for a preacher to pull out hateful verses from the Bible, much like it's easy for a preacher to pull out hateful verses from the Koran.
Moderate Muslims exist, moderate Imams exist, meaning that it's possible for an Imam to preach about Islam from the Koran without focusing on stuff like "Kill the infidels" and instead focus on far more moderate messages from their holy text.
The texts matter. It is actually very difficult to pull hateful verses out of the new testament. It is patently easy to do so with the Quran.
As for moderate imams, it depends on what we mean with the term "moderate". If "moderate" means not preaching to kill people, then yes, there are plenty of moderate imams. If "moderate" includes treating women as equals and valuing secular laws over sharia, then moderate imams are virtually non-existent. The reason being that their religious texts just don't allow these things. Sure, you'll find the rare gay imam, or a mosque here and there that doesn't separate women from men. But not only are such instances extremely scarce, they have no backing in Islamic theology whatsoever.
The orthodox imams have theology on their side. That is a huge problem. Which is why I wanted to discuss it in this thread.
Phrossack said:
It's very unfortunate for everyone that so many Muslims interpret the Quran as sanctioning violence, slavery, and terrorism, but we as non-Muslims have no place telling them that their interpretations are incorrect.
It is unfortunate that the Islamic State has a very plausible interpretation of the their faith. They are following Muhammad's example as closely as possible. From childhood on, Al-Baghdadi spent most of his time immersed in religious studies and Quran recitation, and later graduated in Islamic Studies in Baghdad. It would indeed be foolish to claim that his interpretation is incorrect.
It's clear to anyone who has read the Quran or the Life of Muhammad that Islamists in general are totally in line with the instructions laid out in their scripture. That is not to say that there can't be less disruptive interpretations - but it is a lot harder to get to a more or less benign version of Islam than it is to get to Islamism.
Bootstooth said:
It goes much deeper than that, and I'm not one to lay all or even most of the blame on the West's foreign policy. That is an important part of the story of how radical Islam became entrenched, though, so I don't think you should dismiss it out of hand or consider it off-topic. We will definitely need to stop supporting Islamist regimes (Saudi Arabia first and foremost) and rebel groups immediately, as the first of many steps.
I don't dismiss our missteps in foreign policy, and I totally agree with you that we must stop supporting Islamist groups. I'd go even further and say we should stop any kind of weapon trade with Saudi Arabia and other orthodox countries. I consider the nuclear deal with Iran to be a huge mistake. What I meant in the OP and what I want to keep out of this thread is the ridiculous notion that Islamism is a result of Western foreign policy.
Bootstooth said:
The way to proceed is probably to go piecewise and relatively slowly. Attempting to destroy their faith outright is actually quite likely to increase the polarization between radical Muslims and play into ISIS's claims that the West and Islam are destined to be locked in an apocalyptic struggle for the future of the faith. I don't think critics of Islam should be muzzled or anything, but I can't help but notice that the 'clash of cultures' narrative is very common among both radical Islamists and anti-Islam voices.
While I don't usually use the phrase myself, we must be honest with ourselves:
there is a clash of cultures. I know that many people are terrified to accept it, not least because this narrative is employed by both Islamists and right-wing nutjobs. But just because they say it doesn't mean it isn't true. Islam is clashing with the West (and the rest of the world) in virtually every aspect of life. In America this may not be as noticeble yet as it is in Europe. But here in Germany not a day goes by without countless instances of cultural misunderstandings, tensions, animosity, or hostility.
Often they are small issues, like Muslim men refusing to shake hands with their female boss, girls kept out of sports and swimming lessons, children not attending evolution classes or not being allowed on class trips, quarrels over food in canteens or over extra days off on religious holidays, demands for female driving teachers (girls may not be in a closed room with a man other than their husband), etc etc.
Then there are more serious issues, like demands for halal food, a general refusal to integrate which causes ghettoisation and parallel societies, imams preaching hate of infidels, all kinds of problems regarding education, like not accepting female teachers or generally very poor school results, open hostility to indigenous Germans, overrepresentation in crime, especially sexual harrassment and rape, vast overrepresentation in dependence on social welfare, men beating their wives, or men having several wives etc etc.
And finally we have the most glaring problems, like FGM, honour killings, and terrorism.
This is a clash of cultures if there has ever been one!
What we have to do is find a way to deal with it. It is clear by now that we won't solve the problem by denying that it exists. The correct way forward is not to ignore the problem for fear of using the same words as Islamists do, the correct way forward is to be honest and acknowledge the problem, and then steer the conversation in a desirable direction. The Islamists' solution is to gradually implement sharia and eventually undermine and conquer more territory. The far right solution may be to deport all Muslims. The correct solution is to have a rigorously honest dialogue about the nature of Islam and challenge its mainstream orthodox interpretation. We must make it clear that we will not accept any of our values to be undermined by religious theocracy. And we must be forceful and candid about it. This may involve unpopular measures. It may involve heated debates and fights. It may involve monitoring mosques. It certainly will involve deporting hate preachers. And it may even lead to riots within some radicalised parts of the Muslim population. But the longer we wait, the worse the situation will get, and the harder it will become to do anything about it.
And we mustn't overlook the long-term results of such measures. By speaking honestly about Islam we will cause countless Muslims, who hadn't given their religion all too much thought or who were misled by imams, to leave Islam, thereby slowly undermining the faith. By deporting hate preachers and monitoring mosques, we will decrease the likelihood of young Muslims becoming radicalised. If Islam is holding back Muslims, if it is limiting their participation in society and preventing them from pursuing their talents, doing better in school, and getting better jobs, then by combatting Islam we are first and foremost helping Muslims.
Bootstooth said:
What are you thinking would actually convince people to deconvert from a deeply held religious faith en masse?
I actually have an idea. I came up with it after reading
The Life of Muhammad. While Muhammad is a despicable and deeply immoral character, his life is also very interesting and exciting. It is full of adventures, quarrels, fights, deceit, relationships... We must expose all Muslims to the story of Muhammad and to the true nature of this man, as laid out in the sira. A book only reaches a small audience, and often not the one intended. No, we need something bigger.
We need a full-fledged, hollywood-style motion picture about the life of Muhammad!
Now, I am just another guy, and both too busy and unskilled to pursue such a project. That is why I was rather excited when I found that Ali Sina, an Iranian ex-Muslim in his book about Muhammad had exactly the same idea. And not only that, he actually has already written a script! I will conlude this post with his thoughts about this project.
"I believe Islam can be eradicated in a very short time. But we need a medium to tell the truth about Muhammad to a large audience. We have to find a way to reach to hundreds of millions, or even billions of people. This can be done through an epic biopic on his life. Not a documentary. Documentaries attract only a small audience. We need to make a feature film, something that can be seen, for its entertainment value, by everyone. I have written a script of such movie and I am looking for people who might be interested to help me produce it. Today we can do things that were not possible a few years ago. We can, for example, disguise the features of the actors so they can't be recognized and we can distribute the movie via Internet, so we don't have to worry about theaters being bombed. Such movie can be downloaded and viewed even in Mecca."
) in Russia, China, India, and parts of Africa. Of course in the Russian case, the US and its more unsavory allies promoted Islamism in order to destabilize the USSR both in Afghanistan and in their territory in Central Asia and the Caucasus, and then went on attempting to prop up "friendly" Islamists all the way through the present, as the disasters in Libya and Syria show.
