The Islamophobia Network

You find beheading and suicide bombings prevelant in the Islamic world... This is due to it's being directed in the Koran. You don't find beheadings and suicide bombings prevelant in any other religious area. This really isn't even a huge point... it is just saying that the way violence manifests itself in that region or those in conflict with it is based at least partially on the teachings of the Koran, whether they are being twisted or not is quite irrelevant.
I'm afraid you missed my point. I'll rephrase more succinct.

Do you believe that if the religion in the Islamic world, as you call it, would have been Christianity, there would have been less violence or just that it would take a different form?

edit: An example. You might see Christian terrorists slay someone while reciting Luke 19 26 He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”
 
Suicide bombing simply isn't commanded in the Qor'an and beheadings are mentioned because they were a common method of execution at the time. It was supposed to be a living document, like the US Constitution, but now both are revered as unchangeable, fixed documents, both to great detriment.
 
Suicide bombing simply isn't commanded in the Qor'an and beheadings are mentioned because they were a common method of execution at the time. It was supposed to be a living document, like the US Constitution, but now both are revered as unchangeable, fixed documents, both to great detriment.

Good comparison. Again, something I've been saying for a while on here.
 
I love how you repeatedly harken back to something that occured centuries ago for your point...
Good work man!

Maybe we can talk about something that has happened since 2000?
Then why are you insisting on the idea that Islam has retained some essential character unaltered for over thirteen hundred years?
 
I'm afraid you missed my point. I'll rephrase more succinct.

Do you believe that if the religion in the Islamic world, as you call it, would have been Christianity, there would have been less violence or just that it would take a different form?

edit: An example. You might see Christian terrorists slay someone while reciting Luke 19 26 He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”
I think that it would mainly have taken another form... mainly.
Look in unstable areas where Christianity is "in charge"... still violent, just not quite as graphically directed by the religious book.

Suicide bombing simply isn't commanded in the Qor'an and beheadings are mentioned because they were a common method of execution at the time. It was supposed to be a living document, like the US Constitution, but now both are revered as unchangeable, fixed documents, both to great detriment.
Both points you make are quite faulty.

1) "Suicide bombing" isn't directly mentioned because bombs didn't exist... Great point. However, it is clear that giving ones life in the killing of infidels is a great honor and worthy of martyrdom (though not the only way). It has manifested itself in all sorts of ways... if one is willing to kill oneself in the quest to kill others, they can potentially do way more damage (9/11 for example... without out those suicide pilots, they could not have flown the planes into the 2 Towers).

2) The Koran was supposed to change? Ummm... where did you come to that conclusion...
And, the US Constitution has changed, and can continue to... there is a built in system for amendments... that means changing it.
 
1) "Suicide bombing" isn't directly mentioned because bombs didn't exist... Great point. However, it is clear that giving ones life in the killing of infidels is a great honor and worthy of martyrdom (though not the only way). It has manifested itself in all sorts of ways... if one is willing to kill oneself in the quest to kill others, they can potentially do way more damage (9/11 for example... without out those suicide pilots, they could not have flown the planes into the 2 Towers).
Out of interest, what cultures entertaining any sort of martial tradition have not glorified this sort of suicidal valour?

2) The Koran was supposed to change? Ummm... where did you come to that conclusion...
The principle of the distinction between the Mecca and Medina revelations is well-established in Islamic scholarship, the former representing Muhammad's originally revelations which lay down the fundamentals of Islamic theology, the latter pertaining more directly to the circumstances in which the early Muslim community found itself after their exile to Medina. It's simply that there is not universal consensus on the practical implications of this distinction, just as there's no consensus among Christians as to the practical implications of the distinctions between Old and New Testaments.

Wikipedia said:
The Qur'an is divided into 114 suras, or chapters, which combined, contain 6,236 āyāt, or verses. The chronologically earlier suras, revealed at Mecca, are primarily concerned with ethical and spiritual topics. The later Medinan suras mostly discuss social and moral issues relevant to the Muslim community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam#Revelations
 
I think a big explanation for why Islam is much more radical than Christianity aside from political issues is that Europe and America are far more secular than the Middle East so Christianity just doesn't have as much of a hold on the population.
 
Out of interest, what cultures entertaining any sort of martial tradition have not glorified this sort of suicidal valour?
The Brits? They seem to prefer idolizing failures then idolizing victory. (The battle of Balaclava for example).
 
He died in the battle.:p
 
Do you believe that if the religion in the Islamic world, as you call it, would have been Christianity, there would have been less violence or just that it would take a different form?
I'd probably prefer living in Kenya to living in Somalia or Sudan.

edit: An example. You might see Christian terrorists slay someone while reciting Luke 19 26 He replied, ‘I tell you that to everyone who has, more will be given, but as for the one who has nothing, even what they have will be taken away. 27 But those enemies of mine who did not want me to be king over them—bring them here and kill them in front of me.’”
A Christian terrorist might recite that verse. It's a possibility. Just like Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction recited some verses before killing someone. That's how relevant this is.
 
He died in the battle.:p
That's my point, yes: he dies in the moment of victory, so the Brits put a statue of him on top of a column that was at the time one of tallest structures in the country. Just because they didn't frame in religious terms doesn't mean that it isn't an example of the same basic martyr-worship.
 
So the Brits immortalized a suicide attacker!:eek::eek:
I now have to go and rethink my entire worldview.
 
So the Brits immortalized a suicide attacker!:eek::eek:
I now have to go and rethink my entire worldview.
I hope you're joking - dieing in a battle between two warring nations and blowing yourself and dozens/hundreds others to smithereens are two very different things.
 
I hope you're joking - dieing in a battle between two warring nations and blowing yourself and dozens/hundreds others to smithereens are two very different things.
The people who blow themselves up view themselves as being in a war with the people they are fighting.

Just looking at Trafalgar, Nelson was responsible for the death of several hundred French and Spanish, whose ships he then proceeded to plunder and take as hostage.
Seems like something a terrorist would do.
 
I'd probably prefer living in Kenya to living in Somalia or Sudan.
Good for you I guess. Not sure how that links in to my question though.
A Christian terrorist might recite that verse. It's a possibility. Just like Samuel L Jackson in Pulp Fiction recited some verses before killing someone. That's how relevant this is.
Does this mean you agree that whatever religion used, or verse quoted, at these times is more of a justification instead of a motivation?
 
I think all religion is stupid.
 
That's precisely the sickness... because they target women and children specifically.
In WWI Britain implemented a blockade that would fall hardest upon civilians, women and children. Germany implented aerial bombardment against London which resulted in the deaths of women and children. In WWII Germany specificaly targeted London for civilian bombing. The UK retaliated by carpet bombing Germany. America went on to firebomb Japanese cities comprised almost exclusively of women and children, along with two nuclear weapons. In Vietnam American troops (and earlier, French troops) would round up entire villages and execute anyone suspected of being a collaborator with the Viet Cong.

Targeting women and children has been done by every major power in a war ever.
 
That's precisely the sickness... because they target women and children specifically.
So you're not familiar with the fire-bombing of Dresden or the atomic bombings of Hiroshima or Nagasaki? You can argue the ifs and buts of that analogy all you like, sure, but they inarguably fit the criteria given above, so that's clearly not the only thing that makes them exceptional.
 
Top Bottom