Bill Maher and Sam Harris arguing with Ben Affleck about Islam

Both. I and maybe 2 other Muslim posters on here don't follow the two major mainstream branches of Sunni and Shia Islam. The majority of criticism from posters in this forum is an attack on those two branches and their mistranslations + misinterpretations.

 

The most I, my family, and like-minded Muslim friends can do is live our lives the way we interpret our faith: coexistence with others, secular/religious humanism, egalitarianism, education, and giving alms.

If I see an extremist Muslim in America, I'm calling the police. If at a social event with Muslims I hear stuff that's trending in that direction, I'll openly (and have) castigate that person for badmouthing a society which tolerates everyone including hypocritical jerks like him. When I'm in Pakistan for business, I tell my managers not to hire extremist/Wahabbi individuals.

What we can't do is battle with ISIL, the Taliban, and similar company on the streets over there. For one, they use asymmetric warfare. Two, they have too many hidden supporters so our backside would be exposed. And third, the Pakistanis I know that think like me have all moved out of the country to safer places like UAE, Australia, the UK, Canada, and the US. We'll only visit the country for short trips, but nothing longer than that. Those peaceful Muslims still there are too indigent to buy a $4 million flat in Mayfair so they suffer living with extremists and corrupt cops on the streets, and Hellfire missiles from above.

The only way we minority Muslims can "crush" extremist Islam is advocating our brand in the West, and siding (our serving like Fchowd) with the armed forces of countries that engage with threats like ISIS. What we can't and won't do, is write off the entire faith and its supporters like an increasing number of right-wing voters. I see and hear far too many comments like "exterminate them like rats", "collateral damage", "carpet bomb/nuke them to hell", etc.

 

Wow. Is it common for muslim social functions in the west to support extremism and killing Americans? It's going on right now under our noses.

I support a policy of complete withdrawal of troops and oil dependency from the middle east. There are enough alternate sources of energy and a need to distance ourselves from the inherent hatred in that region. You can't take away religion from people but you can take away the seeds of hate.

 

No, it's not. I said trending in that direction. There's a spectrum: moderate/secular Muslim -> traditional -> conservative -> ultra-conservative -> extremist/Wahabbi/etc.

Conservative Muslims are almost always peaceful. They're like traditional Mormons. They have strange beliefs (athiests rolls their eyes), they keep to themselves, and want to be left alone without wanting to hurt anyone. Ultra conservatives and extremists on the other hand are very vocal and in your face about theirs being the true way.

The person who I criticized in public was in the UK at a wedding. He mentioned something ridiculous like "these unbelievers are killing millions of us through drones, the CIA/Israel created ISIS or 9/11 to make us look bad, etc." I wouldn't say that was extremism or wanting to killing British people; however, his comments were sensationalist, irresponsible, and stirring anger among the ignorant people there. Words have power and long lives so I had to stop him.

Btw, I wasn't a fan of your 'tagging' comment in the Hangout. Not cool even if you were trolling.

 

wow...

Firstly, whoever that was that was justifying the forced marriage of a 6 year old child should be placed into a mental institution. There is absolutely zero evidence to support your notion that children at that time matured faster than children today. I just recently graduated from college with a biology minor (I also studied pre-med) and from what I have understood, the opposite is true. Children today mature faster than they did in the past.

Secondly, dmc89 has very similar views of Islam to many of my Muslim friends, however, the vast majority of Muslims I knew from the Muslim Student Association at my college had radically different viewpoints on many of the points he made. For the most part, they believed that Mohammad was infallible and that any actions that he did were not only supported by God, but an example that they should always follow.

Next, I would like to point out that whoever continued to compare Islam and Christianity was largely going off topic/avoiding making the tough conclusions about the possible interpretations of Islam. What Christianity did in the past is largely irrelevant to what modern Islam is undergoing. Just because Christians did it before, doesn't make it ok or right to do now. We are discussing Islam and it's own merits, not Christianity.

I would like to conclude this by saying that forcibly marrying a 6 year old child is under no circumstances ok, and the fact that within the Quran/Hadiths themselves, the barbaric punishments for thieves, adulterers, apostates (which someone tried to change the definition of) one can find support, along with several other horrible actions, shows that there are serious issues in the text itself, not only one's interpretation of them. The fact that the most common view of these portions of the Quran is largely objectionable as evidenced by the numerous pew polls is what causes the severe concerns/angst amongst the the general non-muslim public towards Muslims.

 

Why is it irrelevant? Seems very relevant. If Christianity can make the transition, why can't Islam? That's my point. If Islam is inherently violent, than it needs to be eradicated and banned as a practice. That is what ATW is arguing. Is that what you agree with?

How does saying that a religion isn't inherently violent say it's ok to commit crimes? I don't get why that is viewed as somehow glossing over evil in the world. It's not. It's just saying blame the people, not a book full of words.

 

You are arguing that Islam is inherently violent and if you read the Koran it will turn you violent. Therefore you are implicitly stating that it should be banned.

 

Nothing changed. Jesus Christ was a prophet who Christians believe to be the son of God and who could have killed any aggressor with a legion of angels, instead sacrificed himself on a cross to save everyone. Christians strive to be like Christ and suck at it but that is the goal. If they succeed then they would pretty much sacrifice themselves for anyone of any religion.

I'm not going to say that men have not used the Christian religion to control people and do terrible things but I think they kinda missed the point.

The prophet that Islam follows was a warlord...

 

So what is your goal then ATW? Why are you saying that Islam is inherently the problem? Why are you constantly creating all these threads and what are all your posts about? What's your objective?

I am not trying to put words in your mouth, I thought that was your position based on what you write. So if you don't mind, can you articulate what you are advocating?

 

Yes but yesterdays Christianity was just as violent as today's Islam.

 

I see you can't help but avoid personal insults when you don't have an answer to my question.

You still haven't answered me. What is your goal here? You want to raise awareness that Islam is inherently violent to what end? What do you hope to accomplish? Let's say you convince the entire world that Islam is inherently violent. What would be the outcome of that?

Why don't you answer the question instead of spewing insults? What are you afraid to engage in honest debate?

 

Which is more likely:

1. Pew doesn't know how to properly conduct a poll.

2. Individuals who support death for apostasy don't have a logical grasp of religious freedom.

I assume when you hear hooves you assume unicorns.

 

How should people stop this exactly and prevent it from spreading? These acts are already illegal in most countries. So how else do you prevent it from spreading?

You state it a 1,000 times a day. That's what is odd.

What does posting it here have anything to do with numbness? Have you ever thought it doesn't get posted because we've debated it 50 million times already and this is Debate and Discussion not Post the News?

Now you are putting words into my mouth. I don't think you understand the point I am trying to make at all.

Speaking out against bigotry and hate is a great thing to do. I don't think that is all you are doing though. And that's my issue with you. You are going further by saying Islam is the root cause of these violent acts. That's is more than condemning hate speech or violence.

What's your point? Who cares what you are in this debate. It's not a political debate.

 

Humans since their inception have been violent. Ascribing the "trend" of violence to some specific religion or ideology is nonsensical. It was 70 years ago that Europeans were slaughtering each other by the millions.

 

So once again you go on the personal offensive.

I asked you a simple questions - what ACTION are you seeking people to take to stop the spread of violent Islam?

You can not answer that. You can only spew insults. This would seem to point to the fact that you don't have a good answer and are trying to distract from answering a question.

So instead of engaging in a debate, you shift to personal attacks. Won't work ATW. Either you answer the question here or you will be admitting that your crusade is nothing more than a bigoted agenda against Islam.