Islam is not a Peaceful Religion

I don't "love Muslim's or Jews or Christians", individuals I can love and respect. Good article, you covered it well. My view is a little different, stoning people to death and lopping off hands seems a bit cruel to me, I approach the subject as Philosophy. They're all philosophy's, Communist to Muslim to Baha'i, I liked your notation that Communist and Muslims are responsible for thousands of deaths in the name of their ideologies. To be fair, add Christianity and the crusades to the list, sh*t happens. Any ways, if someone is out to kill you, you can kiss them but it might be your last kiss.

Good luck with any attempt to eradicate or rewrite the Ideologies/Religions. Like StarTrek, we poses incredible weapons, yet we always end up bare chested and bare knuckled in a hand to hand combat.

Thank you "chaz" for mentioning Christianity and the crusades, because it seems everybody blaming Islam only these days.  The article is nice and well written, however, the writter has to search more to analyze certain stuff about Islam.  FYI, regarding the verse you have mentioned in your article, which you've explained encourages fight, when it was written, it meant only at that time of history, not nowadays.  I'm a Muslim lady and i'm proud of it.  I follow Islamic instructions as is, that's why i'm not extremist.  So extremists are the ones who don't follow kuran and not the followers as you've mentioned.  Statics show that Islam is the most growing religin around the world.  Most of its followers are very educated and they convert after deep study of the Kuran.  I agree with you that some Muslims spoiled the name of Islam by their stupid actions under Islam.  But we can't judge the whole nation/ religion by individuals.  Please study more about history.  Hitler wasn't muslim, Bush isn't muslim and Sharoon isn't muslim either.  I have very good Christian and Jews friends who are very peaceful unlike the ones i mentioned.  Thank you.  

chaz & Ibe:

You both reference Christianity and the crusades to discredit the article - reread the first few paragraphs, and your comparitive arguments will be rendered null.

On a sidenote, Ibe, the article provides an example - the war against Tripoli - to prove wrong your claim that the violent verse in the Koran was only for "that time in history"... as if it makes a difference anyway. You reject oppressive Islamic instruction, that is why you are not an extremist. There is no other reason. You have no proof for your claims, only wishful thinking. Furthermore, if by no other balance, we can judge Islam by how it has historically interacted with the non-Muslim world - violently. So yes, we can judge the whole religion by its historical nature, but not by "individuals"... so to an extent you are right. Not sure why you bring up random politicians in your comment.

I hope you find the courage to embrace the truth.

To calarify a little.  It  appears that nearly every religion and idology has their violent  side or faction or period , if not yesterday or today there's always to marrow. Islam, or any other group that damands control over how you "live and die" should to be watched closely, by those inside and outside it. Discrediting the article wasn't the intent. But a MACRO view of the subject needs to cast a wide net and this was adding a little more perspective, or at least hoped too. The article was actually OK, it hit on all the hypocracy of people fighting for womens rights, ignoring them now, those that would fight in the streets for equality in the sixties, now fighting to keep other races from the opportunity, refusing to let another human being have the same rights.  

 

 we can judge the whole religion by its historical nature, but not by "individuals"

You got it, while individuals in a religion may be great people, there are undesirables also, how do you seperate the "curd from the whey" .  (Little joke, sorry Curds)

Bush has done fairly well seperatig the Wheat from the chaff.  

Or should it be HOMOGENIZED? You know the saying(kill them all and let God/Alah sort'm out), which may yet be the result if Islam can't adapt to peace. It worked in Waco.

Let he who cast the first stone... 

 

A few recommendations:

So first, it seems like you're one of those fellows who has been unidimensionally indoctrinated to reflexively see Islam and analyze it as the archetypal "Great Destructor" religion, but are ostensibly trying to "look fair" in doing so. 'tis a noble undertaking. So, you start off your article with a few caveats. I can understand that. After all, Nazism was bad, but there were plenty of GOOD Germans, right? One small semantic recommendation I have for your charitable little "crusade for Christ" is to use "God" or at least "god" instead of Allah.  It's a subtle but very powerful twist in vocabulary, strategically used by people writing against Islam, that makes me want to tear my hair out. The oblique insistence here is that the Muslims worship some crazy and strange alien deity. The word "Allah" is Arabic for God. So don't say Allah, say "God." Or, if you're going to do the typical kneejerk and say "that crazy smiting tyrant isn't MY good and humble lord and savior," then you can substitute god. But don't buy into that underhanded, lowballing semantic politick. Or, keep on using Allah, but then note that the French worship some crazy idol named "Dieu" and the Germans worship some crazy idol named Gott and the Chinese worship some crazy idol named 上帝.

 There are plenty of Arab Christians at my church and when they worship in their native tongue, they use "Allah." Yes, Christians! Jesus Christ is their personal lord and savior! Imagine that.

Secondly, I look forward to your writing of an article of a really similar tone about the Jews. Because, after all, the Jews only have the Torah, and there's no abrogation in that tradition. And you're a Bible Believer, so certainly you know all the delightful laws in Leviticus and Deutoronomy. Stoning adulteresses and executing disruptful children and other miscellaneous gore. Oh, yes, in the stories, too... this thing instituted by God (Or should I say "Yahweh" to make it exotic and foreign?) called the ban whereby Jacob's sons in retaliation for a rape wiped out an entire village, killing all men and children and taking all the women. Let us not forget Joshua's rampage through Canaan.  In law and in historical example, the Jews are supposed to be vicious and murderous to non-Jews and fatally unforgiving to sinners in their own midst. And no Jesus came along to cancel all that stuff out for the Jews who live today. And wow, Judaism isn't a proselytizing religion like Islam! So there's not even a real chance to convert and receive mercy. So like I said, I hope you write a post about how, while individual Jews (insert plug that you've "been to a Jewish country" here. My, aren't we well travelled!) may be nice, Judaism itself is a rampaging, violent religion (don't forget to selectively pull out quotes from the Torah and bash them against your readers' heads until they crumple into submission! Repeating quotes out of context over and over again, be they from the Torah, the New Testament, or the Quran, is vain repitition, I mean, good rhetorical style) and that if Jews and Israelis aren't stoning adulteresses and homosexuals today it's because they've pussied out and aren't real Jews (because of course peaceful Muslims aren't "real Muslims", aren't faithful to what is laid down to them in the Quran and Hadith, and there's no hope for Islam to go through a modernizing process as did Judaism).

Maybe you can pull off a cute "secret question" stunt at a Jewish talk, too. "Why aren't you wishy-washy people stoning homosexuals like the Torah says? Either get real or become Christians because we have an excuse not to stone them. =D" Because people representing a religion getting worried or upset about an insultingly simplistic and reductionist question is something only silly Mooooooslems would do. 

Lol

 

What nonsense. Christians and Jews aren't mutilating women and stoning homosexuals.  Christians and Jews aren't strapping shrapnel bombs to children and sending them into crowded markets to blow up innocent people.  Christians and Jews aren't committing barbarous acts of terrorism around the world every single day.  When Muslims live next to Hindus, they kill Hindus; when they live next to Christians, they kill Christians, when they live next to Jews, they kill Jews; and when they live next to Muslims, they kill each other.

vgmalic:

"So first, it seems like you're one of those fellows who has been unidimensionally indoctrinated to reflexively see Islam..."

Haha... what? 5 points for word usage.

"There are plenty of Arab Christians at my church and when they worship in their native tongue, they use 'Allah.'"

Congratulations, you are so multicultural!

"the Jews only have the Torah"

You are completely wrong, do some research. For one thing, they also have the Tanakh. And actually, if you are truly interested, I did write briefly on the topic of Old Testament Law.

http://thoughts.jessenickles.com/old_testament_law.html

To jselkcin, 

I'd like to enhance your knowledge about Islam by telling you the following, which i quote from School Hajj Bahaa Eddin al-Hariri of Lebanon :<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />Islam has three basic rules underlying unity in diversity : The first rule is that the sense of human unity of all people constitute one of the same God created one, and has said the Holy Quran : "O mankind We have created you from a male and a female." Second base is where human diversity follow the Koranic verse ", and made you into nations and tribes." .Any that diversity is the divine will, and his presence will reflect this. The third rule is that the objective of this diversity is the people to unity and diversity reservation respected and safeguarded. Where complete verse of the Koran determine the wisdom of diversity saying, "Verily, the sight of God despise." There are many references to differences and diversity set forth in the Quran, including : "The people of one nation and went forth." "Had your Lord willed to make the people of one nation, and still different." The division is based on humanity and not on the differences or similarities unconformity. Highlights complementary relationship between unity and diversity through the following three principles : The first principle is trading as if the people one people or ethnic one, there would have been no circulation and they are different and because the will of God wants to be different, it was inevitable from circulation. Circulation continues to mean humanity and continuation of what is contrary to the argument of the end of history circulation life and eventually death. The second principle is the scramble : Valtdava-not antagonism and confrontation - is the evolutionary competition and evolutionary different human societies. he communities are water, if stagnated Assent, and if left and scrambled attending, Tangt with the light and wind which will provide them with the elements of life and recovery and growth and progress. Without friction intellectual and cultural exchanges and the scramble among civilized people and different cultures National, loses mind Attaché knowledge, which is fueled by promises of a match. The difference between people and the threat it is to defend one of the requirements that corruption Earth. The difference is the norm, which is a strain on the waiver, a fixed permanent human societies since the beginning of creation until the end of time.  Now, can you tell me the same about yours.

jselkcin,<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /> I am a Palestinian-not an Arab, a PALESTINIAN- from <?xml:namespace prefix = st1 ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:smarttags" />Galilee, and I am proud to be from the same region where Jesus Christ (May the Peace and Blessings of God be Upon Him) was from. I am also proud to say that I am a practicing Muslim (Thank God), and have friends from all faiths; I count my Muslim, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Baha’i, Sikh, and Buddhist friends as all my best friends. I even have a few Israeli friends who even though we disagree on politics for obvious reasons, are friends nonetheless. I was particularly offended by you characterizing Islam in Palestine by describing toddlers dressed up as suicide bombers! For your information, that is against Islam as any person would know. You should also know that Jewish settlers- occupiers of Palestinian Judea and Samaria- teach their kids how to “kill Arabs” from about the same age (don’t believe me? I have the pictures to prove it), or how about those pictures from last years Lebanon War with innocent little Israeli girls writing cute little love messages on rockets for Lebanese kids to receive- could I/ would I use that to characterize Judaism? Of course NOT! But only in the case of Islam are contemporary events and actions of self-proclaimed Muslims used to “explain” that Islam is “not a peaceful religion”.   The theme of violence and religion is one which all three monotheistic faiths share, you cannot deny this. The socio-political events of their time meant that in order to arise the way they did, they had to be. Could Judaism have been established without the Genocide of the Philistines and Canaanites? Could Christianity have arisen without Constantine’s bloody and crushing victory at Milvian Bridge? Could Islam have even survived had not Muslims taken up arms at the Battle of Badr? The Answer in all three cases is most definitely NO. Then why is only Islam labeled as “violent” and “barbaric” only because of some- I emphasize that it is a tiny minority- people have decided to undertake violent methods for political means under the guise of Islam? So, you’re telling me that the next time an Israeli soldier kills a Palestinian child without even considering the circumstances (whether the child was targeted or collateral damage) using your logic I can just quote a few verses from the Torah (or the Tanakh, Talmud, whichever you prefer) about the mayhem that the Hebrews wrought upon the Philistines, including the killing of babies in their cribs, and the systematic decapitation of unarmed persons, to say “Aha, the Israeli soldier is Jewish, means he/she must just be following Judaism as prescribed in that verse of the Torah, that means the Torah promotes hatred and violence, thus Judaism is a twisted ideology which seeks the total obliteration of all gentiles”. You will never hear a real Muslim say that- you may hear Hamas or Hezbollah or Al Qaeda say it though- because the logic of such a statement is twisted and wrong. Not to mention that even implying such a thing earns one the title of “Anti-Semite”. Maybe we should think of a similar name for people who say the same about Islam… I’m waiting for you to address  vqmalic’s comments which are not only very well written but also are very bluntly true (perhaps too blunt for your tastes?), and don’t try being sarcastic since you just come across as looking foolish. I find it amusing that you tell vqmalic to “do some research” when in fact you’ve done hardly any yourself and most of your assumptions about Islam are evidently ridiculous. For example, you claim according to this so called “ideology” which you say is “true Islam”; a real Muslim has to either convert, wage war on, or force non-Muslims to pay a “heavy tax”. Well, in the age of the Rashidun (the first four Caliphs of Islam which were by all means REAL MUSLIMS, and indeed the standard by which most Muslims judge their leaders) when the Caliphate stretched from Egypt to Persia, and afterwards under the Umayyad, and then the Abbasids in what can be considered the “age of conquests”, non-Muslims who came under Muslim rule did indeed have to pay a tax, but so did the Muslims; and in fact the tax paid by the Muslims was much higher than the meager tax the non-Muslims paid. Women, the elderly, and children were exempted from this tax as were those unable to pay it due to their income. You should also note that these non-Muslims were excluded from military service so basically Muslims paid a higher tax than non-Muslims, had to serve in the military, had to stay away from their families for long periods of time, and were obligated to protect the non-Muslims from any harm. I can see the discrimination! And don’t quote some obscure “scholar” who says that the fact non-Muslims couldn’t have weapons equal to those of Muslims as ‘proof’ of Islam’s discrimination because the historical context (yes you should consider this) shows that these laws of prohibition on non-Muslims carrying weapons equal to those of Muslims (they were still allowed to carry basic weapons) came at a time of great turmoil in the Muslim Empire. I can explain further if you want, just ask.  On the theological level, I don’t even want to enter a discussion with you since you don’t even have a grasp of basic definitions. “His descendants and followers have routinely declared additions and subtractions from original Islamic texts in this same spirit of Nashk”, do you have any proof for this claim, no- probably because you will find that it is impossible to find any to justify such a ludicrous claim.  I really suggest you look up the real meaning of Nashk and find some credible sources to read up on it, I suggest Al-Tabari, Al –Shafi’i, and Al Ghazali, just to name a few scholars over the past 1400 years who can help clarify the meaning of Nashk for you. If you would like me to elaborate please don’t feel shy to ask.  

Finally, I want to add that the very essence of this baseless attack on my faith is really uncalled for. If you wanted to open a dialogue with Muslims because you misunderstand our faith (which you clearly do) you should have done so in a respectable way and not in a manner- as evident from the ridiculous title of this article- which is clearly trying to slander the Islamic religion. However, if your intention was not to open a dialogue with Muslims and was just intended to “show” Americans how evil and terrible Islam is, you’ve done a really bad job. Thank God most Americans are clever enough not to buy into such hate-inspired writing and to investigate matters for themselves more fully by looking at the original source- the Qur’an and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace and Blessings of God be Upon Him, His Companions, His Family, and His followers)- and will find the truth. Since 9/11, all sorts of vile insults were launched at Islam, so Americans decided to investigate this faith for themselves, and many have converted after doing so. I give thanks to God that the majority of people on this Earth whose hearts are open and whose minds are open do not propagate hate mythology about a rival faith because it suits their interest.

 

P.S. Out of curiosity i would like you to list all the sources you have used to accumalate your current view of Islam- books/articles/films etc.

Muslims would be much more convincing about how npn-violent they are if they would just stop killing people - including each other.

Huh? jselkcin, you totally ignored many of the aspects of my post and my questions. The fact you don't even recognize the existence of Palestinians as a people tells me all I need to know- discussion over ..and btw vqmalic God Bless You for your posts, I appreciate and am glad there are people like you in this world that don't take sides and only portray things as they are and understand if you allow scum like jselckin to go on a racist rant and be silent about it that means you're allowing them to give Americans a bad name.

And by the way your source list jselkcin is laughable!! LOL- "Muslism worldwide" - wow what a  source, "{Prophet} Mohamad" HAHAHHAHAHAHAHA greaaaaat, where is he, can I meet him to or are you the only one who has access to him?! Ridiculous...

Hey guys.  This is in
response to the article that was posted up at the top of the page.  It is really long, I keep blabbing on and on
with no coherency, but it is definitely worth a read.  Please read through all of it.  I am not a scholar, but I am trying my best
to give the fullest account of a peaceful Islam.  So please bear with me: 

Before I go further, I jus want to say that I’m not a
religious Muslim.  And when I say I’m not
a religious Muslim, I mean I do not follow many of the main tenets in today’s
mainstream Islam.  And when I say
mainstream Islam, I don’t mean strapping bombs to myself and killing innocent
men, women, and children, or preaching jihad, or subjugating women.  When I say I’m not a religious Muslim, I mean
that I have broken a lot of rules when it has come to things such as alcohol,
pre-martial relations, etc, etc.  Things
that a lot of other religions would also forbid.  In other words, I am pretty far from what
many of guys on this page, think is a radical Muslim (or a true Muslim
according to the author).  In fact, I
believe in a lot of things to the extent that one time my religious teacher
said, I would be branded as a non-Muslim.

So if I’m not religious, then why am I spending time here
defending Islam?  It’s because even though
I am not the best Muslim around, I am still very proud of my religion and the
civilization it has brought about.  

Mind you.  You guys
talk about, or imply, how great Western civilization is, or any other
civilization is, compared to Islam.  I
came to North American when I was one, have been brought up here.  I love being Western and I say it openly
that there are many opportunities and ideas here that are unfortunately not
available in many (not all) Muslim countries to a great extent.  Indeed, the West has an amazing civilization,
but it is not perfect, and it has not always been as great as it is now. 

When Islam first came about, people in the Europe
were dying of the bubonic plague, the Black Death.  One reason why they were dying was because they
wouldn’t take baths.  Why?  Because they were afraid their sins would be
washed away.  Farther south, in the harsh
lands of Arabia, where water was scarce,
Muhammad preached that cleanliness is HALF of faith.  That before Muslims stood before their Lord
in prayer, they were to wash their hands, their face, their feet.  And not just wash themselves physically, but
also mentally and spiritually: to wash themselves of all evil thoughts.  Now tell me, what barbaric and violent
religion would preach that?

One other thing.  I
come from a family that is one-third Roman Catholic.  I’m from Bangladesh.  I was reading in the article about mutilated
Hindu bodies.  It’s a very graphic image,
and I regret that murders did happen, in the name of Islam, but it was not only
targeted towards Hindus, but also towards other Muslims, not just minority
Muslim groups, such as the Ahmadiyyas, but also towards mainstream
Muslims.  The Muslims who perpetrated
this didn’t even follow their religion properly.  They drank, they barely prayed, and they
harmed others.  And Muhammad once said
that those who harm others, are not true Muslims.  

Let me tell you this: 
my Roman Catholic family has never EVER been targeted for their
beliefs.  Yes, incidents happen, I don’t
deny it and I regret it, but to make it look as if only Muslims do it is a
lie.  Muslims are in power in Bangladesh and
many will misuse the religion for their own purposes.  Likewise, in India, Hindus are mainly in power,
and likewise they will misuse the religion for their own benefits.  There have been many instances of massacres,
on both sides.  In the latest violence in
India, a train going from India to Pakistan was bombed.  The official police report after the incident
blamed a HINDU extremist group for staging the attack.  I do not blame Hinduism for the violence, and
many Muslims don’t.  And many Hindus will
tell you they won’t blame Islam for the violence.  If Muslims were so barbaric, the president of
India
right now wouldn’t be a Muslim.  Something
for you guys to think about.

Btw, about those Hindus that were murdered, the radical
Muslims that perpetrated the attacks were hung by the Bangladesh
government just a few weeks ago.  In
fact, it was the top 6 terrorists in the country.  And people rejoiced.  They were glad these terrorists were brought to justice.  It took them only a few months after the
major attacks took place to capture them. 
Only a few months.  And yet the
American government, 6 years after 9/11, has still yet to catch Osama bin
Laden.  I am not a conspiracy theorist,
but I just like to show the dedication the people of Bangladesh have towards maintaining
religious tolerance, and still maintain a strong Muslim identity.  We are the second or third largest Muslim country in
the world (population wise).  And Bangladeshis aren’t alone
in this.  Throughout the Muslim world,
people want to end the violence.  Yes, we
aren’t doing enough, but the intention is there.  Action doesn't happen just like that.  Starts off as a trickle, and slowly becomes a raging river.  You will see a greater response from the Muslim world.  I can't say when, but it will happen.  And since the terrorists were captured, the
country has seen no religion-related violence in the past year nearly.  Why didn’t the author mention this?  It only happened a week or two before he posted
the article.  It looks like he did quite
a bit of “research” to prove Islam is a terrorist ideology.  I’m surprised he didn’t come across this
piece of news.  Something for you guys to
think about. 

My family, during the 1971 war against West Pakistan (Bangladesh was East Pakistan at the time) were
one of hundreds, if not thousands, of families that sheltered Hindus from the Pakistan
military.  I admit, the Pakistan army came to kill
them.  But my family is a conservative
Muslim family, and yet they still protected non-Muslims, not because out of any
financial benefit (their houses were burnt down by the military for sheltering
them), but because they felt it was the right thing to do.  That Islam tells them to protect the
helpless.  And today there are 15 million
Hindus in the country.  Some 10% of the
population.  You can say Hindus are
fleeing the country, but so are Muslims. 
Religious problems occur, but it is not as bad as the media makes it look, and it is not always a religious issue; economics and politics come as
well.  Asia is a very volatile region, whether it involves a Muslim country or no.  Something for you guys to think
about.

Another thing, yes, there is a lot of violence going on in
the Muslim world today and in neighbouring countries involving Muslims.  Some are justified, some aren’t.  Some are fought in good ways, some
aren’t.  But at the end of the day, if
atrocities in the name of Allah occur, it does not mean that Islam condoned
it.  Most of the atrocities occur in
places where there is a lot of poverty. 
The Crusades against the Arab Muslims that occurred several centuries
ago was caused, on the surface, by a desire to free the Holy Land from what
Christians believed were the Infidels (Yes, Muslims aren’t the only ones that
used that word).  But underneath, there
were many economic and political factors that came into play.  Many went for spiritual purposes; many went for other purposes.  When they Crusaders conquered Jersusalem, thousands of Muslims, Jews, and Christians were slaughtered.  10 000 Muslims were slaughtered inside the vicinity of the  Al-Aqsa mosque; the third holiest site in Islam.  In the future, perhaps the West will fall
(and I think it will…as civilizations rise and fall) and maybe our descendants
will be strapping bombs (or something along that line), will be preaching war
(and remember the rhetoric the West’s “democratic” political leaders use today).  Will it be because of Judeo-Christian values (besides they are the same as Islamic values anyways),
or democratic values, or will it be because you are frustrated from years of
humiliation, poverty, and suppression and a desire to just survive and keep
some dignity in the face of your spouse, kids, and society?  Mind you, the Islamic world only collapsed to
its present state about a century ago. 
At that same time, the weapons you see today were beginning to be
manufactured.  That’s why you see radical
Muslims do these abhorrent attacks.  But
similar attacks happen in other parts of the world, involving non-Muslims.  And the West has yet to struggle the way the
Muslim world struggles today.  Imagine
what could happen if they do.  Weapons are getting more and more advanced and dangerous as the years go by.  Something
for you guys to think about. 

Now you guys say Islam teaches violence against other religions.  Let me tell you this: any line, taken out of
context, can be used to preach something else of what it stands for.  I’m sure we can all agree on that.  The lines the author used were taken out of
context.  Those lines were aimed towards
a specific group who were not only harassing Muslims when the religion had just
been born, but maiming and killing them. 

You say that Islam treats women terribly, the first martyr
in Islam was a woman.  She converted
because she was awed by the respect Islam gave women.  Maybe in today’s Western standards these new rights
Islam gave may seem backwards and not sufficient, but back then, it was
revolutionary.  And it is also a matter of faith and situations.  Rights change from people to people and time to time.  And these rights, even
today, whether you believe in them or not, contain some wisdom in them.  Back then, when girls were born, many were
buried alive.  Islam banned that.  This woman, was amazed by that (the abortion
debate still rages on, passionately and often violent, in the year 2007).  She converted.  She was murdered by the pagan Arab elite at
the time.  They tied her arms and legs,
stretched them out, and tortured her under the burning sun.  They asked her to revoke her new religion,
but she kept saying, “There is only one God, and Muhammad is his
messenger.”  Then she spat on her
torturer who was verbally abusing her. 
He got insulted, and drove a spear through her most private part.  Oh I forgot to mention, this was done in
front of her son and her husband, who were tied up as well on poles in front of
her, being whipped. 

You say Islam doesn’t respect slaves, most of the first
converts to the religion were slaves. 
The Arab elite hated the new rights Islam bestowed on many people.  They even ridiculed the rights that Islam was
bestowing upon ANIMALS (and in the West, animal rights didn’t become a major
issue till the 60s or 70s).  One of the
first converts was this Ethiopian slave named Bilal.  His owner was one of the leaders of Mecca and when he found
out that Bilal had converted had him whipped and then laid out on the burning
Meccan sands with a heavy rock on top of him. 
The heat seared into his skin which had been gashed open.  But he kept saying, “Ahad (The One (True
God)).”  And then what happened?  Abu Bakr, Muhammad’s best friend and the
first Caliph (POLITICAL ruler of the Muslim world) after Muhammad’s death
rushed to Bilal’s owner, paid for him, and then set him free.

Something for you guys to think about. 

You see, Islam is not only idealistic, it is also
practical.  You cannot change the world all
at once.  Slavery was rampant in Arabia, it could not be overthrown just like that.  For better or for worse, Islam said that it
was better to free a slave than keep it. 
It never said to keep more slaves. 
And it gave slaves rights, as I said before.  They could not be abused and had to be fed
well and sheltered well.  Whether you
agree with this method or not is up to you, but this was 6th century
A.D., and this was coming from a shepherd (Muhammad was shepherd, not a king or
a military commander).  Judge it for the
intentions.

The new Muslims were soon forced out of their homes.  Muhammad was almost assassinated.  One group of Muslims went to Abyssinia (modern day Ethiopia) and
another took shelter in a nearby city, Medina.  No matter how noble the Muslims were, they
were human.  One thing I respect about
Islam is that it is not overly idealistic. 
Muhammad never said he was the son of God, or God himself.  Nor is he portrayed that way to this
day.  And he did make mistakes, but that
makes him human and easy to relate to. 
Compared to an overly-idealized Jesus, the son of God, who has been so
GOD-ified that many Christians today cannot relate with him.  Just look around you.

Anyways, war happened. 
As you can see from the cruelty of the Arab elite at the time, they
didn’t really have a choice.  It was a
life or death matter.  Then these
verses were revealed.  The verse the
author uses, 9:29 in the Quran, was aimed primarily towards the pagan Arabs,
who were harassing Muslims, and not towards anyone else whom they were at peace
with at the time, including the Christians and Jews.  How do I know this?  Because in the translation, she mentions “People
of the Scripture.”  People of the
Scripture is also known as the People of the Book.  Which book? 
Not the Quran, surprisingly, but the Bible:  the Old and New Testaments.

War happened not because they wanted to expand Islam’s
boundaries, but in self-defence.  When
times were okay, Muhammad told the Arabs in chapter 109 in the Quran:  “I worship not that which you worship.  Nor will you worship that which I
worship.  To you be your way, and to me
be mine.”  When the Muslims conquered Mecca, not a single drop
of blood was spilt (except for a group of 10 or so pagan Arabs, members of the elite families, who wanted to fight to the death and maintain honour; maybe hard to believe today, but honour and integrity meant everything back then).  In fact, the rules
of war were handed down before then:  no
innocent men, women, or children to be harmed, no trees to be cut down, no
houses to be looted, etc.  One time, on
the battlefield, a non-Muslim combatant was about to be killed when he said,
“There is only one God.”  But the Muslim
killed him.  Afterwards, when Muhammad
found out, he rebuked the Muslim.  But he
replied saying that that warrior only said it out of fear, to survive.  What was Muhammad’s response?  “Only God knows that.” 

To top that part off: 
“Those who believe (in the Quran). 
Those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians (some minor
Christian sect I believe) and the Christians—And who believe in Allah and the
Last Day, and work righteousness—on them shall be no fear, nor shall they
grieve. (Quran 5:69)

Hmmmm…sounds pretty peaceful and understanding to me.  What do you guys think? 

What are the five main pillars of Islam?  Jihad isn’t one of them (I hope you’re not
surprised…sorry to burst your bubble if you are). 

1. Iman
   (Faith):  to believe not only in a
   single God and Muhammad, but also to believe in the previous faiths
   (Christianity and Judaism).  But
   most importantly to believe in Al-Qadr, or Divine Preordainment.  That everything that happens in life
   happens for a reason and that we must be patient about it.  That we must learn from it and become
   stronger people.
2. Salaat
   (Prayer):  to pray 5 times a
   day.  Its spread throughout the day,
   so Muslims can remember God throughout the day.
3. Siyam
   (Fasting):  you can fast pretty much
   any time.  But especially during the
   month of Ramadan.  It is done so we
   know how those who are impoverished, those who are not as lucky as us to have food readily, feel. 
   It is not an easy fast; there is no food or water between sunrise
   and sunset.  But it is doable.  If you think that’s
   harsh and tyrannical, I did it when I was 8, for the entire month, years
   before the age of 15 (which is when many think it becomes mandatory), and
   I did not have any problems. 
   Seriously, if you are into your religion, into anything as a matter
   of fact, you can persevere through hardships.
4. Zakat
   and Sadaqah (Charity):  The Zakat
   was more like a tax than charity. 
   Just as the non-Muslims had a Jizyah tax, Muslims also had a tax,
   the Zakat.  It was mandatory and a
   huge part of Muslim society. 
   Although the Jizyah has been misused by Muslim rulers, so has the
   Zakat.  So don’t whine about
   non-Muslims being oppressed by the Jizyah. 
   They weren’t alone.  Sadaqah
   was voluntary charity, one of the greatest things someone could do.  These 3 things were primarily used not
   for government services, but to protect non-Muslims and Muslims
   alike.  Muslims had a widespread and
   sophisticated welfare system before it became even widespread in the West.  The second Caliph in Islam, Umar, was
   once walking in the streets (he was one of the most powerful men in the
   world, and yet he would walk in the streets freely amongst his
   people).  He ran into this elderly
   Christian man, an impoverished man. 
   Umar was saddened to see his state and asked him what was
   wrong.  He explained his situation
   to the Caliph.  What did Umar
   do?  He said that when the man was
   young, he paid the Jizyah, he served his state, and now the state should
   serve him.  And so he took him to
   the state bank, the Bayt-ul-Maal, and gave him money from there so he
   could live comfortably.
5. Hajj
   (Religious Pilgrimage):  It’s a
   pilgrimage.  Almost 2 million people
   from around the world, from all walks of life, come to Mecca to stand in front of God wearing
   the same white or black garb.  In
   unison.  In equality.  Enough said.  If you would like to know more, I went
   on it a long time back when I was 13. 
   My memories a little shady now, but I can give you guys the best
   description I can give of this remarkable journey.

As you can see, the main pillars of Islam is not violence-prone.  It wasn’t mean to be.  Whatever violence Muslims in the early stages
of Islam took up was done in self-defence. 
Shit happens.  Mistakes happened.  But in war,
mistakes always happen.  You could say no
divine religion can make mistakes.  Sure,
you can say that.  But we aren’t talking
about the divinity of Islam, we are talking about its supposed inherent
violence.  Judge it for the intentions. 

This is random.  But
Philistines (today’s Palestinians) were in Israel
(Canaan at the time) before the Hebrews.  C’mon. 
Don’t tell me the author doesn’t know the story of Moses (and afterwards
Joshua) leading the Hebrews from Egypt
TO Israel.  They killed off a whole bunch of tribes there
too.  They ignored the law of converting
non-Jews (I don’t blame Judaism for the violence, btw…I hope the author doesn’t
either).  They also fought with the native Philistines (David vs Goliath).  So it was the Hebrews, not the Philistines, that were foreigners at the time.  That word, Phleshtim, which
means “foreigner,” is actually a Hebrew word. 
A language bias.  Philistines were
foreigners not in their own land, but to the newly arrived Hebrews.  Philistines called themselves Flesten, which
means “sea people.”  They were sea
farers; it doesn’t mean they magically popped out of the sea.

K, I’m tired typing this up now.  And you guys are probably tired of reading
this.  So I’ll end this quick.  The author used some hadiths near the end,
the one about the Jew behind the tree and the other about women and
sexual slavery.  Those hadiths are in the some
well-known Muslim hadith collections.  I
admit.  But one thing you have to
understand:  the hadiths are not as
widely respected as the Quran itself. 
You will not read such things in the Quran.  The hadiths are sayings of Muhammad.  He said many things in his 23 years of preaching
and a lot was copied down.  There are
THOUSANDS of sayings of his.  It’s
impossible to track every single saying down. 
It’s futile.  On the other hand,
the Quran is believed to be the word of God, it is only 6236 verses.  Still a lot, but much less compared to the
Bible, and it’s easy to maintain.  In
fact, millions around the world have memorized it.  Even in Islam’s early ages, it was
memorized.  So it was less easy to
corrupt and it was more protected too because of its apparent divine
nature.  The hadiths were unfortunately
corrupted.  It was hard for people to
tell what was fake and true and party fabricated.  Several Muslims attempted to sift through all
this, but they had limited lives and resources. 
They were humans who had their share of biases.  Mistakes were made.  To this day, it is still being revised.  I do not believe Muhammad said these things,
but it is a matter of faith.  If you
believed he did, then fair enough.  But
from what I have told you about the brighter parts of the religion, and please
do your own research, make your own judgement. 

Btw, I'm sure in many religious texts, there will be obscure, or even clear, verses talking about something that we modern people will find barbaric.  We have to realize that additions and subtractions have occurred to some sort of respected religious text, in most religions, if not all. 

Islam means “submission,” but what’s wrong with submission?  Muslims submit to their Lord out of awe,
respect, and love.  Rudolph Otto, a very well-respected German philosopher on religion once defined religious experience as "tremendum et fascinans (I learnt it in religious studies class...if you guys can and haven't...take it...its hella interesting)."  Basically, awe-inspiring and fascinating.  It overcomes you.  And then you submit.  In an individualist
West, it might be hard for many of us to submit to anything.  But let's say this, when you love someone, you always submit
to them to a certain extent.  I don’t
mean to sound cheesy, but it is true.  It
doesn’t have to be a tyrannical submission.  Islam doesn't stand for "slavery."  Besides, the root word for Islam, is Salaam, which means “peace.”  To submit to a cause greater than ourselves,
to lose ourselves in a divine ecstasy, as many followers say they feel when they
submit to their Lord, for the greater good, that is what Islam is about.  It might not seem perfect to you.  Sure, believe that.  But please don’t say that it is inherently violent
(and I don’t have to explain that almost every religion has had its share of
violence and violent verses), because despite the harsh, volatile, and violent
world it was born in, it still maintained a strong sense of doing good for the
greater good.  I'm not religious, but Islam has changed my life several times and in many ways, for the better.

Something for you guys to think
about.

PS:  If you like to
know where I got my verses or paraphrases from, just ask me.  And oh yeah, Islam can’t be
anti-semitic.  Arabs and Hebrews are both
semites.

sorry guys...ionno wth happened w/ the format...came out all fucked up :s...

Very well spoken s.c.o.r.p.i.o., philistine, vqmalic and manutd.   jselkcin and followers, you're sc***ed, you better change the title of the article.  I have to leave now because my time is more valuable than wasting it commenting on your f***ing personal opinion.

Jselkcin I would like to say; I do find your attempt to recognize the pain, suffering and flaws in our world commendable.However, it seems you have givin up. Let me see if I can help you in your analyzing.

Islam is not a Peaceful Religion
BY : Delphinna
. Your title is incorrect, because Islam is the religion so it is redundant to repeat Religion a 2nd time.
. Let me make a suggestion for your title. ( Islam’s Ideology )

BY: jselkcin
“I love Muslims. The few Muslim nations that I’ve visited are home to some of the most hospitable and generous people that I have ever met. However, this does not change the politically incorrect fact that
BY : Delphinna
. Take this it out here.

BY: jselkcin
Islam is an ideology that inherently promotes violence, subjugation, and inequality. “Before you call me a racist, let me clarify to you that I am analyzing Islam as an ideology that affects millions of people, and not generalizing the actions or attitudes of any certain ethnic group.”
BY :Delphinna
. You are speaking of their “Ideology” in your introduction paragraph how it promotes violence, subjugation, and inequality. So naturally paragraphs to follow should be on these points.

BY: jselkcin
You see, when the claim is submitted that “Islam is a peaceful religion,” it is most always based on the fact that indeed, most Muslims are peaceful people. This, however, only confirms the fact that most humans of the world pursue peaceful lives, without truly addressing the ideology itself.
BY : Delphinna
. I don’t see how Muslims living peaceful lives is the reason, or confirms in anyway why the rest of the world would? It makes no sense what so ever. I would take this out of your analyzing.

BY: jselkcin
I could easily construct an argument calling solely upon the news photos I see regularly of women being beaten in Kabul, or the mutilated bodies of Hindus in Bangladesh, or the toddlers dressed up as suicide bombers in Palestine, or a Ronald McDonald statue being burned in Pakistan. I could also call upon Muslim holidays like the Day of Ashoura, when Shiite Muslims slice open the heads of their babies with swords. I could even point out the fact that the Muslim world seems to have continually bloody borders: central and east Africa, the Balkans, the Caucasus, central Asia, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Philippines, etc. - but I suppose these would be cheap shots.
 BY :Delphinna
. Thought you wouldn’t be doing this, because it makes your claims in the introduction contradicting. If you wish to make a point to others in the world try to stay away from contradicting yourself. I would take this out.


BY: jselkcin
Many ideologies in the world that by their nature seek “good” have been perverted to accomplish “evil.” Hitler justified his wars by claiming allegiance with Christianity. “By fighting off the Jews,” he wrote in his book, Mein Kampf, “I am doing the Lord's work.” The list of perversions justified by the Catholic Church, likewise, is almost limitless - and interestingly, they have yet to add Mein Kampf to their “Index of Forbidden Books.” 
 BY :Delphinna
. Index Librorum Prohibitorum was abolished by Pope Paul VI in 1966.This would be why they have yet to add it, because it no longer exists. The Catholic Church now recognizes the freedom of conscience. I would take that out now, because it is false Information.

BY: jselkcin
In fact, a recent poster put up on UC Irvine’s campus by the recently established Atheists, Agnostics, and Rationalists Club argued that without religion, we would have “No Holocaust… No 9/11… No Problem.” Perhaps ignorance like this has certain foundations. But, as it turns out, there are other non-religious, well-meaning ideologies like communism that, according to the U.S. Senate, has been responsible for upwards of 100 million human deaths within the last century alone. 
BY: Delphinna
• Has nothing to do with your points in your introduction. I consider this pointless babble that doesn’t relate to the topic at hand.



BY: jselkcin Islam
is different than many “well-meaning” religious and social ideologies in that the ideology itself contains oppressive elements – it requires no perverting.

BY: jselkcin
In Arabic, the word “Islam” means “submission” (to the will of Allah); which is what Islam expects from both Muslims and non-Muslims, according to the Koran. It is now the fastest growing religion the world
BY: Delphinn
• I would not keep this unless you add in a point as to why you are even mentioning it, or how it pertains to Islam Ideology of violence, subjugation, and inequality

BY: jselkcin
Ultimately, much of the inconsistency in Islamic ideology comes from the concept of “Nashk” – the idea of abrogating older ideas with newer ones. The very core of Islam is built upon this idea: the words of Christ are said to abrogate any conflicting commands of past Jewish texts, and the words of Mohammed are said to abrogate any conflicting commands of Christ. But since Mohammed’s death, his descendants and followers have routinely declared additions and subtractions from original Islamic texts in this same spirit of Nashk. Hence the ensuing chaos: Sunni verse Shiite, Egypt verse Iran, Osama bin Laden verse…

BY: jselkcin
well, I suppose most ayatollahs hate America these days too.But most major Islamic texts and religious leaders seem to agree on one thing –that violence is desirable, or at least justifiable, against non-Muslims and “hypocritical” Muslims.
BY: Delphinna
• This looks to me like generalizing. You need to back this up again with some kind of fact where you are gathering this information.

BY: jselkcin
In Surah 9:29 of the Koran, for example, it states:
“Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the people of the Scripture, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.”
 BY: Delphinna
• I would keep this and include it in your fist paragraph on how Islam’s Ideology promotes violence.

BY: jselkcin
In other words, non-Muslims must either: convert to Islam, pay a heavy tax to Muslims, or face war. This verse, according to mainstream Islamic theology, abrogates earlier peaceful verses in the Koran that Mohammed wrote during the Mecca phase of Islam.
BY: Delphinna
• No facts backing this assumption. “Mainstream Islamic theology” does not support your claim.

BY: jselkcin
Among other reasons for the shift, his new empire was short on money at the time.Most Americans don’t realize that the very first foreign military engagement of the United States after gaining our independence was a response to proactive Muslim aggression –
BY: Delphinna
• I would keep this bit here, but you need to show some kind of connection to how this is effecting and causing Islam’s Ideology to promote violence, subjugation, and inequality
• Include what book you are getting this from. Take some quotes from the author, but don’t ramble on for several paragraphs becoming distracted from your goal.

BY: jselkcin
the First Barbary War, fought in the Mediterranean Sea. Muslim pirates had been demanding (and receiving) the Jizyah tax from American trade ships in exchange for safe passage, which eventually amounted to 20 percent of U.S. government annual revenues by the year 1800.
In 1786, when Thomas Jefferson and John Adams went to negotiate with Tripoli’s ambassador in London, they asked him by what right the pirates extorted money and took slaves. Jefferson reported to Congress:
“The ambassador answered us that [the right] was founded on the Laws of the Prophet (Mohammed),
that it written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have answered their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as prisoners, and that every Mussulman (Muslim) who should be slain in battle was sure to go to heaven.”
Upon Jefferson’s inauguration as president in 1801, further ransoms were denied, and a four-year war was eventually launched against Tripoli that ended in U.S. victory, now memorialized in the U.S. Marine Hymn. Ironically, it was Jefferson’s Koran that U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison was recently sworn in on.
BY: Delphinna
• Babble, so take it out.

BY: jselkcin
Many Muslims respond to exposures like this by saying that verses have been “mistranslated” and that one cannot truly understand Islam without speaking Arabic. This is a hilarious defense when you realize that there are more Muslims in Indonesia than in all Arab nations combined – and yet, the growth of al-Qaeda and other violent Muslim groups doesn’t seem to be phased by so-called “mistranslation” in that part of the world, let alone anywhere. In fact, according to PBS, only 12 percent of Muslims worldwide are Arab, and the vast majority of Arab Americans are Christian.

BY: Delphinna
• Keep this and put it in a paragraph under inequality.

BY: jselkcin 
I recently attended an event at UC Irvine put on by the Muslim Student Union where a former Christian pastor-turned-Muslim, Yusuf Estes, came to speak on peace, unity, and Islam. The audience was given the chance to submit question cards at the end, so taking up the offer, I wrote my own:
“Do you really think that Islam can contribute to a so-called ‘global peace’ when verses in the Koran such as Surah 9:29 and 9:39 advocate proactive violence against non-Muslims and when religious leaders in Iran and elsewhere lead Friday prayers asking Allah to aid them in the destruction of the United States and Israel?”As
my question was passed to the aisle, an MSU student leader collected it, and bewilderedly showed it to another man. After reading it, the man whispered back, “Tear it up or something,” and they ran to the back of the room to consult other MSU leaders. It made me feel sorry for them, because they obviously were peaceful Muslims that had not truly pondered the foundations of their religion.
BY: Delphinna
• Unless you have some kind of written statement from Yusuf Estes. This is all hear say. Stay away from hear say.

BY: jselkcin
Perhaps I should let a few more verses from the Hadith (oral teachings of Mohammed) speak for themselves:
“You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, ‘O Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.’” Hadith Sahih Bukhari, Vol. 4, Book 52, Number 176
“If a man is in a mood to have sexual intercourse, the woman must come immediately even if she is baking bread at a communal oven.” Hadith Sahih Tirmzi, Vol. 1, P.428
There is no such thing as Muslim extremists. There are only those that follow the teachings of Islam and those that don’t

BY: jselkcin
Islamic “terrorists” simply choose to follow all such teachings, while most Muslims reject the teachings that they sensibly, and commendably, conclude are oppressive – even though they have trouble condemning Islamic “terrorists” dogmatically.
BY: Delphinna
• I would come up with some information as to how terrorists simply chose to follow all the teaching. You need to support your claim.

BY: jselkcin
It is a bizarre situation when an American can’t legally be a communist in some states, but is allowed to propagate an ideology that calls for the outright destruction of our country.