Radical Islam

Jarid Calamus wrote: You would no more call a Christian who terrorizes an abortion clinic, a radical Christian, no more than you would a priest who molests children, or a KKK member.

I would call a Christian who terrorizes an abortion clinic a radical Christian. I wouldn't call a priest who molests children a radical Christian because his actions aren't condoned by any biblical doctrine, nor are the KKK's actions.

That being said, "radical Islam" is a poor term for Islamic terrorists. A better term is "Islamic fundamentalists", especially when referring to ISIS. Fundamentalists believe in a literal reading of scripture, and ISIS certainly checks that box.

Religious psychiatric patients dont care if we care about violent passages in the Quran/Bible/Thora they will bend and try to get out of logical discussions and try to implicate their idea of their beliefts ,like trying to force the Sharia on us or try to get the Palistinians out of Judea , or try to shut down abortion klinics ...i feel that when you believe in a G'd that is a very personal thing , for all others ...they should not even be confronted with it.

MartaLina wrote: Religious psychiatric patients dont care if we care about violent passages in the Quran/Bible/Thora they will bend and try to get out of logical discussions and try to implicate their idea of their beliefts ,like trying to force the Sharia on us or try to get the Palistinians out of Judea , or try to shut down abortion klinics ...i feel that when you believe in a G'd that is a very personal thing , for all others ...they should not even be confronted with it.

The root of the problem, of course, is not Islam. I think that is an important line that has to be drawn. The root of the problem is that we as humans have a tendency to band together into clans, where outsiders are perceived as enemies and the absolutist idea of "with me or against me" reins supreme. This tendency has been cunningly played upon by politicians and leaders of all sorts, religious or not. Because this political manipulation is so intertwined with the history of religion, it is woven into its sacred texts.

The degree to which people have replaced the "old" religions of monotheism, with the "new religions" of Constitutional Democracy and the Free World, with its sacred tenets of freedom, equal rights and the rule of law, is what is responsible for our modern world. It's not perfect either, but it certainly beats the old tenets of do-as-I-say-or-burn.

but it certainly beats the old tenets of do-as-I-say-or-burn.

"Do as I say or I'll give you a fine" doesn't have the same ring to it does it?

Manu wrote: The root of the problem, of course, is not Islam. I think that is an important line that has to be drawn. The root of the problem is that we as humans have a tendency to band together into clans, where outsiders are perceived as enemies and the absolutist idea of "with me or against me" reins supreme. This tendency has been cunningly played upon by politicians and leaders of all sorts, religious or not. Because this political manipulation is so intertwined with the history of religion, it is woven into its sacred texts.

I agree with you to the extent of your point about tribalism and political manipulation, Manu. Where I disagree is on tribalism being the root problem in the sense that what a tribe values culturally is at least a greater issue.

Tribe A believes in sacrificing their first born to a god. Tribe B doesn't believe in sacrificing their first born to a god. We could, based on what we know, make an argument that Tribe A holds unethical beliefs. We could also believe it to be due to tribalism.

Person A believes in sacrificing their first born to a god. Person B doesn't believe in sacrificing their first born to a god. We could make the same argument about ethics using the first example, but we couldn't about tribalism because this involves individuals.

What is the common thread? Ethics and morals. Islam promotes certain unethical and immoral beliefs. The belief system of Islamic Fundamentalists is what needs to change.

Jack wrote: What is the common thread? Ethics and morals. Islam promotes certain unethical and immoral beliefs. The belief system of Islamic Fundamentalists is what needs to change.

Biblical scripture also promotes unethical and immoral beliefs. You don't see people petitioning Christianity to change, just specific people or institutions defending their fundamentalist versions of the religion.

Manu wrote: You don't see people petitioning Christianity to change

No, Manu doesn't see them. But other people do — in fact, other people often are those people. I think I can count myself among one of them, for all the good that will do.

The 21st century has seen an unprecedented effort to correct past wrongs of the Church, whether it was the small Episcopal church in Kansas that formally apologized for shunning black churchgoers a century ago and celebrated a service with their descendants, the Roman Catholic parishes worldwide that are slowly beginning to accept and admit their mistreatment of LGBT people, the ongoing and probably endless work to try to end feuding between various Christian denominations and so on.

And that's ignoring what has happened in theology — advances in the studies of history, anthropology and archaeology have changed Christian theology forever. Examining scripture within its specific cultural context is only slightly newer than the fundamentalist movement which only began in the 1910s. The 21st century has only brought more changes, many of which have not gone over well with traditionalists. Either way, trust me: there is no shortage of Christians "petitioning Christianity to change" — definitely not in the present day, and certainly not for the last few centuries of reformation and upheaval.

Edit:

Jack wrote: Islam promotes certain unethical and immoral beliefs.

So does Christianity. So does Buddhism. So does [insert basically any religion, including Jediism here]. Heck, so do a gazillion different political/philosophical views. Find the right place and the right person in the world and you will find someone who is able to find an unethical/immoral interpretation of a religious belief system or any other -ism. No belief system is immune from this.

I just don't understand radical extreme anything combined with violence, intimidation and terror. I think is a personality disorder and a desperate grasping for power by frustrated people out of touch with society, common values and reality.

Adi wrote:

Manu wrote: You don't see people petitioning Christianity to change

No, Manu doesn't see them. But other people do — in fact, other people often are those people. I think I can count myself among one of them, for all the good that will do.

The 21st century has seen an unprecedented effort to correct past wrongs of the Church, whether it was the small Episcopal church in Kansas that formally apologized for shunning black churchgoers a century ago and celebrated a service with their descendants, the Roman Catholic parishes worldwide that are slowly beginning to accept and admit their mistreatment of LGBT people, the ongoing and probably endless work to try to end feuding between various Christian denominations and so on.

And that's ignoring what has happened in theology — advances in the studies of history, anthropology and archaeology have changed Christian theology forever. Examining scripture within its specific cultural context is only slightly newer than the fundamentalist movement which only began in the 1910s. The 21st century has only brought more changes, many of which have not gone over well with traditionalists. Either way, trust me: there is no shortage of Christians "petitioning Christianity to change" — definitely not in the present day, and certainly not for the last few centuries.

I stand corrected.

Adi wrote: So does Christianity. So does Buddhism. So does [insert basically any religion, including Jediism here]. Heck, so do a gazillion different political/philosophical views. Find the right place and the right person in the world and you will find someone who is able to find an unethical/immoral interpretation of a religious belief system or any other -ism. No belief system is immune from this.

I don't argue that. I do argue that Islam right now is one of the most violent movements in the world. 75 years ago that title probably belonged to Christianity. I think sometimes, and I'm guilty of this too, we see one immorality in a belief system and put that belief on an equal footing as a belief that has many immoralities.