The fact is Most Muslims and Christians can coexist peacfully in strong Western countries, or countries that function on democratic Governments like Indonesia. Unfortunately when Sunni extremists move among the Muslim communities they incite civillian violence against those of different faith. Example: I have friends in Indonesia who experienced this in Ambon when machete armed Muslim bands moved into the city they burned the homes of Christians and sympathisers, murdered about 10,000 Christian men and boys, stole and raped their wives as sex slaves. I've listened to the heart wrenching stories of young girls who escaped for their lives out of the area. The young Muslim girls close friends of Christian girls taught to turn against them in the agenda of purifying the area of unbelievers. Every week in Indonesia Churches are burned and those who do not accept the Koran are murdered; all under official clerical approval at the planning and implementation. Christian may be sporadically retaliating but this is not organised by the Ministers and Priests of the Churches, but from personal anger.

The problem arises when Muslim Blasphemy Law designed to controll thought and expression is enforced upon a free and democratic population. Islam is a religion based upon absolute controll of its adherents by laws and rulings administered by Imams on trivial behaviours. eg. What should I do if I enter a haidresser that plays western music?

Boaz, I'm not disputing the legitimacy of the need to "understand culture and history" when reading ancient texts. It does make the idea of absolute authority kind of irrelevant when you do so though. Who gets to decide which bits are the absolute commands of god and which bits were cultural allowances? One of my points was that the same space does not seem to be given to moderate muslims by some christians. Quoting selected bits of their writings is about as legitimate as quoting selected bits of the bible.

Have you considered my point about the worst of christians vs the worst followers of other belief structures? If it is legitimate to say that they are not really christian then surely it is not legitimate to point to the extremists in Islam as representative of that faith.

In regard to you challenge to garra. You might consider the comment in one of your posts that appears to suggest that you think I stand for nothing. If that's not what you meant please excuse my misunderstanding. I'm not real bothered by the comment but it certainly appeared to be an attempt to be nasty. I do take quite strong stands on issues of personal integrity - how I live my life matters to me. The fact that we stand for different things (sometimes) does not mean I stand for nothing, just that we hold different values.

R0bert

A quick follow-on from R0bert (my apologies R0bert if you disagree!)…

Selective highlighting I think is the problem here. We have seen it claimed in this thread reference to ‘bad’ Muslim behaviour belonging to the religion while ‘bad’ Christian behaviour lay at the feet of individuals. Perhaps we can apply this in reverse.

Statements that current Muslim governments are not democratic or tolerant can easily compare to similar governments of Christian bent in history. The fact that one exists now while the other comes from the past does not negate the significance of the point. History covers quite a long period. Both are guilty of ‘bad’ behaviour and intolerance.

The rise and fall of government and religion happen. Individuals affect each. It is more the point that both hold similar values on life, humanism and moral standing. The fact that extremism has taken hold at various points in history is sad but a fact. What is of relevance is how society deals with the problem and finds a solution, satisfactory to all.

I do not think that any amount of “I’m right and you’re wrong” or “Look at the evil you perpetrate, we aren't like that!” can justify either position (broad statements to make a point, OK? Not specifically correct in content!).

Moderate the extremism and educate all to the benefits of your faith. Then individuals can make their own informed choice – which is what faith is all about.

Peace and tolerance, as always.

JustDan, very nicely written thanks.

Personally I'm not to keen on encouraging the "educate all to the benefits of your faith" bit. If I see benefits being lived out I will investigate. That is when people holding to a particular faith live lives that are clearly better (whatever that means) than the best of the lives of those holding to other beliefs.

If they want to educate me then they should do so by living their lives in admirable ways rather than doorknocking or sponsoring events.

R0bert

Thanks R0bert.

That is what I meant. Actions speak louder than words and hypocrites damn themselves. Like feeding a toddler, the more you force-feed them, the bigger the mess! People will ‘eat’ of the food of religion, when and if they want to.

Also, the more one proclaims ones belief and righteousness, the more I think one is unsure of their position. How’s that old adage? “Me thinks thou doth protests to much”...

Not naming any names of course, but this is a posting about nutbags, after all. It appears to be a general rule that such people can be identified through their excessive and inappropriate (even random) use of upper CASE. And their propensity to QUOTE THE Bible as "evidence" FOR whatever they ARE asserting. I wonder who I am REMINDED of?