The Forum > Article Comments > Beyond minarets: Europe’s growing problem with Islam > Comments
Beyond minarets: Europe’s growing problem with Islam : Comments
By Shada Islam, published 19/1/2010Can one be both European and Muslim?
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Page 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
-
- All
Posted by stevenlmeyer, Sunday, 24 January 2010 11:16:17 PM
| |
Pericles: "Terrorism. It happens. Sometimes between religions, Hindu vs Muslim" (YES). "Sometimes within the "same" religion, Catholic vs Protestant,"(LONG TIME AGO AND WAS NOT THE CAUSE IN IRELAND.) "Shia vs Sunni." (YES,THE ONES INTENTIONALLY! KILLING CIVILIANS.)
Syrian Poet states: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ylv8sYjZvGo Iraqi politician of rare kind speaks up: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AT031csTNcE Liberal Behraini author expresses his opionions: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lut5DyQl8 Traditional Muslims vs. Liberal Muslims - Roots of Conflict: Young Muslims in America http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxej5bIkfo0 Former Qatarian Dean: Our culture responsible for terror http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4WcWWBdaesM Winston Churchill Views on Islam: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OonT6Gr3soc Posted by Constance, Monday, 25 January 2010 1:38:43 PM
| |
Pericles,
Now this is what I REALLY call "mindless Mozzie-baiting": http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article6999909.ece QUOTE A report drawn up by French MPs will this week call for a ban on Afghan-style burqas and other garments that cover a woman’s face. The proposal has strong public support. According to an opinion poll by Ipsos for the magazine Le Point, 57% of voters favour a ban while 37% are opposed. END QUOTE I understand the need for laws against appearing naked in public. You probably would not want to permit people with covered faces to enter banks. Sometimes you need people to identify themselves. But legislating dress codes? Gimme a break! Posted by stevenlmeyer, Monday, 25 January 2010 2:35:29 PM
| |
I think you might be better placed than I to test this out, stevenlmeyer.
>>Is mozzie-baiting more or less pleasurable than masturbating?<< Do let me know your conclusions. And Constance, if you believe that the conflict in Northern Ireland has not been between Catholic and Protestant, you probably also believe in leprechauns. Take a quick look at these sites http://www.iraatrocities.fsnet.co.uk/ "Even today in 2009 Protestants are being attacked day and daily by bigoted Roman Catholic republicans whose heart if they have one is a black as coal and full of hatred and evil." And this one. http://www.jrank.org/history/pages/7810/Orange-Order.html "The history of the order in Canada includes a nasty record of anti-Catholic bigotry, neighbourhood violence, social exclusion, and sectarian riots." And this one, too. http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-11056518.html "Roman Catholic and Protestant children start learning to fear and loathe each others' communities as young as 3 years old, a newly published study found Tuesday, blaming parents and Northern Ireland's religiously divided school system" Sadly, the situation does not seem to improve. Only the number of casualties changes from year to year, not the underlying problem. Posted by Pericles, Monday, 25 January 2010 4:32:01 PM
| |
Wow, Pericles, you really have blown things out of proportion, whilst completely ignoring the links I had attached of some balanced Muslim gents expressing their opinions of the need for constructive self-criticism in their societies. As one of them says, more dialogue, more humaneness, not booby traps. Where’s your response to the gist of my posting?
The Irish issue began with the English invasion and oppression of that country where they killed off almost 40% of the Irish population - not religious, just England’s past empirical motto of conquering and dividing countries. Yep, there’s bound to be some vestiges of past prejudices – and? Those Tykes and Prodies are certainly a menace in our world today, right(?) Once again, denying or ignoring the real Ogre. “Escape from Reality” was a good song from Elvis, wasn’t it? Posted by Constance, Monday, 25 January 2010 10:14:11 PM
| |
Pericles.
I have a strong view of the difference between good and evil. I criticise evil when I see it in the behaviour of human beings of any kind, including those calling themselves Christians. I can recognize people of good will born into any tradition. Gus Dur, former President of Indonesia, was a mind and a voice for tolerance from within Islam. You don't appear to understand anything about serious, modern, internalized Christianity. But I really can't be bothered debating with you. I'm a positive person who affirms life and the values that make life good. You carp and focus only on the negative. I haven't seen you positively affirm any good value. But I am genuinely disturbed by your preparedness to defend evil. Have a good life if you can. I don't think your attitudes are going to make for one though, either for yourself or anyone else. Posted by Glorfindel, Tuesday, 26 January 2010 1:00:05 AM
|
"… no religion has a monopoly on terrorism…."
You understate the case.
Religions as such have no monopoly on terror. Followers of ANY ideology are capable of atrocities. "Godless" communists perpetrated mass murder on a scale that is truly hard to comprehend. Pol Pot, for example, probably killed one in six of his fellow Cambodians. We may never know how many people died during Stalin's reign of terror.
But the prime monster of the twentieth century is probably Mao Zedong.
Whatever you want to say about Pol Pot, Joe Stalin and Mao, they were not God botherers. Nor is North Korea's Kim Jong Il.
You write:
"It is the mindless mozzie-baiting that I object to…"
You've used that and similar expressions often. But you've never explained what it means.
What is the difference between "mindless" and "mindful" mozzie-baiting?
For that matter, what do you mean by "mozzie-baiting"? Does any critique of Islam qualify as "mozzie-baiting"? If not, what are the criteria?
Even if you objected to what you call "mindless mozzie-baiting" do you want to legislate against it? Should there be an anti-mindless-mozzie-baiting law? If you do want such a law you'd better define "mindless mozzie-baiting".
For example, does pointing out that different versions of the koran have been discovered and that therefore the current version cannot be the uncorrupted word of God qualify as "mozzie-baiting"?
Does pointing out that a book that gets the basic facts of geology wrong is unlikely to be a message from the creator of the universe qualify as mozzie-baiting? Unless off course you posit an absent minded creator which is, I suppose, possible. I mean if you've created trillions of planets you may well forget the details of some of them.
Am I mozzie-baiting?
Is mozzie-baiting more or less pleasurable than masturbating?
Good night.