Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Search for Moderate Islam
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 406 of 432 (755717)
04-10-2015 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 404 by Jon
04-10-2015 9:10 PM


Same was true of Christianity.
Irrelevant.
It's not irrelevant to point out that a religion that exists in largely moderate forms today, used to be very extremist, worse than Islam today even. If you had lived in those times, the notion that Christianity could become what it is today in Europe and the USA especially....would have been absurd. So no, that extreme totally life dominating religions can become moderate afterthoughts is not irrelevant to my views that the same might happen with Islam.
Pointing out other similar examples from different cultures and societies when discussing anthropology is actually referring to evidence. Not irrelevant regardless of your repeated insistence that it is.
Have you read any of the stuff by Ayan Hirsi Ali that I've quoted and linked to? Her perception, as a former Muslim, is that the extremists are right: the texts of Islam really say what they claim they say.
I'm not disputing that the texts of Islam say what they say at all. I've read quite a bit of it myself, translated by reputable translators of course.
Her opinion is that the Qur'an itself (and other Islamic writings)and the fact that Muslims everywhere treat it as infallibleis one of the biggest problems with Islam.
She's wrong, in my opinion. It's the Hadith, and the fact that Muslims treat the ones they believe are genuine as infallible - is one of the biggest problems with Islam. Almost the entirety of the awful stuff is in there. And the Quran holds the key to destroying it as it actually forbids the Hadith. Indeed even some of the Hadith forbid the Hadith.
And yes, much of moderate Islam treats it as infallible, but 'of it's time and needs to be interpreted for the modern world' and the like. Some moderates argue that the words Gabriel gave to Mohammed were timeless truths, but they became temporal when translated into Arabic which, may be awesome - it may have been the best language at the time to use, but it is not up to Allah's perfect majesty. Obviously people that take the Bible or the Qur'an literally and treat it as infallible are often dangerous lunatics I wouldn't want to be within ten miles of - and that's why we want moderates who have a more liberal approach to the texts.
And that's why I am saying we should be promoting that this is possible, reasonable, ethical, and consistent with Islam. Because saying the opposite can't be helping.
Asim Qureshi can't bring himself to declare his disagreement. And how could he disagree? No matter how horrendous the writing, denying it is apostasy, punishable by death.
Exactly. So his prevarications tell us nothing about him other than he is aware he is being filmed, he is aware of his social and cultural context and his place within it and how that would drastically increase the chances someone would be angry enough to do bad things. Given what he does - he would have to be a raging moron to court controversy like that. It would be like indicating you are an atheist as a Presidential candidate. It will lose you the election, may cost you more as there are lots of nutters out there in the US. So why would you?
We already know there are people that would kill him for denying the Hadith or the Qur'an as they see it. So what is there to learn by watching the video?
Furthermore - regardless of the fears of safety - why would he alienate potential financial supporters by taking a definite position on his own religion? Personally I would want people in his position to receive media coaching about this. I'd recommend 'I am not going to discus my personal religious views in such a public sphere. I am not ashamed, but I feel doing so would run in conflict with my mission. Furthermore I am not a scholar, but I fear as a person in the media I might have a certain amount of influence and I believe that as I am not an Imam it is not place to participate in this fashion. Please can we move on?' But perhaps something punchier. I think 'I am not a theologian' is too punchy and people tend to consider him a 'weasel' for using it, rather than as someone who is trying to do things like live free of harassment. murder and financial consequences for his advocacy group.
This restriction on questioning even the most outrageous tenets of Islam is a major obstacle to reform in Islam.
Correct. Same was true in Christianity, just ask William Tyndale. It can change, let's help that happen.
But no one addresses this.
Don't know if you haven't been paying attention - your posts indicate you've looked at the media about this subject. Isn't the deeply held religious convictions angle played on any of the media you watch? Of course it is. All the time. You've probably posted something that qualifies in this thread already. Everybody addresses it, it's the thing to address.
So clearly you mean something else. What was that?
There is some weird attitude that Muslims can declare their devotion to the Qur'an (hadith, etc.) and all its evil while still maintaining the 'religion of peace' mantra.
I don't know what this sentence means. At best I can parse out that free speech and its advocacy is weird? Could you fill this thought out a bit for me, please? Actually, based on my conceptions of you, I might guess what you are trying to say, but it's not certain. Could you give an example of someone displaying this weird attitude, maybe that would help?
It doesn't work and Hirsi Ali gives good argument on the matter, which you can find by reading my other posts here.
What doesn't work? Accepting evil and claiming to be good? Well it does work on a pragmatic scale, people do it to good effect all the time. It's not coherent in and of itself, containing a contradiction. Is that what you are saying?
Because again you are just saying that Islam is intrinsically evil, which is not true.
I am talking about the history of the matter.
It's not history that's killing each other or treating women and apostates poorly.
And those teams have their origins in religious rivalry.
As the reporter said. So again, where's the lie?
And, of course, such conflicts aren't imaginary and were once major concerns in the west. However, two things should be said: this thread isn't about Christians; and, this stuff just doesn't happen in the Christian world anymore. As I've mentioned several times in this thread, our own history of failings doesn't excuse present behaviors (it didn't excuse our past ones, either).
If you think we raise Christians (the most closely related religion to Islam that exists, that isn't an offshoot of Islam) to excuse terrorism then you have not been reading what we've been saying. Could you try to do this from now on?
Christians used to be awful, it was impossible to see it any other way. Christianity itself, the theological texts, the Papal and Royal decrees. All of that shit? That was obviously not helping. But much of that stuff was written for temporal/political reasons. After the political reasons existed, the religion conserved some of these notions, which really did not help. Neverthless, today we can say that Christianity is a problem still, for many of those same reasons, but the improvements are immense.
The same could be said of its very closely related religion: Islam. It is not intrinsically evil, radical, extremist or anything and moderate variants can easily exist because humans are like that. Why is it having a problem growing and what can we do to help? I keep asking and you haven't really had much illumination to shed on the matter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 404 by Jon, posted 04-10-2015 9:10 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 408 by Jon, posted 04-10-2015 11:31 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 407 of 432 (755721)
04-10-2015 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 405 by Modulous
04-10-2015 9:16 PM


Re: social and cultural contexts
Denying that moderate Islam exists or can exist, is not - in my view - conducive to fostering its growth. It just confirms what the extremists are saying when they radicalize people. If we're all agreeing with them, that doesn't seem clever to me.
Then perhaps I can just duck out and let the moderate Muslims duke it out with the extremists.
I don't have a dog in this fight.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 405 by Modulous, posted 04-10-2015 9:16 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 1:43 AM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 408 of 432 (755727)
04-10-2015 11:31 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by Modulous
04-10-2015 10:13 PM


She's wrong, in my opinion.
I will dig around to see if she has given any citations. My source for her quote is in Message 118.
And that's why I am saying we should be promoting that this is possible, reasonable, ethical, and consistent with Islam. Because saying the opposite can't be helping.
Neither can lying.
It is up to the Muslims who care enough to develop a form of their religion that can survive without holding texts infallible that call for killing apostates and stoning adulterers.
It's not our duty to lie for Islam. It's someone else's duty to make the lying unnecessary.
Exactly. So his prevarications tell us nothing about him other than he is aware he is being filmed, he is aware of his social and cultural context and his place within it and how that would drastically increase the chances someone would be angry enough to do bad things. Given what he does - he would have to be a raging moron to court controversy like that.
So you're saying he cares more about his image and maintaining the status quo than about saying what needs to be said?
Sounds like a weasel to me.
We already know there are people that would kill him for denying the Hadith or the Qur'an as they see it. So what is there to learn by watching the video?
When another Muslim is too scared of the followers of his religion to promote a moderate form of it (and I am not saying that Qureshi follows a moderate form of Islam), what hope can there be for any moderate Muslims trying to reform their faith?
I think your understanding of Qureshi's refusal to deny the naughty parts is worse than mine.
According to you, we can't really expect any moderate Muslim to speak publicly about the need for reform out of fear for their lives.
According to me Qureshi is just a weasel.
Let's not believe that there is no hope for moderate Islam on account of moderate Muslims staying hush hush to keep their heads and let's just conclude that Qureshi's a weasel.
It can change, let's help that happen.
The change in Christianity came slowly.
Do we want to wait for Islam to make that transition?
So clearly you mean something else. What was that?
I mean politicians, particularly the President of the U.S. (and not just Obama, Bush is as guilty, for example) of pretending that deep down Islam is a religion of peace.
It isn't. Just like there is nothing the Old Testament that would make someone think that Judaism is a deep down religion of peace.
The peace comes from outside the religion.
If there is peace in Islam, it isn't because Islam put it there.
That is not addressed; and the fact that so many Muslims believe deeply in the truth of their non-peaceful texts, especially the non-peaceful onesso much so that even you agree that a prominent Muslim disagreeing with these texts commits career suicide in doing sois, as I've said, a huge obstacle to bringing about a meaningful reform in Islam.
And I think Hirsi Ali raises a very important issue regarding whether the few moderate Muslims can win against the extremists who have the texts on their side in a culture where the texts have the final say.
The same could be said of its very closely related religion: Islam. It is not intrinsically evil, radical, extremist or anything and moderate variants can easily exist because humans are like that. Why is it having a problem growing and what can we do to help? I keep asking and you haven't really had much illumination to shed on the matter.
I think all the Abrahamic religions are intrinsically evil. From the warmongering gods to the punishments for the most benign of 'offenses'. There's very little in these religions worth anything good at all. That Jesus guy tried to change a few things, but all his followers just ported the bad crap into their new religion and kept on doing business as usual.
It is only very recently that a couple of those religions have shaken off that crazy, and only after a lot of death, destruction, oppression, ...
Islam, though, seems way behind the times on this.
But, Mod, we've gone through this already (half my posts now are links to earlier messages and full of 'as I said already').
If you think we're just going to rehash the same stuff, feel free to call it.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by Modulous, posted 04-10-2015 10:13 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 410 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 3:30 AM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 409 of 432 (755734)
04-11-2015 1:43 AM
Reply to: Message 407 by Jon
04-10-2015 10:39 PM


Re: social and cultural contexts
Then perhaps I can just duck out and let the moderate Muslims duke it out with the extremists.
I don't have a dog in this fight.
So no more complaints about how women are being treated by some Muslim communities in the Western world, or people blowing up buildings, right? Unless they're your women and buildings, obviously.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 407 by Jon, posted 04-10-2015 10:39 PM Jon has seen this message but not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 410 of 432 (755738)
04-11-2015 3:30 AM
Reply to: Message 408 by Jon
04-10-2015 11:31 PM


And that's why I am saying we should be promoting that this is possible, reasonable, ethical, and consistent with Islam. Because saying the opposite can't be helping.
Neither can lying.
Religion is made up bullshit. Lying is a category error when it is applied to works of fiction.
It is up to the Muslims who care enough to develop a form of their religion that can survive without holding texts infallible that call for killing apostates and stoning adulterers.
That's right.
It's not our duty to lie for Islam.
It's not lying, it's encouraging a milder form of a delusion to gain power. I'm not suggesting it is our duty. I am suggesting it is a good idea.
Do you want to share a house with a psychotic who believes you are trying to murder him or a psychotic that thinks an epic poem is about him?
So you're saying he cares more about his image and maintaining the status quo than about saying what needs to be said?
No. That's not what I'm saying.
He's trying to create changes. He has a specific focus and dedication. To publicly declare one way or another on an issue that divides the community he is working to help - would almost certainly work to undermine the success of the very thing he is working to achieve. That's the generic statement. I'm not condoning caged or its actions or membership - but from his perspective neither definitive answer helped him.
Sounds like a weasel to me.
Sounds pragmatic to me. If ever you are in the public sphere trying to promote some charity or advocacy group and you are asked a question the answer to which could either harm your group or cause you to be harmed or both...you can do the brave thing and fall on your sword and hope your martydom changes things, which it probably won't. But sometimes change happens, I hope you never get tested: most people fail and I'm going to guess it's a horrid feeling.
When another Muslim is too scared of the followers of his religion to promote a moderate form of it (and I am not saying that Qureshi follows a moderate form of Islam), what hope can there be for any moderate Muslims trying to reform their faith?
I feel like we've been over this territory already.
It's possible, it's been done, and it's difficult. We can't make it happen, but we can try to help. Denying the existence of those that are moderate, and more or less accusing them of being craven if and where they do is not the kind of environment we should be looking to create. Celebrating their successes and amplifying their voices as being reasonable and consistent with Islam rather than decrying them as lies seems better.
According to you, we can't really expect any moderate Muslim to speak publicly about the need for reform out of fear for their lives.
More misunderstanding of my position. It's quite dizzying trying to figure out what you think I'm saying sometimes.
We can't expect every Muslim with a public position to answer religious questions that divide his religious community on film with a view to broadcasting to millions.
Even in cases where it might be argued to be appropriate, expecting them to do anything but what anybody else would do in the same social context would be foolish. You can call it being a weasel, but it's not your life and family in the firing line and I won't be judging you if you choose to be safe/prudent rather than brave/foolish.
Let's not believe that there is no hope for moderate Islam on account of moderate Muslims staying hush hush to keep their heads and let's just conclude that Qureshi's a weasel.
I don't think there's no hope. I've pointed several Muslims to you who have been quite public with their moderate views. But in Qureshi's case, whatever the truth is would be harmful to him. Call it weaselling if you like, I simply call it pragmatism.
It can change, let's help that happen.
The change in Christianity came slowly.
Do we want to wait for Islam to make that transition?
No.
That's what I've been saying for some time now. That's what I said in the quote above.
Let's not wait, let's help make it happen.
Get it?
I mean politicians, particularly the President of the U.S. (and not just Obama, Bush is as guilty, for example) of pretending that deep down Islam is a religion of peace.
It isn't. Just like there is nothing the Old Testament that would make someone think that Judaism is a deep down religion of peace.
The peace comes from outside the religion.
If there is peace in Islam, it isn't because Islam put it there.
It's not pretending, its trying to
a) discourage homegrown fanatics from engaging in wanton attacks on other citizens
b) provide assurances that it is not a war against Islam, but against some people who claim to be Muslims.
Because you know who we desperately need to appease? A group whose members can really provide tremendous help in creating a lasting peace...they are called Muslims.
So I'm fine with politicians using THAT kind of rhetoric. The kind of rhetoric that is the opposite of this is terrifying.
That is not addressed; and the fact that so many Muslims believe deeply in the truth of their non-peaceful texts, especially the non-peaceful onesso much so that even you agree that a prominent Muslim disagreeing with these texts commits career suicide in doing sois, as I've said, a huge obstacle to bringing about a meaningful reform in Islam.
And it still remains a point about which we do not disagree. I'm trying to talk about how we should handle the problems, and you seem fixated on repeating the things you think are problems..
And I think Hirsi Ali raises a very important issue regarding whether the few moderate Muslims can win against the extremists who have the texts on their side in a culture where the texts have the final say.
Used to be that Kings and Popes had the final say and most people weren't even allowed to read the holy texts. Things change, sometimes in big and surprising ways very quickly or sometimes so slowly nobody really notices until some historian gets his phd on the subject.
It is only very recently that a couple of those religions have shaken off that crazy, and only after a lot of death, destruction, oppression, ...
Indeed.
Islam, though, seems way behind the times on this.
Not really WAY behind the times. In a sense, it started centuries after the others, and there are reasons I've gone over as to why the Middle East in particular have faced such significant problems.
My reasoning is that Turkey came out of the Ottoman empire with a strong benevolent leader (as far as strong leaders go, in any case). His reaction to the collapse of the Caliphate was Islamic Modernism and secularization. It worked out pretty well for Turkey.
Other regions declared independence, fought the the west to get it, and after a leader arises the West didn't like, they'd depose him there'd be more struggling and conflict and the cycle would continue with resentment building all around to the point where homicidal hatred was practically a cultural norm.
So a new strong leader has arrived. His name is Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. We can fight him, or let him do as he will. Maybe the people will grow tired and rebel against him, another war, but their war. And maybe, maybe that's the solution. But can we really just stand by?
It's difficult to break our interventions in an area like that, even just on moral grounds. But then there's the whole oil issue just to make sure this situation is likely to get much worse before it gets better.
But, Mod, we've gone through this already (half my posts now are links to earlier messages and full of 'as I said already').
Personally I'd prefer you stop repeating yourself and telling me how bad you think Islam is Muslims are or whatever and start thinking what the best way to address the issues is and why.
You claim you can erradicate Islam. It wouldn't solve everything, but I'm sure it'd help. How?
You suggest we have dog in this fight and we stand by. Fine. Do we also withdraw our military bases, the military support of Israel and essentially concede to the demands?
Alternatively you suggest moderating Islam. A fine idea. How do you propose we do that? By killing the extremists?
If you think we're just going to rehash the same stuff, feel free to call it.
If you feel the urge to reply telling me about how bad Islam is, how many Muslims are simply awful people, how the texts and people's opinions of them are an issue or how Islam is the only thing we need to consider in determining causality then I call it.
If you have constructive things to say I'd be eager to hear.
Why do you think Turkey manage to successfully utilize Islamic Modernism to create a pretty decent nation, geography and history considered.
Why do you think other areas responded to the victory of the west as the Ottomans collapsed with Islamic Revivalism?
How do we turn a culture from its Revivalist stance to a Modernist stance and how do we react when the Revivalists do unpleasant things in the meantime?
Care to profer any opinion on that side of the discussion? You've criticized my understanding of the situation but I haven't been educated as to the true path to peace in the Middle East. If you would like to tell me, I'd be keen to hear.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 408 by Jon, posted 04-10-2015 11:31 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 411 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 12:10 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 411 of 432 (755767)
04-11-2015 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 410 by Modulous
04-11-2015 3:30 AM


He's trying to create changes. He has a specific focus and dedication. To publicly declare one way or another on an issue that divides the community he is working to help - would almost certainly work to undermine the success of the very thing he is working to achieve.
Asim Qureshi really isn't a good man. He excused Mohammad Emwazi's behavior as the result of his interactions with UK security services as if everyone who has had such interactions now has a license for terror.
He is a weasel, no matter what he would have said in the video.
We can't expect every Muslim with a public position to answer religious questions that divide his religious community on film with a view to broadcasting to millions.
Then which Muslims can we expect to answer these questions?
Let's not wait, let's help make it happen.
I think honesty is the first step.
I'm trying to talk about how we should handle the problems, and you seem fixated on repeating the things you think are problems..
That's partly because the title of this thread isn't "How to Fix Islam".
Maybe the people will grow tired and rebel against him, another war, but their war. And maybe, maybe that's the solution.
It probably is.
You've criticized my understanding of the situation but I haven't been educated as to the true path to peace in the Middle East. If you would like to tell me, I'd be keen to hear.
I'm honestly not interested in that discussion, and that's why this thread isn't called "How to Bring Peace to the Middle East".

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 410 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 3:30 AM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 1:13 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 412 of 432 (755772)
04-11-2015 1:13 PM
Reply to: Message 411 by Jon
04-11-2015 12:10 PM


I'm honestly not interested in that discussion, and that's why this thread isn't called "How to Bring Peace to the Middle East".
I suggest you don't post videos discussing the history behind the current conflicts in the Middle East if you don't want to discuss it.
Back to the topic. We've established that moderate Islam exists, but that it doesn't have the widespread acceptance we'd like. You seem to be angry about people lying about Islam, is this tied to the topic in some way and would you like to finish that thought if it is?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 411 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 12:10 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 413 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 1:56 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 413 of 432 (755775)
04-11-2015 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 412 by Modulous
04-11-2015 1:13 PM


I suggest you don't post videos discussing the history behind the current conflicts in the Middle East if you don't want to discuss it.
It might have been better posted in the Multiculturalism thread.
We've established that moderate Islam exists
You say so. There are plenty of people here who would disagree with you.
You seem to be angry about people lying about Islam, is this tied to the topic in some way and would you like to finish that thought if it is?
It's probably more tied to the Multiculturalism topic. Though I do think it is relevant here to point out that the 'religion of peace' line is a load of crap.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 412 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 1:13 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 414 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 2:21 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 414 of 432 (755779)
04-11-2015 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 413 by Jon
04-11-2015 1:56 PM


You say so. There are plenty of people here who would disagree with you.
That's true about everything I say.
Do you deny its existence today?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 413 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 1:56 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 415 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 3:17 PM Modulous has replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 415 of 432 (755790)
04-11-2015 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 414 by Modulous
04-11-2015 2:21 PM


Do you deny its existence today?
Haven't I made my stance on this pretty clear?

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 414 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 2:21 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 416 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 9:50 PM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 416 of 432 (755813)
04-11-2015 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 415 by Jon
04-11-2015 3:17 PM


Haven't I made my stance on this pretty clear?
Sometimes it feels like you are denying it entirely. At other times you say it isn't prominent enough. Where are you today?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 415 by Jon, posted 04-11-2015 3:17 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 417 by Coyote, posted 04-11-2015 10:04 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 419 by Jon, posted 04-12-2015 11:18 PM Modulous has replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2106 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 417 of 432 (755814)
04-11-2015 10:04 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by Modulous
04-11-2015 9:50 PM


I haven't been in this thread for a long time, but...
Why should we be concerned with "moderate Islam?"
They aren't the ones blowing things up and chopping off heads.
Nor are they able to prevent the other Islam from blowing things up and chopping off heads.
We could wish that they were more numerous, or more influential, but "if wishes were fishes..."

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
How can I possibly put a new idea into your heads, if I do not first remove your delusions?--Robert A. Heinlein
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 9:50 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 418 by Modulous, posted 04-12-2015 1:58 AM Coyote has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 418 of 432 (755825)
04-12-2015 1:58 AM
Reply to: Message 417 by Coyote
04-11-2015 10:04 PM


Why should we be concerned with "moderate Islam?"
Because
They aren't the ones blowing things up and chopping off heads.
We could wish that they were more numerous, or more influential, but "if wishes were fishes..."
This is the same as wishing for less extremism. Which I believe you do in fact do, and have essentially spent some time on this thread indicating you would find preferable.
Once you've answered why you are concerned with extremists and why you wish they are less influential, you'll understand why I am concerned with moderates and wish they were more influential.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 417 by Coyote, posted 04-11-2015 10:04 PM Coyote has not replied

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 419 of 432 (755880)
04-12-2015 11:18 PM
Reply to: Message 416 by Modulous
04-11-2015 9:50 PM


Sometimes it feels like you are denying it entirely. At other times you say it isn't prominent enough.
Those two go hand-in-hand.

Love your enemies!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 416 by Modulous, posted 04-11-2015 9:50 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 420 by Modulous, posted 04-13-2015 10:16 AM Jon has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 420 of 432 (755902)
04-13-2015 10:16 AM
Reply to: Message 419 by Jon
04-12-2015 11:18 PM


Those two go hand-in-hand.
When you've finished weaselling, could you answer the question in a straight forward fashion?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 419 by Jon, posted 04-12-2015 11:18 PM Jon has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 421 by Jon, posted 04-13-2015 10:49 AM Modulous has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024