Radicalism and religion.

CRASHFROG -

quote:

---

But Christianity leads to radicalism, too. Who do you think keeps bombing those abortion clinics?

​

Prior to September 11, the big incidents of domestic terrorism were mostly from Christian white folks, not arabs. What, you thought Tim McVeigh was a Muslim or something?

---

I understand christians have done atrocities in the past but were they living consistent with Christs teachings?. Where has Christ taught anything but love?, It seems as though these "christians" were being inconsistent with the christian standard of morality. Radical Muslims however seem to be following Islam to a tee.MATT DABBS -

quote:

---

You also have to remember that other religions only seem "radical" or "terrorist" to you because you were instilled with a moral and ethical system based on the Christian religion. If you were raised a fundamentalist and devout Muslim in the Middle East, it would be the Christian religion that was "radical" and "terrorist". It's all relative.

---

So are you admitting there is no standard of morality? Because we are just another biological animal?. Then you must live consistent with your belief that there is no right or wrong. The only "right" our society has is christian morality. Western nations like Australia and U.S.A were blessed and prospered as they based there understanding on Gods word. It seems logical that a religion that teaches love has more validity then one that cause one to fight.

How much do you actually know about Islam? What do you know about what Islam teaches? I'm not talking about what you've "heard" or what you believe, but what you actually know. I believe somewhere on this forum are quotes directly from the Q'ran teaching against the type of violent radicalism that you're talking about. I don't know where it is, maybe someone else can point it out to you.

What an ignorant, bigoted statement.Have you ever even tried to read the Quran? If you had, you wouldn't be tempted to utter such baseless drivel.This message has been edited by custard, 06-18-2004 03:31 AM

According to them, yes. Did Christ not drive the moneychangers from the temple? Did Christ not say "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword"?There's plenty in the Bible to suggest the use of force to accomplish ends, if you're enclined to read it that way. According to them, though, they're entirely consistent. Uh-huh. And it's your deep study of the Quran that leads you to this conclusion? Funny that the majority of Muslims don't seem to agree.Anyway I wasn't aware you spoke Arabic so fluently.This message has been edited by crashfrog, 06-18-2004 03:44 AM

No i have not studied it. Please enlighten me and point me to what radicals are reading or interpreting thats making them become terrorists.

You're missing the point. There's nothing in the Qur'an that makes people be terrorists, just like there's nothing in the Bible that compels people to shoot abortion doctors.It's the social and economic conditions that breed terror, just as it breeds gang violence in our country. People become terrorists because the terror groups offer angry young men a chance to strike against the people they view as responsible for everything that sucks in their lives, that is, the US.The religious overtones are just frosting. They're just gang colors. They're a source of identity. They're not the reason people become terrorists. It's like saying that a pair of BK shoes makes someone join the Crips.

No. Many people beleive there is no absolute standard of morality in a book, but that does not mean no morality. Not believing the Bible, or not believing any religion at all, is not the same as believing there is no right or wrong. Many people derive moral principles from their own internal feelings and respect for others. and, as we have seen, some people drive immoral principles from the Bible, the Q'uran, or any other religious book or principle.Sorry, there's no "Get out of Hell free" card. You need to find morality and respect for others from within or you're just putting on a false face.

So, you know nothing about Islam but you say that "Radical Muslims however seem to be following Islam to a tee". What a pathetic, bigoted, immoral, gullible fool you are. You are certainly not a folower of Christ.

The idea of a directly book-based morality is a distinctly Protestant one. Catholic moral theology is also based on the idea that there are moral absolutes that can be known through human reason. Aquinas developed this idea in detail. Thus it is possible for people of many other religions, or even no religion, to develop a moral system.There are also secular "natural law" based moral systems, e.g. John Locke.

Please read what you are writing. You say... I point you towards the Bible. The problem is not the document, it is the RADICAL. It matters not if they are Islamic, Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Atheist, Communist, Fascist, or any other type of radical.To paraphrase the Wizard of Oz, "RADICALs and FUNDAMENTALISTS and LITERALISTS, Oh My."

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You guys are going are little nuts here about the

quote:

---

Radical Muslims however seem to be following Islam to a tee.

---

remark but if you actually read what i wrote, i said "seem". Look at terrorism today. One of the biggest issues in the world currently. And how much of it is coming out of the middle east from Islam devotees. This is why i said it seemed. And please, relax a little.

How can you say it 'seems' like something you know nothing about?

---

"The religion of the invisible pink unicorn is based both on faith and logic...through faith we know that the unicorn is pink, while logic tells us it is invisible."

What i mean is that all i see on T.V are muslims killing themselves & others in the name of Allah.

Right, and on TV is George W. stating that he is on a mission from God to establish a new order in the Middle East. He mentions God several times in every speech he gives. The force in Iraq is >95% Christian. Does that mean this is a Holy War? After all, the 9/11 commission has confirmed that the US had no valid reason (none that had been stated, anyway) to invade Iraq, other than George W.'s concept of God and destiny.As I side note, I'm trying to remember the last time I heard on the news any Muslim actually stating that the reason they were doing something horrific was "in the name of Allah" - Though I've heard lots of general anti-US sentiment.Also keep in mind that the US is in term five (twenty years) of Reagan-Bush/Bush regime - a regime that originally built up (funded, trained), then manipulated the terrorists they are now decrying as evil. There are plenty of reasons other than "Allah" for the terrorist activities - although I'm not going to deny that religious differences allow for ease of demonizing - on both sides.I worry that people watch too many Chuck Norris movies, then assume: 1) Every Middle Eastern person is a terrorist. 2) All terrorist acts are done "in the name of Allah".

Let's not derail into politics. Although I will say, given the personality decompensation Al Gore is now displaying, having him in the Oval Office after 9/11 would likely not have been a pretty sight. We'd in all likelihood have had our first Jewish President by now...