patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,260,096 comments by 15,050 users - Al_Sharpton_for_President, goofus, Robert Sproul, Tenpoundbass online now
invite response« First « Previous Comments 72 - 111 of 2,882 Next » Last » Search these comments
Â¥
2010 Jan 8, 1:00pm
I would become a devout Atheist if I thought that it was possible to live a more virtuous life
? atheism or religion is independent of virtue. Virtue comes from within, from the decisions we make every moment.
AFAICT, at the end of the day the only virtue we can be judged on is have we made the world a better place for others. To the extent we have succeeded with that overarching mission we have been 'virtuous'. The be virtuous is to be a Man, not an animal. That is the word's Latin root, where we get 'virile', too.
People who succeed at this with no expectation of eternal reward for their efforts are, we should agree, quite admirable.
Â¥
2010 Jan 8, 1:07pm
What is it about Islam that you find violent?
All the violence? Seems the more Musilm a person is the more violence emanates from them.
'course, one would hope all those protests were inflitrated by false-flag Israeli agents. If not, the Mossad is off their game.
You cannot be RATIONAL and religious !!
billions of christians believe that jesus is the GOD
billions of muslims believe that allah is the GOD.
one of them have to wrong then !!
so billions are wrong ....and if billions are already wrong , whats the probability that the other billions cannot be wrong about an invisible man
In response to Troy:
"atheism or religion is independent of virtue. Virtue comes from within, from the decisions we make every moment."
Nope. Virtue comes from understanding principles and putting them into practice. Religious people seem to do a better job at it. Particularly in the area of practicing temperance (in areas such as alcohol consumption, food, sexual habits, etc).
"AFAICT, at the end of the day the only virtue we can be judged on is have we made the world a better place for others. To the extent we have succeeded with that overarching mission we have been ‘virtuous’. The be virtuous is to be a Man, not an animal.
Couldn't have said it better myself. Except I believe to be virtuous is to acquire and put into practice eternal principles.
"You cannot be RATIONAL and religious !!"
Very well said--since religion has nothing to do with rationality. Rationing is a product of mathematics--science. Religion is a product of reason. Practicing religion is different than practicing science.
Response to chanakya:
That was a cheap analysis.
"billions of christians believe that jesus is the GOD
billions of muslims believe that allah is the GOD.
one of them have to wrong then !!"
Clearly you don't understand the issue. We believe in the same God. Allah is the name of God in Arabic. Many of the early Christians didn't believe Jesus was God.
It'll be interesting to see if devout atheists end up pursuing the same errors that religious people have. If I understand human nature properly, I'd think yes. Particularly in the area of tolerance.
Additionally I do agree that religion and atheism is independent of virtue.
Â¥
2010 Jan 9, 5:04am
Particularly in the area of practicing temperance (in areas such as alcohol consumption, food, sexual habits, etc
That sort of virtue, with no actual real-world impact, is entirely subjective if not meaningless.
I mean, really, are the dietary laws against eating lobster tails producing virtue? I think not. Just because a religion spells out explicit rituals, behaviorial requirements, and dietary restriction doesn't result in a virtuous life in the global, interpersonal sense of the word.
A religious tradition may by scattershot find some useful rules to dogmatize, but even then these are often half-baked or honored in the breach, like the islamic injunctions against interest.
A lot of these rules retard Sharia economies, though I do admit I like the general idea of Musharaka al-Mutanaqisa (diminishing partnership in a holding vehicle). It aligns well with how I think residential lending should work.
Â¥
2010 Jan 9, 5:08am
illions of christians believe that jesus is the GOD
billions of muslims believe that allah is the GOD.
"... and I believe [Christians and Muslims] worship the same god" -- George Bush, 2003.
tee hee hee
RayAmerica
2010 Jan 9, 5:27am
“… and I believe [Christians and Muslims] worship the same god†— George Bush, 2003.
Proof George Bush is an even lousier theologian than he was a president.
Response to Troy:
"That sort of virtue, with no actual real-world impact, is entirely subjective if not meaningless."
I disagree: it keeps people from becoming alcoholics, obese, and disease-infested--but this was only one example. How about this:
The Beatitudes
1Now when he saw the crowds, he went up on a mountainside and sat down. His disciples came to him, 2and he began to teach them saying:
3"Blessed are the poor in spirit,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
4Blessed are those who mourn,
for they will be comforted.
5Blessed are the meek,
for they will inherit the earth.
6Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness,
for they will be filled.
7Blessed are the merciful,
for they will be shown mercy.
8Blessed are the pure in heart,
for they will see God.
9Blessed are the peacemakers,
for they will be called sons of God.
10Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness,
for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
11"Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of me. 12Rejoice and be glad, because great is your reward in heaven, for in the same way they persecuted the prophets who were before you.
Salt and Light
13"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men.
14"You are the light of the world. A city on a hill cannot be hidden. 15Neither do people light a lamp and put it under a bowl. Instead they put it on its stand, and it gives light to everyone in the house. 16In the same way, let your light shine before men, that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.
"like the islamic injunctions against interest."
Interest is an evil. I don't have a problem with charging a fee on money. But perpetual-compounded interest I have a problem with. Pretty much what the IMF does to every nation below the equator.
"and I believe [Christians and Muslims] worship the same god†— George Bush, 2003."
Interesting. For once George Bush actually said something intelligent. Too bad he didn't understand what he said =P. If you understand the evolution of Christianity and Islam, and the history of that region, then you know it's quite close to the truth. The only problem I have with George Bush is that he's George Bush and my IQ is higher than his. But, he's a politician. They're not much different. Power and re-election makes the political-system go 'round. It doesn't matter if they can make a sentence or not. Obama makes great sentences. But he's just as corrupt. Ultimately our civil rights just get shredded and taken away no matter who gets into office. I guess that's one of the reasons I haven't went the atheist route. I believe in the freedom for people to believe whatever they want, and not be persecuted for it. The only restriction: You have to respect a difference of conviction and be non-violent.
I pose a question to you all: If we were to have no religion(s), would we still have violence and bloodshed?
It’ll be interesting to see if devout atheists end up pursuing the same errors that religious people have. If I understand human nature properly, I’d think yes. Particularly in the area of tolerance.
Â¥
2010 Jan 9, 10:12am
Ultimately our civil rights just get shredded and taken away no matter who gets into office
Funny thing is, I've experience no identifiable loss of civil rights this past decade. If anything Obama has expanded rights by calling a moratorium on Federal prosecution of legalized marijuana distributors.
I disagree: it keeps people from becoming alcoholics, obese, and disease-infested–but this was only one example.
How very Straussian of you.
How about this:
The problem is that religion as it is run today in this country generally claims to be exclusive and does not actively seek the wisdom available to be found in other creeds. This is its loss and the fundamental reason I lost any interest in organized religion. It is really organized mass stupidity.
If we were to have no religion(s), would we still have violence and bloodshed?
Of course. But . . . The lack of religious differences though would remove one cause of violence both on the personal and state level. Christians in this country were very bloody-minded about wanting to f--- Saddam's shit up in 2002-2003. It was disgusting. The whole Blackwater thing with Erik Prince is also rather horrid -- there's millions of fundamentalist nutjobs trying their hardest to bring on the End Times apparently. That's really constructive.
In Response to Troy:
"Funny thing is, I’ve experience no identifiable loss of civil rights this past decade. If anything Obama has expanded rights by calling a moratorium on Federal prosecution of legalized marijuana distributors."
The Patriot Act says otherwise. Also a war that I wanted ended but that didn't happen. No difference.
"How very Straussian of you."
The difference, of course, being that practicing religion is voluntary.
"The problem is that religion as it is run today in this country generally claims to be exclusive and does not actively seek the wisdom available to be found in other creeds. This is its loss and the fundamental reason I lost any interest in organized religion. It is really organized mass stupidity."
Perhaps. It's good to be familiar with other wisdom. Exclusivity depends on the tradition. If people want to associate together based on shared convictions of right and wrong, I have no problem with it. If people want to go worship a golf-ball in their backyard, that's fine with me too.
"It is really organized mass stupidity."
That's one way to look at it. Most people are stupid.
"Of course. But . . . The lack of religious differences though would remove one cause of violence both on the personal and state level. Christians in this country were very bloody-minded about wanting to f— Saddam’s shit up in 2002-2003. It was disgusting. The whole Blackwater thing with Erik Prince is also rather horrid — there’s millions of fundamentalist nutjobs trying their hardest to bring on the End Times apparently. That’s really constructive."
I don't believe in authoritarian thought control. I'm a liberal. Some of the fundamentalist Christians are more close-minded people, a little more similar to yourself.
I agree with you about the whole end-times scenario. What scares me most is that it has the potential to become a self-fulfilling prophecy. I'm a skeptic; I don't believe in much prophecy. I do believe in self-fulfilling prophecy.
Â¥
2010 Jan 9, 1:40pm
The Patriot Act says otherwise. Also a war that I wanted ended but that didn’t happen. No difference.
I *really* can't get worked up about PATRIOT. Is there anything in particular that has actually affected you, or is this just BS. nb, when I was living in Japan in the 90s I just naturally assumed calls [edit: to the US] were being intercepted. I don't like that loss of privacy but as long as there are no actual abuses by people with access to this stuff I can live with it.
As for the war(s), it's kinda disingenuous blaming the politicians now. The whole thing is just a f---ing political football. No matter what Obama does he'll catch s--- from 30% of the population, because we are a nation of idiots. And I don't pretend to know what's the best strategy for Afghanistan, other than not killing innocent people. This particular fear was seen as typical Democratic wimpiness going in, but at least now is migrating into the centrality of our military doctrine apparently.
The difference, of course, being that practicing religion is voluntary
Wrong Strauss? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Strauss
If people want to go worship a golf-ball in their backyard, that’s fine with me too.
Just don't call that virtue. It dilutes the meaning of the word.
are more close-minded people, a little more similar to yourself.
Just because I think the religions I've been exposed to are bs doesn't mean I'm closed-minded. Anyone who believes in the faith they were inculcated with when growing up are generally very closed-minded, as is trying to apply texts written thousands of years ago by goat herders and camel traders as hard and fast moral law. I'll take rationalism and empiricism, thanks.
In response to Troy:
*really* can’t get worked up about PATRIOT. Is there anything in particular that has actually affected you, or is this just BS."
Nothing has affected me yet. I'm just concerned that in time things will get worse. I like being left alone like most people to live my life in peace and philosophical reflection.
"Wrong Strauss?"
My apologies. I didn't communicate my point right. That did sound Straussian. I just meant that practicing temperance in a religious context is something one does voluntarily when one chooses to practice certain religions. It affects one's health--for the better.
"Just because I think the religions I’ve been exposed to are bs doesn’t mean I’m closed-minded. Anyone who believes in the faith they were inculcated with when growing up are generally very closed-minded, as is trying to apply texts written thousands of years ago by goat herders and camel traders as hard and fast moral law. I’ll take rationalism and empiricism, thanks."
True. I guess that I just wish more people would realize the limitations of science. Not everything is meant to be rationalized and quantified. That leads us to an inhuman place. I'm not a modernist or a postmodernist. I guess I'm the type who likes to scour the texts looking for principles. I think I'm coming from more of a neo-classicist/pre-modernist paradigm of thought.
"If people want to go worship a golf-ball in their backyard, that’s fine with me too."
It fits with the principle of freedom! Although that is vicious! Ha! I had a mind-picture of physically paying worship to the ball, not a round of putting golf. Anyway, you get my gist =P
Â¥
2010 Jan 9, 3:12pm
Great response, thanks. I tend to get argumentative on the internet but that was a constructive reply.
You're welcome. It's always a pleasure communicating with good minds.
What does stuff about religion do on a real estate blog?
Please don't take advantage of this platform to broadcast some pretty pathetic unrelated propaganda.
Whether any of those texts contains explicit violence or not (I don't believe in any...), whether any of these religions (Christianity, Islam, Judaism, all in fact) was built on violence or not doesn't matter. All these religions are inherently dangerous because a large number of "followers" or "believers" are there to be led, to be shown the path without asking questions. Just put the wrong "leader" in place and you've got a an explosive cocktail.
BTW, I've been to a few buddhist group meditation sessions, and yes even there, you find people who really miss the point and unconsciously try to guide you, in their way.
I can easily find as much, not to so say more, religious driven violence in the history of Christianity as in that of Islam, despite the fact that, according to the Bible, Jesus didn't rob/rape/kill... I won't say anything about other religions because I don't know them well, but I expect the very same patterns.
The current issue with the muslim world doesn't come from Islam or from the Koran. There's a crisis in the Middle East. A very modern one. A 100 years ago you were much better off being Jewish in a muslim country than in say Germany...
The Middle East has entered a phase of decline a few centuries ago. That's a problem of its own. One can only expect instability, extremism from regions in decline. Cf the rise of nazism in post WW1 Germany. Those Germans weren't different from those we know today and I have a very positive opinion of all the Germans I know.
The West (Europe first, joined later by the US) was prompt to take advantage of this weakness. It started back in the 18th century.
Jewish settlers created the last colony of the Western (mostly European) imperialist wave of the 19th and early 20th century. Had the French obtained the mandate in 1920, they would have created some Christian state instead, leveraging the Christians that, then, made up 20% of the local population. They only got Syria and created Lebanon. I'll remind you that the Fort Hood killer was ... the son of Palestinian immigrants. That may have inspired him a bit more than whatever his prophet did 1400 years ago...
Meanwhile western countries support strongly an array of some of the worst dictatorships in the world. There are good reasons for that. The pathetic Saudi regime, very good friends of the Bushes and co, is pretty good at recycling oil money into western economies. They buy tons of modern fighter jets for billions, even though they don't have pilots to fly them, invest billions in banks before they crash... Divide, conquer, control. Oil, oil, oil.
Let me quote Noam Chomsky:
""" Forty-five years ago, President Dwight D. Eisenhower and his staff discussed what he called the "campaign of hatred against us" in the Arab world, "not by the governments but by the people". The basic reason, the National Security Council advised, is the recognition that the US supports corrupt and brutal governments that block democracy and development, and does so because of its concern "to protect its interest in Near East oil". """
Back to the "terrorist" wave. The need for immediate defense has to be combined with something a bit deeper than quoting parts of the Koran or any text. I can only hope that the end of oil is close.
In response to eyeopener:
"What does stuff about religion do on a real estate blog?
Please don’t take advantage of this platform to broadcast some pretty pathetic unrelated propaganda."
We prefer freedom of thought and good analysis. Something the news media (all of it does not do).
"All these religions are inherently dangerous because a large number of “followers†or “believers†are there to be led, to be shown the path without asking questions. Just put the wrong “leader†in place and you’ve got a an explosive cocktail."
I am a follower of a religion. Religion is an idea. The only thing I follow is principles. How do I know you're not a follower of a system of beliefs? Do you follow a leader?
"I can easily find as much, not to so say more, religious driven violence in the history of Christianity as in that of Islam, despite the fact that, according to the Bible, Jesus didn’t rob/rape/kill… I won’t say anything about other religions because I don’t know them well, but I expect the very same patterns."
Yes. So is this violent nature a product of human nature, or of religion? I'm convinced humans have the same potential for goodness as evil. I don't think religion has much to do with it.
"The current issue with the muslim world doesn’t come from Islam or from the Koran. There’s a crisis in the Middle East. A very modern one. A 100 years ago you were much better off being Jewish in a muslim country than in say Germany…"
This is true. The Muslims primarily became irritated after mass-migration to Israel and the Palestinians were pushed out.
"Those Germans weren’t different from those we know today and I have a very positive opinion of all the Germans I know."
Me too. Some of my good friends are there.
I used to be a muslim until 9/11, I don't understand how these people can justify killing inocent people in the name of God. I'm a proud Agnostic, religion is just a waste of time. How can you believe in the koran or bible when man wrote them. I only believe what i see with my own eyes
simchaland
2010 Jan 12, 5:35am
To all who mistakenly call Israel the last Western Imperialist Colony created by Jews, I'd like to clear up some points of history that people seem to forget. This won't be popular. And these are the facts, like them or not.
Jews have always lived in the lands of Judea, Samaria, Israel, the Negev, and across the Jordan into Moabite territories. All through the ages Jews have lived there. Even before the modern establishment of the current State of Israel there were Middle Eastern Jews living there all along. They are called the Sephardim. The Sephardim lived in predominately Islamic countries after the fall of the Roman Empire and the rise of Islam in the Middle East. So the notion that somehow Palestinian Arabs were forced off of "their" land is not 100% true and it's not 100% false.
The Ottoman Turks did nothing to improve Judea, Samaria, Israel, and the Negev into modern times. The land was left to whither and the desertification was spreading. Much of the area was swamp land. Arabs and Jews were neighbors who shared the land and lived side by side with each other in the province.
Once the British took control after the Ottoman Turks and created the Mandate of Palestine, they absorbed the Sephardic Jews and the Palestinian Arabs living on the lands of Judea, Samaria, Israel, and the Negev (and actually Gaza which is ancient Philistia from where the Roman Province of Palestine got its name and it stuck).
So, before the establishment of the modern State of Israel we had Sephardic Jews and Palestinian Arabs living in relative peace together on not very desirable land in the British Mandate of Palestine.
More trouble started when Zionism took hold in Eastern and Central Europe where Jews were concentrated in Europe. The nation states of the time held regular persecutions of Jews where they were living. These are Ashkhenazim (Eastern European Jews). We (they) look like Europeans because of generations of some mixing with the locals when fleeing the Middle East during persecutions there.
The late 19th Century was a very difficult time for Eastern European Jews because of persecution going on in Russia, Poland, and Germany, and other Eastern European lands. During that time Zionism (the idea that Jews are meant to live in Zion (which is a religious term for the Temple Mount in Jerusalem applied to the whole area of Israel, Samaria, and Judea) rose because Eastern European Jews wanted to escape oppression. They found it difficult because the Ottoman Turks didn't want more Jews in their Empire in their Palestinian Province. Ashkhenazim (Eastern European Jews) began to make the migration to Israel, Samaria, and Judea to join Sephardic Jews who have lived there for thousands of years. There were many problems and persecutions from the Turks and then the British who took over from the Turks. As more Jews came to Israel, Samaria, and Judea the Arab population became nervous because they were afraid of losing their majority in the province.
The Holocost in Europe during WWII put great pressure on the British to allow Jewish refugees to flee to the British Mandate of Palestine. The British fought this along with other Arab States. Some Jews came anyway. Many were turned back to be gassed in concentration camps by the Nazis and some remained as illegal immigrants.
Arab fears were stoked by the partition of the British Mandate of Palestine into several States in 1947 after WWII. The British and the UN established a Jewish State called Israel and it had land mainly around the Galilee, Tel Aviv to Haifa on the Mediterranean Coast, and the Negev Desert. The British and the UN established the Kingdom of Jordan (Transjordan). The the lands of Samaria and Judea (Now the West Bank) including Jerusalem, and Gaza was supposed to be a newly created Palestinian Arab State. The Jews accepted the UN plan and the Arabs rejected it.
The conflict was inevitable between Jews an Arabs at that point. Both sides started fighting. Eventually Egypt, Jordan, and Syria invaded and assured the Arab Palestinian population that they would win the war and "drive the Jews into the Sea." The Arab Palestinian civilian population fled the areas of conflict so that they would evade the danger of being in a war zone and to allow the Arab armies to have easier access to Jewish targets.
What happened? The Jews won and established a modern State of Israel capturing lands that were once owned by Palestinian Arabs and retaining the land that was theirs. And now comes the stoking of the problem. Israelis didn't want Palestinian Arabs to return to their lands that were now annexed through war into the State of Israel. Would you want people who wanted your annihilation as direct neighbors? But then what happened is that the Arab world wouldn't take their cousins into their lands as citizens and put them in refugee camps where they weren't allowed to have rights or integrate into the countries of Lebanon, Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. The Israelis came to occupy the West Bank and Gaza later and eventually the Sinai in a later war. Sinai was returned to Egypt eventually. But even today Israel is the defacto occupier of the West Bank and Gaza. The Arabs still haven't allowed displaced Arab Palestinians to become citizens of countries where they hold them as refugees to try to force Israel into allowing these Arab Palestinians and their descendants to enter back into the Modern State of Israel.
The Arab/Muslim countries expelled all of their Jews and took all Jewish property away from their Jewish citizens. These Sephardic Jews were the second major wave of immigration to Israel. They simply had nowhere else to go where they felt that they could remain true to their cultures. So, what people tend to forget is that not only did Israel disallow Palestinian Arabs to return after the War of Independence, the Arab/Muslim countries seized the property of Jews in their countries and expelled Jews from their countries not allowing them to return.
The poor Palestinian Arabs are caught in a very difficult political, economic, and sociological situation. They have a state in name only really. Control of their territories comes from outside (either Israel, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, or even Egypt at times). And they haven't given up their demands of moving into lands that they once held before a war that they lost, and they lost more than once.
Israelis are held hostage more than they want to admit because they must retain control over territory where people are hostile to their intervention. Israelis suffer acts of terrorism on their own territory and they pay a huge price for the unjust way they treat Palestinian Arabs.
No one in this conflict has clean hands. All sides have blood on their hands and have spilled innocent blood over this complex conflict. Anyone who simplifies this into colonizers and colonized peoples makes this way too simplistic because both populations have legitimate claims to thousands of years of living on that land. Both Jews and Arabs in this conflict have refugees who have legitimate claims to property and land in countries where they don't live today.
So, as anyone can see if they study the actual factual history of the Israeli/Arab conflict, this isn't a simple one-sided victim/victimized situation. All of these people are both victims and victimizers at the same time. To pick one side or the other as the oppressor or the oppressed is simplifying a very complicated conflict.
People should stop listening to the propaganda put out by Western, Israeli, and Arab news networks and study the actual history of this conflict to understand just how complicated the conflict is. Both sides are wrong and both sides are correct. That's why this conflict is so complicated and bloody.
yachtman
2010 Jan 12, 10:14am
Sim . . . just because you SAY something is a fact, doesn't make it a fact. Much of what you claim in the body of your essay is being debunked. The Zionist publishers of the 20th century thought they could control details of history, until the internet.
Although your final paragraph is excellent.
simchaland
2010 Jan 12, 10:28am
Yachtman,
Just because some people with a political axe to grind and a mind for hating Jews write their own versions of "history" on the Internet doesn't make their accounts of "history" true.
You can't change facts. Facts are facts. You can try to re-write history using a political slant to slam one people while claiming that another people are victims on the Internet, that doesn't make it true.
What I wrote is the truth. It's backed up by historians world wide. I don't need you to believe it for it to be factual and objectively true.
Those with axes to grind who hate Jews and claim that we are all "Zionists" and that "Zionists" are somehow evil and that the "Protocols of Zion" are fact write all sorts of misinformation and lies all over the Internet. That still doesn't change the facts as they happened on the ground.
Sorry, but what I wrote is actual history as it happened. What you claim that debunks it is propaganda and lies written by people who hate Jews. Just because the history books in Gaza or the West Bank, or Syria, give a different account doesn't make it true either.
Trusted scholars world-wide who are honest know that what I've written is the actual account.
So, back at you, just because you SAY something is debunked on the Internet doesn't make it true.
yachtman
2010 Jan 12, 11:08am
Sim, very Ben Stein of you to assume my questioning 20th century propaganda could imply a hatred for 'Jews.' I am a 'Jew,' one who is embarassed by Zionism and believes God will bless 'His Chosen' with much more than just a sliver of land - I'd rather live in Costa Rica!
I look to the spoils of war to help understand the data.
simchaland
2010 Jan 12, 11:47am
Yachtman, it's self-hating Jews that are the worst propagandists of hate toward other Jews. Learn to love yourself. Learn to love your people. Then come back and talk to me.
Being "Chosen" has nothing to do with being "better" or "special." Or perhaps you were sleeping during Hebrew School. Being "Chosen" simply means that we are chosen to live as Jews and do the mitzvot (commandments). All peoples of the Earth are God's People and our Book doesn't deny this and our religion that has sprung from our Book doesn't deny this either. We as Jews are chosen to live as Jews. Other Peoples have their own ways to God. Judaism is our way. It's not necessarily the best way, but it's ours.
Just before you post a response you should know that nothing you say from now on will convince me that you aren't suffering from internalized anti-semitism. So don't bother to deny it. De-nial isn't a river in Egypt in that case.
Oh, and of what "spoils of war" do you speak? Really? Do you honestly believe that Israelis are extremely rich or something? There's no oil in Israel and agriculture is only possible because of irrigation and even with that growing food isn't a "sure thing" there. So, perhaps the joke was played on the Israelis...
Simply being a Jew doesn't mean that you can't be anti-semitic. My Great-Uncle was a big anti-semite and made the family hide its Jewishness until he died. He was a big bully. He hated Jews, African Americans, Native Americans, Mexicans, and anyone "of color." He wanted to live in a suburb of Chicago where no Jews, Blacks, or Latin people were allowed to live. So he hid his Jewishness and bullied the rest of the family into hiding their Jewishness so he could live there. He was ashamed of his heritage to the point where he hated his own people.
He died a sad and bitter old man alone because he had alienated the entire family and most of his friends by the time he had died.
May you be spared his fate.
Simchaland: Great history analysis. I have a question for you: I'd really like to know what you believe about the Khazars.
http://www.khazaria.com/khazar-diaspora.html
Do you believe this is propaganda? Or is there truth to this? This argument looks like it is supported by good evidence. I guess my point is that to be a Jew is not to be a certain race, although it can be. Hitler tried to make this argument and disastrous consequences unfolded. It's really a way of life attached to a religion and a culture. The Hebrew Bible has many examples of convert acceptance. Examples: Obadiah, Ruth, etc.
simchaland
2010 Jan 15, 6:37am
Mr pre-modernist,
The scientific/historical evidence seems to point to what that that page says. There seems to be truth in it. I know that at one point Jews who emigrated to the Khazar/Russian areas did go out and convert people in the Khazar region back when they were in a prosthelytizing period. Also Russians and Khazars converted to marry Jews who were new immigrants at the time.
So yes, there is a definite mixing of Eurasian and Jewish people that happened throughout history. That's why there are blond haired blue eyed Jews and green eyed red haired Jews.
Later in history conversions were stopped because Czarist Russia made conversion a dangerous prospect for any Rabbi and the convert.
Most Ashkhenazim (Eastern European Jews) have some Eastern European/Eurasian blood. Some Sephardim (Middle Eastern/Spanish Jews) who were living outside of Israel/Palestine have some Arab/African/Spanish blood in them too.
The Falasha Jews of Ethiopia are descended from exiled Jews and local Ethiopians who inter-married with them.
The Jewish Diaspora has had to mix in with the people with whom they live in order to survive at times. And some Jews had to remain separate from the peoples with whom they lived in order to survive too.
Judaism is a religion, certainly. And it's more than a religion. It's also a People who are drawn or tied to or originate from a strip of land in the Middle East. Jews aren't a separate race, certainly. Judaism is an ethnicity. And within Judaism there are many ethnic groups who vary in religious practice and custom and language.
What unites us is our Books, Hebrew, our One God, the Sabbath, our Holy Days, and the Land of Israel (both the figurative/spiritual Eretz Yisrael and the actual physical land if Israel.) We are still very much a tribal people even when living in modern countries where tribalism is all but extinct. We tend to "know" each other when we meet each other. Each one of us has a "Jewish Soul" that somehow most of us can "sniff out" in other Jews who may not appear to be "outwardly Jewish."
So, it is wrong to consider Jews as a homogeneous "race." We aren't a race. We are a People that has an over-arching culture that varies within different Jewish sub-ethnic groups. Jews can be found around the world in every country. Jews can and do look differently depending on ethnic background or conversion.
So, the question of "Who is a Jew?" is very complex and even Jews disagree on what makes one person a Jew and another person a non-Jew. Personally, I believe that if you self-identify as a Jew, you're a Jew. If you don't identify as a Jew and your Mother is Jewish, you're still technically a Jew by Jewish Law, and yet I don't believe it's fair to call a person who has a Jewish Mother who doesn't identify as a Jew a Jew, even though Jewish Law states otherwise. Jewish Law doesn't recognize conversion to another religion. Basically if you're born a Jew or you converted to Judaism you are always a Jew, even if you leave and join another religion. It's because being a Jew isn't just being part of a religion, it's also being part of a People/Tribe.
So, these answers can get very complicated. And no, I don't believe the Khazar Diaspora Theories to be propaganda. I believe that there is some scientific/historical evidence that points to certain truths there and that to dismiss it without careful study would be wrong.
resistance
2012 Sep 13, 2:34am
I think it's important to resurrect this thread each time militant Muslims murder in the name of Mohammed.
Latest murders: Lybia
CrazyMan
2012 Sep 13, 2:49am
What's amazing is in this day and age people still believe any of this shit actually exists. Jesus, Allah, Joseph Smith, the Easter Bunny, Santa Claus; they're all figments of your f***ing imagination. I really wish people would understand that but unfortunately the world is full of stupid people.
Also, RIP Vile Rat.
curious2
2012 Sep 13, 3:21am
Thank you for posting this. The latest murders in Libya are very sad, possibly orchestrated by Al Qaeda manipulating a mob, which seems all too easy in Muslim countries (remember the Danish cartoons, and the Pakistani girl accused of blasphemy). An early comment said Christianity has also been used to promote violence, e.g. the Crusades. Apparently that was also true of the most recent Iraq war, where W saw himself fulfilling biblical prophecy:
Religion motivates and organizes people to do things they otherwise wouldn't, sometimes terrible things. Based on claims that cannot be proved, it lends itself to division and violence. Even on P.net I have noticed people who seem otherwise reasonable become totally unhinged when the subject is religion; they subordinate the Constitution to their preferred preacher, call the founders of the Republic (who prohibited the Congress from passing any law respecting an establishment of religion) "scumbags," and say that disagreeing with their preacher is like slitting their throats. The paradox is, they claim to believe in an omnipotent god, yet they act as if he/she/it needs their help all the time. They seem unable or unwilling to understand that no omnipotent god can ever need their help. While Islam seems to be the locus of most religious violence currently, Muslims are only acting out primal behaviors best shown in the opening scenes of 2001: their preachers have discovered a tool to cause violence and gain power for themselves, just as other preachers have also discovered.
freak80
2012 Sep 13, 4:54am
Maybe move this to the Religion section?
I read through a lot of this. Will humanity blow itself up?
Anyone remember "The End of the World Cartoon"? ;-)
Patrick
2013 Apr 19, 2:34am
Looks like the "Religion of Peace" has directly inspired the murder of innocent people at random yet again (Boston this time), so it's time to bump this thread back to the top.
Please copy and paste the original text from http://www.faithfreedom.org/ to other blogs, especially in Arabic if you can do the translation.
All religious people should be viewed with suspicion and fear. They cannot be trusted to be humane to others because they are delusional.
Chechens have longstanding beef with russians as such it was somewhat surprising that they chose to attack america. America never done anything to them directly or indirectly.
Tenpoundbass
2013 Apr 19, 4:32am
I hope they mail the boy's head to his father, judging by his tone, he knew what they were up to.
Patrick
2013 Apr 19, 6:00am
Looks like INS really screwed up this one. Those guys should not have been admitted to the country.
MisdemeanorRebel
2013 Apr 19, 6:47am
Nor did one brother have trouble hanging out with people and making friends:
We need to start charging clerics as accessories to crimes, if they explicitly endorse violence from their pulpit. Or at least seize their church's assets.
Heavyweight Champion, best boxer in Boston, wanted him to represent Boston in various sporting events.
What did that guy say about entrails and priests?
Dan8267
2013 Apr 19, 7:39am
Nor did one brother have trouble hanging out with people and making friends:
Well, that idiot won't be spending any time with girlfriends anymore. He'll have plenty of time for regret during the next 60+ years in jail.
leo707
2013 Apr 19, 7:40am
We need to start charging clerics as accessories to crimes, if they explicitly endorse violence from their pulpit. Or at least seize their church's assets.
Careful now...we would have to word that law so it does not accidentally snare real Americans like Michael Savage and Glenn Beck.
Dan8267
2013 Apr 19, 8:05am
We need to start charging clerics as accessories to crimes, if they explicitly endorse violence from their pulpit. Or at least seize their church's assets.
Careful now...we would have to word that law so it does not accidentally snare real Americans like Michael Savage and Glenn Beck.
Actually, I would be more concerned about such, even well-intended, laws ensnaring people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King, Jr., and anyone else who "rocked the boat".
There's also still some truth in the mantra:
The Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.
I think all Americans need to have a rebellious streak in them. It's good for the country.
« First « Previous Comments 72 - 111 of 2,882 Next » Last » Search these comments
A Call to the Muslims of the World from a Group of Freethinkers and Humanists of Muslim Origins
Dear friends,
The tragic incidents of September 11 have shocked the world. It is unthinkable that anyone could be so full of hate as to commit such heinous acts and kill so many innocent people. We people of Muslim origin are as much shaken as the rest of the world and yet we find ourselves looked upon with suspicion and distrust by our neighbours and fellow citizens. We want to cry out and tell the world that we are not terrorists, and that those who perpetrate such despicable acts are murderers and not part of us. But, in reality, because of our Muslim origins we just cannot erase the stigma of Islamic Terrorism from our identity!
What most Muslims will say:
Islam would never support the killing of innocent people. Allah of the Holy Qur'an never advocated killings. This is all the work of a few misguided individuals at the fringes of society. The real Islam is sanctified from violence. We denounce all violence. Islam means peace. Islam means tolerance.
What knowledgeable Muslims should say:
That is what most Muslims think, but is it true? Does Islam really preach peace, tolerance and non-violence? The Muslims who perpetrate these crimes think differently. They believe that what they do is Jihad (holy war). They say that killing unbelievers is mandatory for every Muslim. They do not kill because they wish to break the laws of Islam but because they think this is what true Muslims should do. Those who blow-up their own bodies to kill more innocent people do so because they think they will be rewarded in Paradise. They hope to be blessed by Allah, eat celestial food, drink pure wine and enjoy the company of divine consorts. Are they completely misguided? Where did they get this distorted idea? How did they come to believe that killing innocent people pleases God? Or is it that we are misguided? Does really Islam preach violence? Does it call upon its believers to kill non-believers? We denounce those who commit acts of violence and call them extremists. But are they really extremists or are they following what the holy book, the Qur'an tells them to do? What does the Qur'an teach? Have we read the Qur'an? Do we know what kind of teachings are there? Let us go through some of them and take a closer look at what Allah says.
What the Qur'an Teaches Us:
We have used the most widely available English text of the Qur'an and readers are welcome to verify our quotes from the holy book. Please have an open mind and read through these verses again and again. The following quotes are taken from the most trusted Yusufali's translation of the Qur'an. The Qur'an tells us: not to make friendship with Jews and Christians (5:51), kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (2:191), murder them and treat them harshly (9:123), fight and slay the Pagans, seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (9:5). The Qur'an demands that we fight the unbelievers, and promises If there are twenty amongst you, you will vanquish two hundred: if a hundred, you will vanquish a thousand of them (8:65). Allah and his messenger want us to fight the Christians and the Jews until they pay the Jizya [a penalty tax for the non-Muslims living under Islamic rules] with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued (9:29). Allah and his messenger announce that it is acceptable to go back on our promises (treaties) and obligations with Pagans and make war on them whenever we find ourselves strong enough to do so (9:3). Our God tells us to fight the unbelievers and He will punish them by our hands, cover them with shame and help us (to victory) over them (9:14).
The Qur'an takes away the freedom of belief from all humanity and relegates those who disbelieve in Islam to hell (5:10), calls them najis (filthy, untouchable, impure) (9:28), and orders its followers to fight the unbelievers until no other religion except Islam is left (2:193). It says that the non-believers will go to hell and will drink boiling water (14:17). It asks the Muslims to slay or crucify or cut the hands and feet of the unbelievers, that they be expelled from the land with disgrace and that they shall have a great punishment in world hereafter (5:34). And tells us that for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods (22:19-22) and that they not only will have disgrace in this life, but on the Day of Judgment He shall make them taste the Penalty of burning (Fire) (22:9). The Qur'an says that those who invoke a god other than Allah not only should meet punishment in this world but the Penalty on the Day of Judgment will be doubled to them, and they will dwell therein in ignominy (25:68). For those who believe not in Allah and His Messenger, He has prepared, for those who reject Allah, a Blazing Fire! (48:13). Although we are asked to be compassionate amongst each other, we have to be harsh with unbelievers, our Christian, Jewish and Atheist neighbours and colleagues (48:29). As for him who does not believe in Islam, the Prophet announces with a stern command: Seize ye him, and bind ye him, And burn ye him in the Blazing Fire. Further, make him march in a chain, whereof the length is seventy cubits! This was he that would not believe in Allah Most High. And would not encourage the feeding of the indigent! So no friend hath he here this Day. Nor hath he any food except the corruption from the washing of wounds, Which none do eat but those in sin. (69:30-37) The Qur'an prohibits a Muslim from befriending a non-believer even if that non-believer is the father or the brother of that Muslim (9:23), (3:28). Our holy book asks us to be disobedient towards the disbelievers and their governments and strive against the unbelievers with great endeavour (25:52) and be stern with them because they belong to Hell (66:9). The holy Prophet prescribes fighting for us and tells us that it is good for us even if we dislike it (2:216). Then he advises us to strike off the heads of the disbelievers; and after making a wide slaughter among them, carefully tie up the remaining captives (47:4). Our God has promised to instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers and has ordered us to smite above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them (8:12). He also assures us that when we kill in his name it is not us who slay them but Allah, in order that He might test the Believers by a gracious trial from Himself (8:17). He orders us to strike terror into the hearts of the enemies (8:60). He has made the Jihad mandatory and warns us that Unless we go forth, (for Jihad) He will punish us with a grievous penalty, and put others in our place (9:39). Allah speaks to our Holy Prophet and says O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be stern against them. Their abode is Hell - an evil refuge indeed (9:73).
He promises us that in the fight for His cause whether we slay or are slain we return to the garden of Paradise (9:111). In Paradise he will wed us with Houris (celestial virgins) pure beautiful ones (56:54), and unite us with large-eyed beautiful ones while we recline on our thrones set in lines (56:20). There we are promised to eat and drink pleasantly for what we did (56:19). He also promises boys like hidden pearls (56:24) and youth never altering in age like scattered pearls (for those who have paedophiliac inclinations) (76:19). As you see, Allah has promised all sorts or rewards, gluttony and unlimited sex to Muslim men who kill unbelievers in his name. We will be admitted to Paradise where we shall find goodly things, beautiful ones, pure ones confined to the pavilions that man has not touched them before nor jinni (56:67-71).In the West we enjoy freedom of belief but we are not supposed to give such freedom to anyone else because it is written If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good) (3:85). And He orders us to fight them on until there is no more tumult and faith in Allah is practiced everywhere (8:39). As for women the book of Allah says that they are inferior to men and their husbands have the right to scourge them if they are found disobedient (4:34). It advises to take a green branch and beat your wife, because a green branch is more flexible and hurts more. (38:44). It teaches that women will go to hell if they are disobedient to their husbands (66:10). It maintains that men have an advantage over the women (2:228). It not only denies the women's equal right to their inheritance (4:11-12), it also regards them as imbeciles and decrees that their witness is not admissible in the courts of law (2:282). This means that a woman who is raped cannot accuse her rapist unless she can produce a male witness. Our Holy Prophet allows us to marry up to four wives and he licensed us to sleep with our slave maids and as many 'captive' women as we may have (4:3) even if those women are already married. He himself did just that. This is why anytime a Muslim army subdues another nation, they call them kafir and allow themselves to rape their women. Pakistani soldiers allegedly raped up to 250,000 Bengali women in 1971 after they massacred 3,000,000 unarmed civilians when their religious leader decreed that Bangladeshis are un-Islamic. This is why the prison guards in Islamic regime of Iran rape the women that in their opinion are apostates prior to killing them, as they believe a virgin will not go to Hell.
Dear fellow Muslims:Is this the Islam you believe in? Is this your Most Merciful, Most Compassionate Allah whom you worship daily? Could Allah incite you to kill other peoples? Please understand that there is no terrorist gene - but there could be a terrorist mindset. That mindset finds its most fertile ground in the tenets of Islam. Denying it, and presenting Islam to the lay public as a religion of peace similar to Buddhism, is to suppress the truth. The history of Islam between the 7th and 14th centuries is riddled with violence, fratricide and wars of aggression, starting right from the death of the Prophet and during the so-called 'pure' or orthodox caliphate. And Muhammad himself hoisted the standard of killing, looting, massacres and bloodshed. How can we deny the entire history? The behaviour of our Holy Prophet as recorded in authentic Islamic sources is quite questionable from a modern viewpoint. The Prophet was a charismatic man but he had few virtues. Imitating him in all aspects of life (following the Sunnah) is both impossible and dangerous in the 21st century. Why are we so helplessly in denial over this simple issue? When the Prophet was in Mecca and he was still not powerful enough he called for tolerance. He said To you be your religion, and to me my religion (109:6). This famous quote is often misused to prove that the general principle of Qur'an is tolerance. He advised his follower to speak good to their enemies (2: 83), exhorted them to be patient (20:103) and said that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256). But that all changed drastically when he came to power. Then killing and slaying unbelievers with harshness and without mercy was justified in innumerable verses. The verses quoted to prove Islam's tolerance ignore many other verses that bear no trace of tolerance or forgiveness. Where is tolerance in this well-known verse Alarzu Lillah, Walhukmu Lillah. (The Earth belongs to Allah and thus only Allah's rule should prevail all over the earth.).Is it normal that a book revealed by God should have so many serious contradictions? The Prophet himself set the example of unleashing violence by invading the Jewish settlements, breaking treaties he had signed with them and banishing some of them after confiscating their belongings, massacring others and taking their wives and children as slaves. He inspected the youngsters and massacred all those who had pubic hair along with the men. Those who were younger he kept as slaves. He distributed the women captured in his raids among his soldiers keeping the prettiest for himself (33:50). He made sexual advances on Safiyah, a Jewish girl on the same day he captured her town Kheibar and killed her father, her husband and many of her relatives. Reyhana was another Jewish girl of Bani Quriza whom he used as a sex slave after killing all her male relatives. In the last ten years of his life he accumulated two scores of wives, concubines and sex slaves including the 9 year old Ayesha. These are not stories but records from authentic Islamic history and the Hadiths. It can be argued that this kind of behaviour was not unknown or unusual for the conquerors and leaders of the mediaeval world but these are not the activities befitting of a peaceful saint and certainly not someone who claimed to be the Mercy of God for all creation. There were known assassinations of adversaries during the Prophet's time, which he had knowledge of and had supported. Among them there was a 120 year old man, Abu 'Afak whose only crime was to compose a lyric satirical of the Prophet. (by Ibn Sa'd Kitab al Tabaqat al Kabir, Volume 2, page 32) Then when a poetess, a mother of 5 small children 'Asma' Bint Marwan wrote a poetry cursing the Arabs for letting Muhammad assassinate an old man, our Holy Prophet ordered her to be assassinated too in the middle of the night while her youngest child was suckling from her breast. (Sirat Rasul Allah (A. Guillaume's translation The Life of Muhammad) page 675, 676).The Prophet did develop a 'Robin Hood' image that justified raiding merchant caravans attacking cities and towns, killing people and looting their belongings in the name of social justice. Usama Bin Laden is also trying to create the same image. But Robin Hood didn't claim to be a prophet or a pacifist nor did he care for apologist arguments. He did not massacre innocent people indiscriminately nor did he profit by reducing free people to slaves and then trading them. With the known and documented violent legacy of Islam, how can we suddenly rediscover it as a religion of peace in the free world in the 21st century? Isn't this the perpetuation of a lie by a few ambitious leaders in order to gain political control of the huge and ignorant Muslim population? They are creating a polished version of Islam by completely ignoring history. They are propagating the same old dogma for simple believing people in a crisp new modern package. Their aim: to gain political power in today's high-tension world. They want to use the confrontational power of the original Islam to catalyse new conflicts and control new circles of power.
Dear conscientious Muslims, please question yourselves. Isn't this compulsive following of a man who lived 1400 years ago leading us to doom in a changing world? Do the followers of any other religion follow one man in such an all-encompassing way? Who are we deceiving, them or ourselves? Dear brothers and sisters, see how our Umma (people) has sunk into poverty and how it lags behind the rest of the world. Isn't it because we are following a religion that is outdated and impractical? In this crucial moment of history, when a great catastrophe has befallen us and a much bigger one is lying ahead, should not we wake up from our 1400 years of slumber and see where things have gone wrong? Hatred has filled the air and the world is bracing itself for its doomsday. Should we not ask ourselves whether we have contributed, wittingly or unwittingly, to this tragedy and whether we can stop the great disaster from happening?Unfortunately the answer to the first question is yes. Yes we have contributed to the rise of fundamentalism by merely claiming Islam is a religion of peace, by simply being a Muslim and by saying our shahada (testimony that Allah is the only God and Muhammad is his messenger). By our shahada we have recognized Muhammad as a true messenger of God and his book as the words of God. But as you saw above those words are anything but from God. They call for killing, they are prescriptions for hate and they foment intolerance. And when the ignorant among us read those hate-laden verses, they act on them and the result is the infamous September 11, human bombs in Israel, massacres in East Timor and Bangladesh, kidnappings and killings in the Philippines, slavery in the Sudan, honour killings in Pakistan and Jordan, torture in Iran, stoning and maiming in Afghanistan and Iran, violence in Algeria, terrorism in Palestine and misery and death in every Islamic country. We are responsible because we endorse Islam and hail it as a religion of God. And we are as guilty as those who put into practice what the Qur'an preaches - and ironically we are the main victims too. If we are not terrorists, if we love peace, if we cried with the rest of the word for what happened in New York, then why are we supporting the Qur'an that preaches killing, that advocates holy war, that calls for the murder of non-Muslims? It is not the extremists who have misunderstood Islam. They do literally what the Qur'an asks them to do. It is we who misunderstand Islam. We are the ones who are confused. We are the ones who wrongly assume that Islam is the religion of peace. Islam is not a religion of peace. In its so-called pure form it can very well be interpreted as a doctrine of hate. Terrorists are doing just that and we the intellectual apologists of Islam are justifying it. We can stop this madness. Yes, we can avert the disaster that is hovering over our heads. Yes, we can denounce the doctrines that promote hate. Yes, we can embrace the rest of humanity with love. Yes, we can become part of a united world, members of one human family, flowers of one garden. We can dump the claim of infallibility of our Book, and the questionable legacy of our Prophet.Dear friends, there is no time to waste. Let us put an end to this lie. Let us not fool ourselves. Islam is not a religion of peace, of tolerance, of equality or of unity of humankind. Let us read the Qur'an. Let us face the truth even if it is painful. As long as we keep this lie alive, as long as we hide our head in the sands of Arabia we are feeding terrorism. As long as you and I keep calling Qur'an the unchangeable book of God, we cannot blame those who follow the teachings therein. As long as we pay our Khums and Zakat our money goes to promote Islamic expansionism and that means terrorism, Jihad and war. Islam divides the world in two. Darul Harb (land of war) and Darul Islam (land of Islam). Darul Harb is the land of the infidels, Muslims are required to infiltrate those lands, proselytise and procreate until their numbers increase and then start the war and fight and kill the people and impose the religion of Islam on them and convert that land into Darul Islam. In all fairness we denounce this betrayal. This is abuse of the trust. How can we make war in the countries that have sheltered us? How can we kill those who have befriended us? Yet willingly or unwillingly we have become pawns in this Islamic Imperialism. Let us see what great Islamic scholars have had to say in this respect.Dr. M. Khan the translator of Sahih Bukhari and the Qur'an into English wrote: Allah revealed in Sura Bara'at (Repentance, IX) the order to discard (all) obligations (covenants, etc), and commanded the Muslims to fight against all the Pagans as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizia (a tax levied on the Jews and Christians) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (as it is revealed in 9:29). So the Muslims were not permitted to abandon the fighting against them (Pagans, Jews and Christians) and to reconcile with them and to suspend hostilities against them for an unlimited period while they are strong and have the ability to fight against them. So at first the fighting was forbidden, then it was permitted, and after that it was made obligatory [Introduction to English translation of Sahih Bukhari, p.xxiv.] Dr. Sobhy as-Saleh, a contemporary Islamic academician quoted Imam Suyuti the author of Itqan Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an who wrote: The command to fight the infidels was delayed until the Muslims become strong, but when they were weak they were commanded to endure and be patient. [ Sobhy as_Saleh, Mabaheth Fi 'Ulum al- Qur'an, Dar al-'Ilm Lel-Malayeen, Beirut, 1983, p. 269.]Dr. Sobhy, in a footnote, commends the opinion of a scholar named Zarkashi who said: Allah the most high and wise revealed to Mohammad in his weak condition what suited the situation, because of his mercy to him and his followers. For if He gave them the command to fight while they were weak it would have been embarrassing and most difficult, but when the most high made Islam victorious He commanded him with what suited the situation, that is asking the people of the Book to become Muslims or to pay the levied tax, and the infidels to become Muslims or face death. These two options, to fight or to have peace return according to the strength or the weakness of the Muslims. [ibid p. 270]Other Islamic scholars (Ibn Hazm al-Andalusi, Ga'far ar-Razi, Rabi' Ibn 'Ons, 'Abil-'Aliyah, Abd ar-Rahman Ibn Zayd Ibn 'Aslam, etc.) agree that the verse Slay the idolaters wherever you find them (9:5) cancelled those few earlier verses that called for tolerance in the Qur'an and were revealed when Islam was weak. Can you still say that Islam is the religion of peace? We propose a solution.
We know too well that it is not easy to denounce our faith because it means denouncing a part of ourselves. We are a group of freethinkers and humanists with Islamic roots. Discovering the truth and leaving the religion of our fathers and forefathers was a painful experience. But after learning what Islam stands for we had no choice but to leave it. After becoming familiar with the Qur'an the choice became clear: It is either Islam or humanity. If Islam thrives, then humanity will die. We decided to side with humanity. Culturally we are still Muslims but we no longer believe in Islam as the true religion of God. We are humanists. We love humanity. We work for the unity of humankind. We work for equality between men and women. We strive for the secularisation of Islamic countries, for democracy and freedom of thought, belief and expression. We decided to live no longer in self-deception but to embrace humanity, and to enter into the new millennium hand in hand with people of other cultures and beliefs in amity and in peace.We denounce the violence that is eulogized in the Qur'an as holy war (Jihad). We condemn killing in the name of God. We believe in the sanctity of human life, not in the inviolability of beliefs and religions. We invite you to join us and the rest of humanity and become part of the family of humankind - in love, camaraderie and peace.
Arabic translation الترجمة العربية
See http://www.centerforinquiry.net/isis and http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ for more.
Please copy this article, and distribute it as widely as possible, both online and physically. The future of humanity depends on it.