«12. . .175176177178179180181. . .2,5112,512»
What would an Islamic cleric say? Have you looked that up?
Agreed. As CoL has said, this region is inclusive of all religious beliefs (or lack thereof).
Happy Hanukkah everyone!
Just to weigh in briefly on the whole Islam debate; quite aside from the issue of what regions Right to Life should have embassies with, or whether non-Christians are welcome in the region (and on this point I wholeheartedly agree that Right to Life should be open and accepting to everyone who is committed to the cause of Life, regardless of what religion, or irreligious, they hold), as far as the confrontation with Islam in the real world is concerned, I would like to say this:
While I absolutely agree that our attitude as Christians toward individual Muslims should be one of love and compassion, after all, we are commanded to love our enemies, and should hope to win them over by our good conduct and loving manner, the fact remains that they are our enemies. Not only because in 2 Corinthians 6:14-16 it says
" Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?
15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?
16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."
but they see themselves as soldiers in a war between the Dar al-Islam (House of Peace) and the Dar al-Harb (House of War, i.e. you and I, and everyone who isn't Muslim). It's a war they declared, but a war that the West stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the existence of.
I worry that so many Westerners, (including, sadly, many Western Christians who have never had to fight or sacrifice for their beliefs, unlike our Middle Eastern Brethren) are blind to the very real threat that the political-religious ideology of Islam poses to us and our way of life. I'm not saying that we should forcible evict Muslims from our nations, or that we should ban them from coming, or even that we should treat them with anything other than decency and kindness (and I concur with Dallas unit 9 in this- all the Muslims I have met have indeed been lovely, pleasant people). However, it should be made absolutely clear to everyone coming here that the (indisputably Judeo-Christian in origin) values upon which our Anglosphere societies rest, namely, Justice and Liberty, are non-negotiable.
We also need to get our heads out of the sand and wake up to the fact that the various Islamic terrorist groups that crop up all over the world, are all heads of the same serpent, or tentacles of the same monster; different fronts of the same global Jihad. A slogan I read on a (supposedly "mainstream") Islamic website sums it up very succinctly "Our war is one. Our struggle is one." Until the civilized, secular nations of the world (and I include non-Western countries, including rather unsavoury ones such as China or Russia*) realise this and start working together to combat this menace.
The major civilisational conflict of the 20th century was the battle between the Free World and the totalitarian ideology of Socialism, manifested in Fascism/Nazism and Communism. I firmly believe that the defining struggle of the 21st century will be the battle between the Free World and the totalitarian ideology of Islam.
To properly combat Islam , we must first seek to understand Islam. "Know your enemy" is a very important principle, which is why I plan on taking an Islamic Studies class in University.
To hear the arguments for why Islam IS a threat explained in more detail, I would highly recommend the following documentary:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5YsdbhIbZoc (warning: some of the content is highly disturbing)
If you're pressed for time, this clip is only around 15 minutes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2HlptyGvlIY
Also, the following sites are very useful:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/
http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Main_Page
http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
Above all: DON'T BELIEVE WHAT THE MEDIA TELLS YOU! Read what Muslims say/write/broadcast about THEMSELVES! GO TO ISLAMIC WEBSITES (ones designed for internal consumption, not for proselytising to outsiders)! What you read will shock, and, God willing, enlighten you.
Sorry for the rant, but this is a topic I feel quite strongly about. God bless! :)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*And I am supremely irritated by the way both the Left AND the Right demonise Putin and Russian, who could be valuable allies in the fight against extremism-see brilliant British writer Peter Hitchens for more).
On second thoughts, I probably shouldn't have used the word 'briefly". :)
1. The word jerk doesn't even begin to describe Putin and Russia so don't even get me started.
2. Have you studied Islam in depth from the Qu'ran? Not saying I have (I need to myself sometime.), but I'm just curious. Do you get your information simply from websites?
3. What are you addressing this against? Islamic fundamentalism or Islam?
I guess I'm the only person here who likes college football. :(
http://w11.zetaboards.com/NS_Right_to_Life/topic/10814356/1/
Sorry, but I know nothing about football....
God of love, Father of all,
the darkness that covered the earth
has given way to the bright dawn of your Word made flesh.
Make us a people of this light.
Make us faithful to your Word,
that we may bring your life to the waiting world.
Grant this through Christ our Lord.
Amen.
May the peace of the Lord be with you this Christmas.
Archbishop C.
1. I'm not saying I'm a fan of President Putin, or his domestic policies: I would definitely not like to live in his country. However, the fact is, that he proved to be absolutely correct when it came to Western intervention in the Middle East, during the so-called Arab Spring, didn't he. Take Syria for example; President Assad, who we were told was an evil dictator, worse than Hitler!, is now an important ally in the fight against ISIS-many of whose recruits are the very same rebels who WE supported and armed only a short while ago. Which is why Syrian Christians largely support the Assad regime, by the way.
And while the situation in the Ukraine is very messy and complicated (this radio interview by Peter Hitchens is quite insightful: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OfdcIbT3pKQ), I do think a large part of it could have been avoided if the EU, and by proxy, NATO and the US had avoided needlessly provoking an insecure nation like Russia by, from their perspective, creating a vassal state right on the edge of their territory.
Peter Hitchens talks more about his here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UeO44STvnJw
2. I have read the Qur'an and portions of Hadith (though not in the original Arabic). I have also read both Islamic websites and material critical of Islam.
3. I don't believe it's possible to make a distinction between the two. Fundamentalism, in both a Muslim and Christian context, simply means getting back to 'the fundamentals'; the basic teachings and practices of a faith. Surely the truest and purest form of Islam, is Islam as it was practiced by Muhammed and his followers, just as the truest form of Christianity is the Christianity as it was practiced by the Disciples of Jesus and the Early Church.
I have become convinced that what is termed "radical" or "extremist" Islam, is simply the true face of Islam. The fact is that the Islamic State (for all the media tries to to tell us that they are not Islamic) is simply practicing Islam as Muhammed practiced it in the seventh century: murdering, raping, mutilating and enslaving people of other faiths. We are constantly told that there are millions of "good", "faithful" Muslims who don't kill and torture for their faith, in other words: Muslims who behave like normal human beings. But in fact, these are bad Muslims, because they are not following the example of their "Prophet".
ISIS are the best Muslims there are! They are simply obeying the instruction of the Qu'ran, which condones, among other things, the rape of captured slave girls.
No matter how much we are told that the "vast majority" (interesting that we are never given actual statistics) of Muslims are peaceful, which is certainly true. But while there may be many moderate Muslims, with whom it is possible to coexist, there is no such thing as moderate Islam.
While I bear no ill will toward Muslims as people, I must resolutely and wholeheartedly oppose Islam, which must be the most evil ideology in history. The fact is that in the south of France, there are more Mosques than Churches, gangs of Muslims men patrol the streets of East London, enforcing Sharia Law and there are huge Muslim ghettos in many European cities, where the police dare not go. I am afraid that the types of attacks we have seen recently in Sydney and in Pakistan are only going to increase, as more Muslims pour into Western countries and are Imams are allowed to preach anti-Christian, anti-Jewish hatred unchecked. The Muslims are closer to realising their dream of Ummah (a global Islamic state) than ever before, and all because of the cowardice of Western peoples, government, and, above all, churches! Churches who have failed to make a gracious but bold stand for the Gospel, and to assert the exclusivity and sufficiency of the Christian faith. Churches who have allowed themselves to be lulled into a false sense of security by "inter-faith dialogues" and who have ignored the plight of their persecuted brothers and sisters. Our world is changing, and not for the better, and by the time the West wakes up, it may already be too late.
Three minor points: ISIS may be worse than Assad, but Assad knowingly contributed to the radicalization of the war so that he would appear more legitimate. The primary enemy in the eyes of the Syrian regime is not ISIS or al-Nusra but the various secularist and moderate Islamist rebel groups.
Also, fascism has very little relation to socialism. The original ideology of the Spanish Falange was indeed left-leaning economically, but Franco basically got rid of that (which was part of the reason why we champions of the free world decided he was a "good" fascist). Mussolini undertook a number of public works projects, but other than that he was closely aligned with the Italian upper class. Hitler quite literally had no economic policy, he did make sure to purge left-wing Nazis like Rohm and the Strasser brothers. In the neo-fascist/neo-Nazi movement today, those who could be really be considered "socialist" are a minority.
Finally, socialism =/= communism (and both terms have broad definitions).
I'm busy at the moment, so I can't really reply to Xinxian's assertions about Islam, but I will say this: I myself have serious issues with Islam, but remember, it wasn't that long ago when it was the Christian nations who saw themselves fighting a righteous war against ignorant savages.
However there is a major distinction between capitalism (i.e. separation between economy and state, just as there is separation between church and state) and corporatism, in which the upper echelons of the government are aligned with the interests of massive multinational corporate cartels. This sort of 'crony capitalism' is as distinct from true, laissez-faire capitalism as you socialism is from communism. As a believer in the free market, I am as opposed to corporate welfare as I am to social welfare.
However, the form of socialism practiced in Soviet Russia, socialism in the interests of "the people", the form implemented in Fascist economies, socialism in the interest of political/corporate conglomerates and the form widespread in the West today, which is supposedly in the interests of the poor, have one fundamental common denominator: state control of and interference in the economy. That's really what socialism boils down to.
As far as modern "far-right" movements, I think you'll find that parties such as the National Front in France, or the British National Party in the UK, actually have more "left-wing" economic policies than the major socialist parties in those countries!
As far as your final point is concerned, I'm afraid that simply isn't an argument. I freely admit that many terrible, sinful acts have been committed in the past by those claiming to be Christians; I acknowledge this (whereas, unfortunately, most Muslims are unwilling to acknowledge the historical atrocities perpetrated in the name of their religion). But the reprehensible actions of one party in no way justifies or legitimises the reprehensible actions of another. Two wrongs don't make a right. While you may argue it is hypocritical for Christians to criticise Islam for its record of violence, that does not make the criticism itself invalid.
It's an old tactic that many people have been using for decades: diverting attention from criticism of one nation/regime by pointing out the failings of another. It's like when online commentators from the Chinese '50 Cent Brigade' respond to mention of China's human rights abuses by saying: "Oh yeah? What about Iraq?!", etc. Muslims (and their defenders) use it all the time. Tu qoque arguments are a logical fallacy, and have their roots in Soviet rhetoric:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque
It was also several hundred years ago since Christians engaged en masse in any sort of 'holy war', whereas jihad (righteous struggle, which I realise is not always violent, but often is) is widespread in the Islamic world today, and, I would argue, fundamental to the religion, in Shia Islam being the first of the ten Ancillaries of the Faith (furūʿ ad-dīn), and in Sunni Islam often referred to as one the Six Pillar of the Faith.
I'm not saying Islamic extremism is excusable because of Christian extremism (and by "not so long ago", I was referring to as recently as the early 20th century, not simply the Middle Ages). I'm saying your characterization of Islamic extremists as the true Muslims is unfair. Islam, like the vast majority of religions, has both good and evil components. I once saw a Facebook page called something like "50 terrorists, not 1.6 billion Muslims" (I don't remember the exact name) the main point of which was that people like Osama bin Laden do not represent Islam. I commented saying I agreed, but I pointed out that the Islamic extremist movement counts members in the tens and possibly hundreds of thousands, not to mention the millions of fundamentalists who are sympathetic to many jihadist beliefs. This is something I think we can agree on - that Islamic extremism is today a much bigger problem than the relatively tiny KKK, and that Islamic fundamentalism is a dangerous breeding ground for hate and violence. I just don't think the fundamentalist attitudes and beliefs you cite are as widely-held as you imply, or that fundamentalists should be considered the "truest" adherents.
So apparently NationStates' resident neo-fascists have invaded the region named Anne Frank.
Yes, I've been contacted about the ongoing effort to free the region. Send me a telegram if you want in on it.
Welcome to Right to Life, Abortionellia and Trondheimen!
On the regional forums, a new topic has been opened for region members to discuss the upcoming Security Council proposal Commend Pauline Bonaparte. Please consider posting your opinions on this proposal.
http://w11.zetaboards.com/NS_Right_to_Life/forum/3118130/
Here's a nice quote to illustrate your point: "Don't judge a religion by its abuse; judge it by its doctrine."
Anne Frank
Ooohhhhh that was so satisfying.
My country bans ALL non-Christian religions/spiritual philosophies, all non-trinitarian Jesus-orientated sects, Joseph Smith and atheism.
Congratulations for establishing embassies.
My central point, though, is that religious violence is a core part of Islamic doctrine, as revealed in the Qur'an and the Hadith.
http://www.answeringmuslims.com/p/jihad.html?m=1
«12. . .175176177178179180181. . .2,5112,512»
Advertisement
