Some say, many spiteful, vindictive & broken minds are working vigorously toward exactly that unfortunately... some would even argue that whole movements are dedicated to the aspiration.

#FlatEarth

OP is correct. Muslims so dangerous they might start two world wars that kill 100 million people.

Jesus said: “My people, now is the time to start putting prayer and My Name back into the public view. Do not let the atheists control you. You have freedom of speech and freedom of religion. Do not let the atheists and Muslims dictate your religious norms. If Muslims can pray anywhere, then Christians can express themselves as well. Stand up for your Constitutional rights, or they will be taken away. Pray for love and unity, but there should be a fair expression for everyone.”

http://www.johnleary.com/index.php/2...at=3&order=ASC

http://prophecy.org.il/1783-prophecy/

Not sure Jesus said that but good point, in the US it is the atheists and Muslims who are the threat to constitution...

I think Islam has issues that are meaningful and real. It tends to hold greater influences over law and state where it is the prevalent religion compared to Christianity. Atheists, for example, tend to face far heavier persecution in predominantly Muslim countries compared to countries which are predominantly Christian. 14 such countries still hold potential death penalties for irreligion.

However that things are better in predominantly Christian countries doesn't have to do so much with Christianity as it has to do with the age of enlightenment, democracy, the rise of human rights and the concept of secularism. These trends tempered Christianity's power over law and state. Still it can't be denied that these are now trends that most major Christian denominations now largely respect, while many Islamic communities still has a way to go.

Because if you go by holy works, the laws of Islam and the laws of Christianity are not very different. It's the execution of those laws that largely separate them. Christian judiciaries with actual power are rare in the world today. They do exist, Catholic law is still a big influence in large swats of the Christian world, but its largely voluntary (legally speaking, not always culturally) to respect.

And the concept of Fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) doesn't really have a counterpart in Christianity anymore, most Christian countries basing themselves on civil law or common law instead. Perhaps somewhat ironically this is something one in part must thank the Catholic church for, because for all its power meddling throughout history - it did in fact keep the civil law tradition alive.

Still, for all these thoughts and criticisms - there is still a long way to go to the kind of unrefined misgivings towards Islam we often see thrown around, which are often just thinly veiled bigotry and racism. The rise of Islamism and extremism plays right into that playbook and makes it an easy sell - something those extremists know very well too, and which they of course exploit. Nothing is better for their recruitment than unrefined bigotry against Islam. And I guess that is the sad reality of the world today, 90% of us are nice people which have to run an exhausting cultural slalom due to remaining 10% being incompetent and angry idiots.

if you're a christian, have read the bible and have any understanding of who jesus was, you're still 100% compatible with modern and progressive western views.
same cannot be said about islam.
the only reason you can point to peaceful so-called muslims is because most of the muslim world is illiterate.
christians have many "outs" in terms of bible contradictions as well as their religious figurehead being, even by today's standards, still saintly.
muslims don't. the quran is a lot shorter and more straightforward than the bible, as well as having a figurehead of whom echoes all of the barbarism within the quran, and has killed far more innocents and taken far more slaves than bin laden could ever dream of.
in short, christians can ignore whatever barbaric passages they want, by simply following the example of their own religion's figurehead.

Black lives matter, including black Muslims.

Okay, let's look at American Muslims. According to Pew, there are approximately 3.5 million Muslims in the US. They are slightly less likely to not graduate high school than the average American (8% compared to a 12% average), so your claim about illiteracy doesn't apply. They seem to view themselves as being able to fit in fairly well in American life, with 92% of Muslims saying they are mostly or completely proud to be American and 88% of them saying they have a lot or some in common with most Americans. 80% of them say they are satisfied with the way things are going in their lives.

As for Western values: 65% of US Muslims say that there is no natural conflict between the teachings of Islam and democracy. 52% of Muslims say that homosexuality should be accepted by society. 82% of Muslims say that they are very or somewhat concerned about extremism in the name of Islam around the world and 71% are concerned about it in the US. They are slightly more likely than the general public to say that killing civilians to further a religious, social, or political end is only rarely or never justified (84%).

Finally, contrary to your claim about Muslims not being able or willing to change traditional religious views, 52% of US Muslims say that traditional understandings of Islam need to be reinterpreted.

So the facts about American Muslims seem to contradict your view of Islam. How do you make sense of this?

When Muslims start renouncing their "holy prophet" and burning Qurans, it will be a step in the right direction.

But Mohammad said it's ok to inbreed, and now we have a world where
50-60% of all Muslims are inbred. Fact.

According to Nicolai Sennels, a Danish psychologist who has done extensive research into Muslim inbreeding, close to half of all Muslims in the world are inbred:

70% of Pakistanis are inbred.
67% of Saudi Arabians are inbred.
64% of those living in Jordan and Kuwait are inbred.
63% of Sudanese are inbred.
60% of Iraqis are inbred.
54% of Muslims in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar are inbred.
25-30% of those in Turkey are inbred.
In England, at least 55% of Pakistani immigrants are married to their first cousins.
In Denmark the number of inbred Pakistani immigrants is around 40%.

Why did you quote my post? Your unsourced claims says nothing to rebut my argument at all. Unless you are saying that being inbred prevents people from having modern and progressive western values?

Or was this just another excuse for you to display your disdain for Muslims?

My point is that they can talk about being "willing to change their
traditional values" as long as they want, but until they are willing to
repudiate Mohammad and the Quran, it's all a bunch of blather.

I don't have a disdain for people, I have a disdain for harmful ideologies.

No it isn't? It is common for religions to drop or vary aspects of their theology or moral claims without repudiating the religion as a whole. For instance, during the Medieval period the Catholic Church banned the lending of money with interest because the Bible said usury was immoral. Today, borrowing or lending money for interest is a commonplace for Christians.

Or look at Reformed Jews - Jews traditionally followed rules around food preparation that are now rejected by most religious American Jews as being obsolete, without repudiating the Torah.

I don't see a good reason to believe that Islam is likely to be different in this way from the other Abrahamic religions, especially given the wide variety of beliefs and practices among Muslims today.

I don't believe you.

@original position: there's 1,500,000,000 in the world. there's 3,400,000 in the u.s. are you really trying to "disprove" my claim by saying 0.2% (possibly the other 3% in europe) of the muslim population in the first world are a reliable representation of the other 97% of muslims in the 3rd world? dude.....

Muslims in the US and in Europe are Muslims by choice, while Muslims in the Middle East are often (usually?) Muslims by force. When Muslims are free to express their true views on things, they apparently choose to accept many "Western" values.

+1

You made an argument that Islam as a religion is not compatible with Western values. This presumably applies as much to Muslims that live in the US as anywhere else. If you want to control for cultural differences, seems like comparing Americans that are Muslim to Americans who aren't is a good way to test your thesis.

This is basically what I was trying to say in my previous post. (But you said it better )

i'm not even concerned with what the actual truth is within the texts. this is all irrelevant. i'm talking about the effects of these books combined with their respective figureheads. it's easy to see WHY muslims act the way they do in a probability sense. i'm not saying they have to. their book is short and streamlined, with a figurehead that is just as vengeful as god, and promotes man to carry out god's will on earth. do you disagree?
the bible is much more confusing as it's a collection of books from different time periods, with a figurehead who (concerning earth) is the antitheses of vengeful, and instructs his followers not act in a vengeful manner, to embrace your own persecution, for you should not care about rectifying injustice on earth, but to simply bear your earthly misery until the rapture.
again, whether this is true or not, it's easy to see how people come to these conclusions.
muhammad deeply cared about rectifying "injustice" on earth, carrying out god's will, etc. jesus instructed us NOT to carry out god's will. when someone sins against you, "turn the other cheek". if god wills it, he will make it done. even in this case, if god wills it, jesus still requests god to betray his will: "forgive them father, for they know not...." etc.

in short, the christian god and allah are the same vengeful god. but:
muhammad instructed us to carry our god's will on earth, whereas:
jesus instructed us to NOT carry out god's will, for that would be vengeful.
true? doesn't matter. only the effects.

fact: 1.1% of u.s. population is muslim
fact: >>>>>1.1% of terror and in u.s. is islamic.

for argument's sake, let's say my assessment is completely wrong, and it's all due to geopolitics:
if you're going to jack land from muslims, to give to their mortal enemies, support the killing of unarmed palestinians (including women and children), it's not good policy to invite those people to live in your country(s).

We better get rid of the first amendment.

I don’t know about that, it’s one of my favorite laws to obey.

Simply pointing out differences is HATEFUL BIGOTRY

"Look this apple isn't an orange"

"How dare you, you bigot"

To be honest, I don't really recognize your description of Christian theology here. I don't know of any Christian who would say that Jesus said we are not to carry out god's will on earth. They do typically believe in Providence - the idea that everything that happens is in accordance with God's ultimate plan, but this is something that Muslims also generally believe.

Here's my view. The primary disagreement here is over how much the ideas of Christian or Muslim theology are the relevant causal factors driving social/cultural differences in Muslim-majority vs Christian-majority countries, or in the individual lives of Muslims and Christians. On the one hand, there are people like Sam Harris, many fundamentalist Christians, and others who believe that theological ideas are a primary cause motivating the actions of religious believers or the cultural mores of society. Others believe either that religious ideas function more like rationalizations for actions/beliefs that they accept because of their material conditions, or at more of an extreme, that religious ideas have very little causal impact on our actions, that claiming to believe them functions more as a way to signal group membership than as describing the actual motives for our actions.

The more one accepts the latter attitude towards religious ideas, the more one is inclined to view the actual content of religious doctrine as not very important - thus making the differences in theology or Scripture between Islam and Christianity not very important. You can also see why people who have this view of religion are more likely to understand people who criticize some religions more strongly than others as likely being prejudiced against the people who hold those religions (since here religion is not being treated as a matter of moral or religious belief so much as a reflection of prior material conditions).