The problem is, that it isnt objectively clear. That is the case... now. It wasnt the case in the past, but things havent changed in the religions themselves right? Do you doubt that in the middle ages it was the christians who were the barbaric *******s that shouted "my way or death" and the Muslims were working on making progressive advancements? It isnt the religions that have changed, the core books have remained the same since long before the time of the crusades, so what exactly do you chalk that up to.

As to the bolded. hmmmmmmm, how about "The majority" just like you claim of muslims?

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/02/...-religion.html

Of course it's objectively clear. Go visit that Pew Polling link I gave you earlier.

The Muslims world has never been civilized. It has always been about slavery, conquest, and the oppression of women. Muhammed left them a strong example. They had a period in which comparatively a lot of wealth flowed through the Middle East, due to where it was, and technology and writing took off, but when that was disrupted by barbarian invaders (not Christians), Islam sank back into the pits, as it has no enduring healthy philosophy to sustain it. Europe in contrast survived and grew despite many barbarian sackings and periods of poverty and strife (including Muslims carrying off millions of Europeans to take home to enslave in vast raids over centuries - something the Christians never did back).

This is precisely what I've been talking about!! Christianity was at least widely open to interpretation, given its two books, such that you could argue for the later over the earlier. This is in fact what happened - as the Old Testament view and claims looked increasingly absurd, the New Testament took over and informed worldview. Islam is a warmongering God and a warmongering last prophet. How do you argue against that? Where is a second book to moderate that? The Koran is very plain, Muhammed's example very brutal, and it has nothing like the moderating effect of Jesus as the last prophet.
This is perhaps 5-10% of the US population and 0.1% of the global population. Compare that with a billion Muslims who want Sharia law (which isn't even in the same class as calling a country a Christian nation). You're out of your tree on this one, sir.

Your Pew link focuses solely on what are mostly third world countries. It doesnt break down what percentage of total muslims are contained within these countries. It doesnt take into account ANY muslims in The US, Canada, Central and South America, Australia, or the majority of Europe... so, I guess YOU are allowed to cherry pick results, and ya know, **** me for showing a poll that says the majority of likely Republican voters wants to make Christianity an official state religion for the only country I am focusing on... because reasons.

So just to clarify, based on this idea, All jews are just as vile and bloodthirsty as all muslims, is that right?

I think his misses one big part. Which is that the practitioners of Christianity have in large part undergone a tremendous growth in standard of living. It's hard to get well fed, safe, and comfortable people off the couch to go risk their life for a religious ideal.

Even look at something like gay marriage. Many Protestant religions have accepted it over the past couple of decades. Has he underlying theology changed? Of course not, but refusing to change would mean the religions would die off as more and more people became ok with the idea.

So tying this back to why I got involved in this thread. Saying that Islam and the Middle East is incompatible with democracy and basic human rights is kind of silly. Religions change as necessary.

Keeping the Middle East stuck with wars and strongman dictatorships will stifle the things that force religion to change.

There's no simple answer to how to achieve this in the ME. But giving up and saying the Middle East just can't support democracy or basic human rights isn't going to help in the short term or the long. And it's pretty ****ing ignorant about how religions actually evolve.

Sounds reasonable.

Are we seeing that? Are we seeing any more difficulties than 'assimilating' other religions, races, and cultures? Not just now, but throughout the last couple of centuries. What are the numbers that back that up?

Further, I'd point to how Islam is practiced in Western countries and point out that it's already clear that they can co-exist. That in fact we see how the religion is adapted to be acceptable to the audience.

Edit: This was in response to a deleted post by BroadwaySushy.

This has been my argument and I believe we should try to speed up the process instead of trying to hold it off. If we're going to have the equivalent of Christendom's Wars of Religion, let's just get it done now before we invent even more horrific instruments of war.

they're pretty end game already.... I wouldn't root for it.

The reform process for Christianity came from within, and was probably partly informed by the New Testament.

The world would be a vicious, ugly place without the influence of Christian Europeans and their descendants. They forced the end of slavery, particularly the massive trade among Muslims and North Africans; established the norm of country self determination; emancipated women; protected the young from sexual exploitation; established the idea of human rights enshrined in law; secularized government; fought against racism in its various forms; and civilized various vicious, barbaric tribes around the world, mostly by spreading Christianity and law.

Can you name a religion or culture that has reformed itself into something more enlightened, that isn't Christian European? As far as I can see, it's never happened. The Chinese and Japanese were barbaric toward their neighbors and their own people (the Chinese still harbor a deep racism and pride that has yet to disappear; the Japanese were only subdued and reeducated by America occupation post WWII), Americans Indians and South Americans were truly brutal to one another, Africa was a hellhole, Hindu India was a hellhole (and still is), and Muslim lands had a widespread culture of slavery and treating women as chattels. Perhaps the Buddhists alone had a civilized culture, and their influence didn't spread far. Perhaps the Jews are another (tiny minority) success story, but they were deeply embedded in Europe. Even worse, in some areas, religion was replaced with the repressive horrors of secular communism.

So no, I don't think these places and cultures will reform from within. The only reason they're somewhat more enlightened than they were is because Europeans have spread civilization and civilized ideas and ideals.

The Middle East has regressed strongly backwards every time a dictator is removed. The Shah of Iran => Khomeini and fundamentalism; Assad in Syria => horrific fundamentalism; democracy in Palestine => Hamas; Removal of Gaddafi => ISIS and other fanatics taking over. Egypt has gone from fairly stable to increasing influence of the Muslim Brotherhood, who are only being kept in line by yet another dictatorship forming.

I mean, the results are in. Without enforced secularism, the Middle East slides into fundamentalism, which endures for decades and centuries. Nothing good comes from democratizing these places. Democracy only works when a majority hold democratic ideals; 80+% of Muslims in the Middle East want Sharia Law, which once established is perpetual, and is the antithesis of democracy and tolerance and human rights and equality under the law.

Basically, I think you're deeply naive. Obama was too, so it's not just you, which is why a lot of this mess happened.

Well, if you look at Europe I would say yes there are difficulties with assimilation.

France is in a hell of a state with much of it's Muslim population segregated into Muslim only neighborhoods. Belgium has similar problems.
Germany is only now starting to realise the folly of unlimited intakes of refugees from Islamic countries.

By comparison the U.S. has fared pretty well probably because the influx has been gradual and more measured so far.

LOL stated like a true terrorist advocate. Obviously you support ISIS objectives in your refusal to state your views while making stuff up about what wil posted. I don't know how you people function in the world supporting outright murder and mayhem. Complete hate mongoring ftw.

Let's face it France is much less tolerant of the practice of Islam than the USA is. I think that is a significant. One of the issues with ISIS that I believe gets overlooked is the conflict between Shia's and Sunni's. FWIW one of the reasons that ISIS has reared it's ugly head is the treatment of Sunni's in Iraq post the USA withdrawal of troops in 2011. So when the Western govts take up arms against ISIS they are perceived by many Sunni's as siding with the Shia's.

BroadwaySushy, the question isn't about difficulties. It's about 'more difficulties'. Because difficulties assimilating (both from the 'existing' population and the 'new' population) are nothing new.

So I'd want to see some sort of actual numbers that showed it was impossible (which I think is what you'd said in your deleted post).

TS, you're basically the Jiggs of religion. Everything good can be attributed to Christianity. Everything bad can be attributed to Islam.

lol jj smackin two dudes at once gg wp sir

He keeps pretending Iran somehow began with the Shah and he ignores the stable democratic leader that the Brits and U.S. overthrew because of oil. He is not arguing in good faith.

This makes no sense.

more like he's the JJ of RW Christian excuse making and apology ... you know, but also super racist.

Jiggs, I think you're saying I'm not racist. I don't think you're racist either! We should hug!

We both know this isn't true.

Total idiocy. Religions are not the same. The Amish are not as violent as Christians. Jains are not as violent as Muslims.

People like you are inherently dishonest. You want to portray Christianity as being fundamentally equal to Islam. It's not. The old testament is probably the worst book ever written, however it's hard to argue the new testament isn't fundamentally a message of peace. Islam is NOT a message of peace and never has been, no matter how many people pretend to say it is.

The Book of Revelations is peaceful...hmmm...

I thought as a non believer when Jesus comes back I will be killed for my non belief. I thought i will also have my soul extinguished for all eternity.


Religions arent static anyway. If Judaism and Christianity reformed (both still do have their head choppers just not many) from their head chopping ways so can Islam.

ok lets stop beating around the bush...

what specific Christian religion is actively furthering an agenda of world domination acheived through head chopping, stoning, gay people murdering and boy rape espoused by their religious book of worship this present day?



seriously, i have no idea

Wil, are you saying that you think that your Muslim friends would agree that no "intelligent, logical person" can believe that Islam isn't a bad religion, relatively speaking?

There is a ton more to terrible religions ruining lives than just violence you ****ing ass hat. NO religion is a religion of peace. Religions are an attempt by a group of men to exert extreme control over people's lives, that is it. There is no other purpose and trying to pretend otherwise makes YOU the inherently dishonest one, not me.