Sure, but I don't think pointing out that Saudi Arabia under strict Levitical law might be worse is much of a rejoinder, for that reason.

I don't follow. The point is that Christianity is capable of being at least as violent, when given the right opportunity and set of circumstances. If that's true, then he's wrong.

Take a look at the article I linked on the "Saudi Arabia problem," and think about how many Muslims there are in the world (nearly 1.6 billion), and how comparatively few people ISIS, etc., are. Indonesia is a country of 200 million people that's 88% Muslim, yet it's a representative democracy, not a theocracy. If Islam were as inherently violent as Harris et al imply, they'd be sending wave after wave of jihadists against us. Morocco is a country of 32 million people, and Islam is the state religion, but it's still a constitutional monarchy. If Islam was as inextricably intertwined with fundamentalism as you claim, Morocco would be a walking human-rights atrocity, but it's in the top 1/3 of countries on the International Human Rights Watch Indicator.

I'm not saying these places are heaven on Earth, but Saudi Arabia is smaller than either of these countries, yet 15 of the 19 hijackers on 9/11 were from there.

Personally, I know a guy I'd call a liberal Muslim. In fact, the only reason I even know he's Muslim is because he practices Ramadan. Other than that, I wouldn't know-- I don't follow him every minute of the day, but I've certainly seen him eat and drink and party like someone who doesn't have any religious proscriptions on those things. It's just an anecdote, but I can't imagine he's the only one.

I had to do a lot of research for that post, which is good because I learned some things, which I was hoping to do in this discussion.

I don't understand the point of having this debate in the first place, on whether it's Islam itself that's the problem, or whether Islamic fundamentalism is the expected result of colonialism and Western intervention in the Middle East. I lean toward the latter, but let's say I agreed that Harris and Maher are right, that Islam is inherently and uniquely violent. If that's the case, what should we do?

Should I walk up to any Muslims that I meet and punch them in the face? Should I tell them that their religion is violent and they're supporting mass murder by following it? Or maybe I shouldn't do anything personally, but as a country we should ban any Muslims from traveling here, and have the police racially profile and spy on the ones that are already here? I'm being facetious, because everyone ITT as well as Harris and Maher themselves, would agree that we shouldn't do any of those things. But then what's the point of having this conversation about how terrible Islam is, if it's not to have any impact on how we treat actual Muslims?

Ok what do those countries have going for them? Indonesia, Morroco, what are their stances on gays? What kind of laws do they have there? Terrible ones? These factors could nullify the credibility of that argument.

And if you take away those so called "Liberal Muslim" countries, and say apply what Bobbo said to the Middle East countries, then wouldn't it be an accurate statement?

Just somethin' about reading that Koran under the hot Middle Eastern sun makes people want to go a rapin' and a murderin' clearly.

I love when ****holes like Indonesia are held up like some sort of beacon of light in the Muslim world. Looking at as recent polls as I can find 30% of their Muslim population supported the death penalty for leaving the religion. 42% support stoning of adulterers. 72% want sharia law. 86% of them support female genital mutilation.

And that's one of the moderate countries. Hard to get good figures on Morocco. Look at Pakistan or Egypt poll results if you want a real scare.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pa...nion-polls.htm

This thread is having a worse week than the stock market. First politarding now religitarding.

Yeah it does seem like an odd place to have this conversation.

nath:

Both the article you linked and your own posts constantly conflate the doctrine of Islam with the actual behavior of Muslims.

Islam is a uniquely dangerous religion because:

- The Qu'ran is held to have been literally dictated to Muhammad directly by God and have been protected against corruption or distortion. This makes quoting from it a slam-dunk argument in a way that quoting from the Bible is not in Christianity. The Qu'ran also contains several injunctions to obey Muhammad and follow his example, making the well-attested hadith in the Sunnah almost as unimpeachable.

- The Bible contains verses cautioning Christians against being concerned with worldly power ("Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's") and reserving to God the power to decide the fate of others ("Vengeance is mine, saith the LORD", "Judge not lest ye be judged", etc). By contrast, Islam explicitly teaches that it is the duty of Muslims to ensure that the will of Allah is carried out on Earth.

The sort of doctrines you presumably imagine are a result of Saudi misuse of Islam - subjugation of women and gays, brutal punishments for adultery, death for apostasy etc - are very much mainstream doctrines in Islam, heavily supported by the Sunnah. There are many Muslims who don't subscribe to these ideas. There are also many people calling themselves Catholic who don't subscribe to the idea that contraception and premarital sex are sins, but that doesn't mean that isn't Catholic doctrine, nor does it mean that those doctrines aren't doing serious damage in poor communities around the world.

To evaluate Islam, the question isn't how many of the world's Muslims are peaceful and tolerant, it's how many more of them would be if it weren't for the influence of Islam.

Yesterday I was intending to move this to a politard thread btw but then today there were like 100 posts on it so I just went with it

lolwat

to this post

I believe it's something like 90% of Egypt support sharia type law.

whoa dude

please tell me you read my reporting of that post (don't worry bobbers it was a JOKE)

Sam Harris killed it there.

lollll at harris calling out reza. reza is pretty much exactly right in his cnn bits wrt islam/religion and harris is hilariously wrong in that maher bit. what a dumbass.

yeah, sam harris is a dumb indivdual. </sarcasm>

idk much about either person, i'm simply commenting on their two perspectives on this specific topic. if you watch the harris/maher/affleck clip and the aslan/cnn clip and conclude that you are on the side of maher & harris then idk what to say i'm fine just agreeing to disagree. but throw in his comments afterwards regarding Aslan then yea he looks pretty dumb.

The obvious bias amongst the liberal atheist jews is obvious

Harris is correct that Aslan tends to argue disingenuously. For instance, here he is early in the CNN piece:

Then later:

So Aslan acknowledges that Pakistan is a country with a poor record on women's rights. But wait... one of those seven women elected as head of state in Muslim-majority countries was Benazir Bhutto, in Pakistan. Doesn't this sort of cast doubt on the notion that those elections herald gender equality in the Muslim world?

I have read Benazir's autobiography and she was elected to office as a proxy for her extremely popular father, who was once Prime Minister of Pakistan. The same turns out to be true of Megawati Sukarnoputri in Indonesia and Sheikh Hasina in Bangladesh. These elections have little to do with gender equality and a lot to do with the power of dynasties. Aslan presumably knows all this but doesn't care - he just wants the nice soundbite about 7 elections. Then it's his opponents who get accused of "facile arguments" and "oversimplification".

In the 2013 Pew survey on Muslim beliefs worldwide (which obtained somewhat more liberal results than similar surveys because it mandated that all data were collected in face to face interviews) 93% of Indonesian Muslims agreed with the proposition that wives must always obey their husbands. This is Aslan's shining example of Islamic gender equality. Ironically, only 88% of Pakistani Muslims agreed.

The main point however is that it's the doctrine of Islam that Harris takes issue with, not the 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide. What does this doctrine have to say about gender equality? Qu'ran 4:34:

Held to have been literally written by God, don't forget.

Apologies in advance to Aslan for my "oversimplifications".

and

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendl...d-this-is-why/

This reminds me why I stopped posting in RGT years ago.

That Barnwell is a real hack