'Muhammad'

[archbishop_josh]

BBC News Story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/7112929.stm)

A British teacher has been arrested in Sudan for letting school children decide to name a teddy bear "Muhammad".

She could face a six month jail sentence or 40 lashings.

[Mat^]

So the kids chose it, and voted for it?

Y'know, I think if she'd chosen to ignore the name she'd probably face fire from the PC brigade.

[Darkscull]

firstly: this will probably turn into a debate somewhere, and may have been better made there, but i may be wrong.

secondly: it often helps to start off a discussion rather than just saying something has happened, if you want to be a newsreader, then apply at the BBC. :p

[Fissh]

I don't quite understand how Islam can expect us to accept and welcome it into our cultures when they come out with utter over-the-top bullshit like this. This gets me immensely mad at the whole Shariah law crap, which is basically an archaic form of violent laws unchanged since the 12th century when people used horses as currency, which people still lay down today

[swampmonkey]

I would say fuck 'Muhammad' and sudan but i better not as it might been seen as an insult to islam.

Actually, bollocks, i'm in a bad mood today so.....

Fuck Muhammad!!

Islam is a fucking bullshit religion and i hope the millions of people who follow it all die in a freak rabbit related incident.

Closely followed by the followers of every other organised religion.

[Darkscull]

I don't quite understand how Islam can expect us to accept and welcome it into our cultures when they come out with utter over-the-top bullshit like this. This gets me immensely mad at the whole Shariah law crap, which is basically an archaic form of violent laws unchanged since the 12th century when people used horses as currency, which people still lay down today

the reason is that "islam" isn't a cohesive entity any more than "christianity" or "women" are.

"Islam" isn't expecting anything, some muslims and muslim groups are wanting to be accepted in britain and elsewhere, but they aren't usually the ones that chop bits off people.

[Zhyl]

On a slightly lighter note, I found out the other day that Ataul's first name is actually Mohammed. When questioned he said: "My full name is Mohammed Ataul Munim but I use Ataul because of all the muslim people in the world, half of them are called Mohammed. The other half are women."

We reflected on this and decided he was probably right.

[Mat^]

I would say fuck 'Muhammad' and sudan but i better not as it might been seen as an insult to islam.

Actually, bollocks, i'm in a bad mood today so.....

Fuck Muhammad!!

Islam is a fucking bullshit religion and i hope the millions of people who follow it all die in a freak rabbit related incident.

Closely followed by the followers of every other organised religion.And you don't sound remotely like a bigot at all, good job.

[Mister Qwerty]

It's completely ridiculous.

[swampmonkey]

Mern Mern Mern

[Darkscull]

Really? Oh i'm sorry? I didn't realise i was supposed to care what everyone on an internet forum actually thinks about my opinions.

when you tell someone your opinions, it's taken as given that you want them to know what you think, and it would be odd to want them to know what you think without wanting to know what they think about what you think.

:p

[swampmonkey]

I'm actually just ranting for the sake of it.

[Mat^]

when you tell someone your opinions, it's taken as given that you want them to know what you think, and it would be odd to want them to know what you think without wanting to know what they think about what you think.

:pHe's trying to have a go at me for something I said to him in another thread, but not doing it that well.

Moving on before this becomes petty internet drama:

Although it wasn't her intention, I do like that she was trying to instill the idea that voting is important, if these kids take nothing from the exercise, it's that the government is fuckin' crazy, try to vote for the least crazy one.

[Katie_D]

Woah Mat, you've suddenly gained the ability to use punctuation correctly.

Some people find it difficult to stay calm when something as insane as this happens. It really is taking freedom of speech and all that bollocks, and going mental with it. It makes me quite angry when I read that story.

More so, because I'm sure the police in Sudan could put their skills to more use than arresting a teacher for a totally innocent bear-naming session.

[ZekeyLizard]

I'm actually just ranting for the sake of it.

That's called trolling. And there is a cheesebin for that sort of thing.

[terrorbite]

Islam is a pile of shite that belongs in the dark ages.

Hey, at least I say what people are thinking ;)

[Mat^]

Woah Mat, you've suddenly gained the ability to use punctuation correctly.I think I over-did the commas.

That's a point actually, why are the police bothered about this exactly? Would it not be better suited to y'know, catch murderers or something?

Slow day at the office perhaps?

[T-Bear]

Thats a stupid name for a teddy anyway.

Srsly, thats really stupid. If you can call your son Muhammad, why not a teddy?

[Katie_D]

We called our mascot at work "Snowy" the other day. He was a white teddy bear with a hat and a scarf.

Thank God I'm off for two days. I'd hate to get raided for "racism".

[Darkscull]

I didn't know you lived in sudan, katie...

[swampmonkey]

He's trying to have a go at me for something I said to him in another thread, but not doing it that well.

Actually i'm letting off steam from an annoyingly shit day at work. I'm not aiming anything at you personally, i'm just ranting at the world in general, and yes zekey, I am trolling and it is fun. But no, I don't intend to burn any niggahs any time soon. My place of work with everyone still inside maybe.

[LeoZ]

IT'S POLITICAL CORRECTNESS GONE MA-

oh wait, it's that crazy Sudan place. They seem rather keen on their religion over there.

[bmfy.]

Islam is a pile of shite that belongs in the dark ages.

Hey, at least I say what people are thinking ;)

I'd just like to point out that it probably isn't the whole of Islam that decides the laws in Sudan.

[Fissh]

"Islam" isn't expecting anything, some muslims and muslim groups are wanting to be accepted in britain and elsewhere, but they aren't usually the ones that chop bits off people.

I realise I may have been overgeneralising in my last statement.

But the thing is that it's not just the extremeists that are going over the top these days. Governments and police are following a set of rules that have something fundamentally wrong with them. Remember some time ago where some area started arrested people for "dressing like westeners".
I am quite sure if it had been a Muslim woman teaching the class there would be no problems. Now I'm not playing the racism card here, but some of the middle-eastern countries seem to be trying to fight off anything western-related, not to preserve their own ways, but merely as a kind of angry (kind of) threat.

I'll admit I'm not very good at debating stuff through the keyboard. The thoughts in my head can flow easily out of my mouth but seem to get very muddled and knotted flowing through my hands.

[terrorbite]

I'd just like to point out that it probably isn't the whole of Islam that decides the laws in Sudan.
My comment was nothing to do with the article :)

I'll admit I'm not very good at debating stuff through the keyboard. The thoughts in my head can flow easily out of my mouth but seem to get very muddled and knotted flowing through my hands.
Yeah likewise.

[Darkscull]

I pretty much agree with you, fissh.

the thing is: extremism and government/police aren't mutually exclusive... in sudan, and a few other places, they have an extremist government.

so it is just the extremists who act like this, unfortunately, there's a lot of them.

[LeoZ]

This is now a debate thread.

Remember some time ago where some area started arrested people for "dressing like westeners".


Proof please, this sounds like bollocks :/

edit: actually i can't tell if you're talking about the UK or Muslim countries here. If it's Muslim countries you're talking about, then I admit that is certainly feasible.


I am quite sure if it had been a Muslim woman teaching the class there would be no problems.


No dude, you can't make an image out of Mohammed, even a teddy bear shaped one. A Muslim teacher just wouldn't go there.

[bmfy.]

My comment was nothing to do with the article :)

sorry

Yours was just the first post I saw when I scrolled up looking for a quote that said something along the lines of "the whole of Islam is bad".

[TheSheep]

im not saying that i agree with the islamic laws but surely she must have known that calling a teddy bear Muhhamed would be against laws of an islamic country. Personally i feel that if youre going to go and live in a different country and culture then as common courtesy you should learn atleast the basic values, laws and beliefs of that place of which blasphemy in islam is one

[stalefish]

No dude, you can't make an image out of Mohammed, even a teddy bear shaped one. A Muslim teacher just wouldn't go there.They're not exactly making an idol of him; they're just giving the bear a name.

I still fail to see the difference between calling a bear or a child Mohammed.

[Darkscull]

... as common courtesy you should learn atleast the basic values, laws and beliefs of that place of which blasphemy in islam is one

or, indeed, as self preservation

[bmfy.]

They're not exactly making an idol of him; they're just giving the bear a name.

I still fail to see the difference between calling a bear or a child Mohammed.

A bear is just an inanimate thing, a toy (whereas a kid is not).

[Darkscull]

because muslims essentially worship muhammed (although it isn't quite phrased like that, think the virgin mary in catholicism), naming a person after them is a sign of respect, and a hope that it will help the child live up to their faith (the parents faith that is).

however naming an object muhammed, or making an image of muhammed is seen as saying 'this is muhammed', or at least 'this represents muhammed'.
this is considered blasphemy because they say there can only be one muhammed (that is the prophet, people named muhammed don't count), and his true glory (etc.) can only be understood through the qu'ran in arabic, if at all.

at least that's what i gather from various sources. that will vary within the various interpretations.

[LeoZ]

They're not exactly making an idol of him; they're just giving the bear a name.


Image.

[Swirl]

The school has been closed until January for fear of reprisals.

Score!

[maldirth]

I would say fuck 'Muhammad' and sudan but i better not as it might been seen as an insult to islam.

Actually, bollocks, i'm in a bad mood today so.....

Fuck Muhammad!!

Islam is a fucking bullshit religion and i hope the millions of people who follow it all die in a freak rabbit related incident.

Closely followed by the followers of every other organised religion.

Do you have the courage to say this in finsbury park at the top of your voice
by yourself?:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[Splush]

Build-a-Bear Workshop totally sucks in Sudan.

[Boyinabox]

Yet again, proof that my plan to build a high wall around the Middle East and most of Africa needs to gain funding sooner.

[LeoZ]

:-/

[argh]

I thought we all had learned about how protective Islamics are about Muhammed after the cartoon debacle. To be honest though, 6 months or 40 lashings isn't really that bad a punishment if you consider their punishment system. It seems compareatively like a slap on the wrist.

To people who say "Fuck Islam" don't say that, say fuck Islamic extremeists. Christian extremests are less violent but just as bad (protesting funerals of soilders), and only less violent recently in the grand scheme of things. It's because of the western world that we are in, because we are "modern" but if we were all still abiding by our laws from their time (when the laws were made), we'd be no better. We only find it so radical because of how privledged each and every one of us is. I bet half of you didn't even get spanked as a child, because you're privledged, because we're "modern".

You say fuck them, I say fuck you. Fuck you for judging a a religion by the extremeists, and a people by the few. She was in their country, she should have learned their laws. We expect that of people who come to our country, we should expect to follow other country laws while there, wether we agree with the laws or not, we're choosing to be there, it's just respectful.

[Splush]

To people who say "Fuck Islam" don't say that, say fuck Islamic extremeists. Christian extremests are less violent but just as bad (protesting funerals of soilders), and only less violent recently in the grand scheme of things. It's because of the western world that we are in, because we are "modern" but if we were all still abiding by our laws from their time (when the laws were made), we'd be no better. We only find it so radical because of how privledged each and every one of us is. I bet half of you didn't even get spanked as a child, because you're privledged, because we're "modern".
I don't think that can be stated strongly enough. Islam can be seen as just a younger version of christianity, going through the same teething problems that christianity did before a series of reforms and ideological opposition (i.e. the enlightenment) de-clawed it. It seems mad to me for people to approach those two religions differently, and slightly hypocritical for somebody who embraces christianity to condemn islam.

I see islam and christianity as two facets of the same beast. Faith can make good people do bad things and we're just lucky in the west that more civilised ways of living are keeping extremism at bay.

[Bloodcloud]

Why arresting a teacher for such a stupid reason? Why making such a deal of this? Ho my god this is so horrible poor teacher damn radicalism freedom of speech bla bla bla

And during this time, while everyone talks and get angry about a teddy bear named Muhammed, Sudan government is slaughtering thousands of people in Darfur...

Why arresting a teacher about a teddy bear name?

It's called diversion. Guess what? You all proved it worked...

When you hear big and stupid scandal such as these, look behind, and you will get REALLY pissed off.

[Ferg]

Wait so Muslims can call their children Muhammad and its not taken as an imitation of the prophet, but you call a bear Muhammad and thats obviously an atempt at impersonation?

Bears apparrently look more like religious prophets than actual human people do it seems....

[matt bird]

it's sad and strange how common sense manages to elude people to such a massive degree

seriously, what the hell. it's scary how irrational this bullshit becomes sometimes. i mean, i just can't understand how people can be serious about things like this. so bizarre

[Roachy]

I heard this on the news today. I laughed my arse off because I used to have a little puppet boy that I named Muhammad. I had Chuck who was ginger and Muhammad who was ethnic. That was when I was younger... sigh.

I say "little" puppet boy. The both of them were actually pretty big. I sat them on my knee, one hand up the back controlling the mouth and another moving a thin metal rod which moved one hand.

I got Chuck confiscated in school once for making him say "shit".

[Splush]

Chuck got what was coming to him :mad:

[Sloth]

or a fine.

you seem to have forgotten to post this from the article.. ooops...

but really... human rights problem in Sudan? golly!

[katt]

Islam is a pile of shite that belongs in the dark ages.

Hey, at least I say what people are thinking ;)

ah i shall forever disagree with you about conspiracy theories but i think you are on the money about this:) (and a few other things)

it is not the 'extremism' of a few if it is the law of an entire country.

although to be fair i'd not really want to call a teddy bear mohammhed (or jesus)

[Sloth]

I would name my dog Muhammad and my cat Jesus Christ...

And just looking at Wikipedia.. they have two images that shown Muhammad's face.
One in the 14th and another in the 15th century... So, this kinda make me feel like this "law" is about as good as some of the ideas that the Ku Klux Klan had in America.

I'm sorry, but that is about how I feel about some Islamic countries. No drinking or dancing in Iran. Honor killing in Pakistan. Naming a teddy bear Mohammad is a "crime". When I hear these thing it really make me feel that if American went in another direction and the Ku Klux Klan became a ruling party... it would be like Iran, Sudan, etc....

I don't think that you can say "duh, she in their country, she should follow their rules... no matter how backwards it is". The very fact that Sudan wouldn't be much of a country if it wasn't for people like her and the countries who funnel money into the nation's government just to keep in afloat should be enough reason for them to kiss her feet or atleast grant here diplomatic immunity.

[katt]

I would name my dog Muhammad and my cat Jesus Christ...


awww that would spoil the frivolity of having a pet..giving them serious names. well at least in my opinion.

I think islam can be massively bigoted and hateful (just ask the jews who leave france due to persecution by swelling muslim populations) . it is why i took a disliking to it.......when it gets enough momentum built up behind it it is just awful. and it is not just non-muslims i feel bad for; i also feel bad for people born into islam who have no choice

there is an american catchphrase that goes 'all i need to know about islam i learned on 911' but the truth of the matter is i found the tendency towards over-zealous religious frevor worrying when studying it in grade 6 in social studies.

[faragher]

I think islam can be massively bigoted and hateful (just ask the jews who leave france due to persecution by swelling muslim populations) . it is why i took a disliking to it.......when it gets enough momentum built up behind it it is just awful. and it is not just non-muslims i feel bad for; i also feel bad for people born into islam who have no choice
I think that Christianity can be massively bigoted and hateful - just look at Fred Phelps "GOD HATES FAGS", or Anne Coulter ("Not all Muslims may be terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslims"), or - well just read this (http://http://adultthought.ucsd.edu/Culture_War/The_American_Taliban.html) - but I don't judge all Christians by these people.

I think that Judaism can be massively bigoted and hateful - just look at the way Israel has behaved towards Palestine - it may have its reasons, but deliberately targeting children (http://http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1007051,00.html) is never acceptable - but I don't judge all Jews by these people.

I think that most some people in most religions can be massively bigoted and hateful - but I never judge all members of a religion by the actions of some of it.

Islam, like all religions has some extremists and a large number of perfectly ordinary, everyday people who just try to live a good life and maintain their relationship with god. However, to address the issue of it not being just a few extremists, but whole countries, try this for size - could we not argue that Islam is not a necessarily the reason that these countries have such extreme laws?

Take Pakistan as an example. Pakistan is a relatively new country, and is really just beginning to experience democracy. Both the instruments of governent (civil service, police etc) and the general population are just coming round to the idea that democracy is a 'good thing'. Could it be that the whole Islam / Sharia law thing is just a bit of a red herring? If you think back to our early attempts at democracy, we had a few problems - a dictator (the monarch) clinging to power, religious persecution, wars and protests. Perhaps these are the natural symptoms of a transitional society.

And perhaps if we hadn't pretty much owned (what is now) Pakistan from the mid-17th to the mid-20th century, supressing the natural move towards democracy, and hadn't at the end of that deliberately created a segregated mono-faith state, we might not be seeing this now.

TO PARAPHRASE:

Anyone who writes ISLAM SUCKS, or FUCK MOHAMMED, or similar perhaps needs to think a little bit more about the situation before they allow their inbuilt bigot to speak.

[terrorbite]

TO PARAPHRASE:

Anyone who writes ISLAM SUCKS, or FUCK MOHAMMED, or similar perhaps needs to think a little bit more about the situation before they allow their inbuilt bigot to speak.
Haha, no. I respect peoples rights to believe in whatever they want. I have nothing against muslims, or christians or anyone else. I just don't agree with the religious instutitions themselves. And yeah, I dislike islam more than other religions - that doesn't make me "racist" or a "bigot". Its simply because the effects of it are thrust in our faces every time we turn on the news these days, and I'm sick of hearing about it.

Peace out, baby.

[CheHamstera]

God doesn't exist. All this respecting imaginary and/or historical dudes is entirely irrelevant to human kind.

<shnuggles world> Let's never argue again!

[Darkscull]

it is not the 'extremism' of a few if it is the law of an entire country.

fascism is rightwing ideas taken to the extreme, just like extremist muslims (or others) take a few ideas and push them to the extreme to justify horrible things.

would you say that fascism is any less extremist because some fascist parties managed to get into power?

hamas was recently democratically elected (unless there was fixing of the election, but afaik no ones looked into that), and effectively govern part of the palestinian authority, would you say that they aren't extremist?

extremism doesn't necessarily exist as a minority, you could have a spectrum of belief (whether political or religious or whatever) that had a massive amount of supporters at an extreme end, and hardly any at the other extreme, or the middle, but it doesn't make the extremists any less extreme.

[InstaCpu]

I thought we all had learned about how protective Islamics are about Muhammed after the cartoon debacle. To be honest though, 6 months or 40 lashings isn't really that bad a punishment if you consider their punishment system. It seems compareatively like a slap on the wrist.

To people who say "Fuck Islam" don't say that, say fuck Islamic extremeists. Christian extremests are less violent but just as bad (protesting funerals of soilders), and only less violent recently in the grand scheme of things. It's because of the western world that we are in, because we are "modern" but if we were all still abiding by our laws from their time (when the laws were made), we'd be no better. We only find it so radical because of how privledged each and every one of us is. I bet half of you didn't even get spanked as a child, because you're privledged, because we're "modern".

You say fuck them, I say fuck you. Fuck you for judging a a religion by the extremeists, and a people by the few. She was in their country, she should have learned their laws. We expect that of people who come to our country, we should expect to follow other country laws while there, wether we agree with the laws or not, we're choosing to be there, it's just respectful.

Well I agree with part of your post, but to blame the teacher as you're doing is just wrong IMO. She may well have known the laws but not in detail. I mean when so many Moslem men are named Muhammad, and she let the kids choose the name, and as we are used to thinking of teddy bears/dolls as companions for children she may have not made the connection. She is no more guilty at least, than the air crew or reporters who were held in Chad along with the members of this French charity accused of kidnapping children. Well the reporters may have known what was going down but went along to investigate. The air crew just thought they were on a mercy flight as they may have done others like it. You will notice the crew and reporters were let go, and I think the charity was doing something fishy btw.


Otherwise well, those societies are much more religious than ours. While most people are NOT extremist, normal behaviour in those countries will look odd to us. As ours is to them.

[razielskorp]

I thought we all had learned about how protective Islamics are about Muhammed after the cartoon debacle. To be honest though, 6 months or 40 lashings isn't really that bad a punishment if you consider their punishment system. It seems compareatively like a slap on the wrist.

.

My mate has a new(ish) wife from indonesia and as a result converted to islam to get married, and he has a good insight into this cartoon thing. The actual competition happened about 6 MONTHS before the whole thing blew up.
The reason it all kicked off? A group of mullahs got a portfolio together of various drawings (including ones that were never entered in the competition) and went on a tour of the middle east, stirring up shit as they went. No-one in the middle east had heard about it or gave a fuck about it until these shit stirring arseholes decided to mern about it. Its all a load of nonsense and frankly i say fuck them if they cant take a joke.

[argh]

I still think she should have known. If she went to teach in an Amish community, she woldn't have brought in a sattelite dish to show the children educative tv shows. The punichment she'll get for breaking the law will be compared to some punishment small, we're only so up in arms because to us, it's extreme, but in their ways it's not.

France's Foreign Ministry and others have cast doubt on the claim that the children were orphans from Darfur, where fighting since 2003 has forced thousands to flee to Chad. Aid workers who interviewed the children said a majority of them reported living with at least one adult they considered a parent and that many appeared to be Chadian.
(from the Associate Press)

They were guilty of not doing their homework. If you're going to resuce orphans, make damn sure their orphans.

[Feawen]

If they just thought the best name was Hassan it all would've been fine. There are millions of men called Muhammed, so just because this character is inanimate it's a crime.. To kids teddies are like people as well - that's how I saw it when I was little.

And look, christianity is able to do some retarded things, so is Islam, so are many religions. It's hard to understand now that our culture is so much more relaxed than a few hundred years ago. It's far too extreme for anyone sometimes, like this teddy bear thing. As someone said above, is there nothing better they could be doing?

[Twatybollocks]

A few thousand years ago you could be stoned to death for saying the word Jehova. Now you get 40 lashes for naming a teddy Muhammed. I think that's showing good progress.

[Darkscull]

A few thousand years ago you could be stoned to death for saying the word Jehova.

*obvious monty python quote*


I can't be bothered to remember/look it up :p

[Mister Qwerty]

Haha, no. I respect peoples rights to believe in whatever they want. I have nothing against muslims, or christians or anyone else. I just don't agree with the religious instutitions themselves. And yeah, I dislike islam more than other religions - that doesn't make me "racist" or a "bigot". Its simply because the effects of it are thrust in our faces every time we turn on the news these days, and I'm sick of hearing about it.

Describes me to a 't'.

[Feawen]

All I said was that this dinner was good enough for Jehova!!

*pummel*

[katt]

Islam, like all religions has some extremists and a large number of perfectly ordinary, everyday people who just try to live a good life and maintain their relationship with god.



It is true that many religions, including christianity and judaism have misbehaved in the past but the past is the past. The present is still here and affects all of us. It just so happens that the religion causing the most violent havoc in our modern world is islam. And I would agree with the statement that any powerful organized religion can easily turn into something unpleasant.

If some people come to a country and destroy two skyscrapers and several jet planes and cite a holy war for mohammhed you better be sure i will find the cause of 'islam' to be, overall, more pestish than a blessing. :P that is just common sense from my viewpoint. And when i hear other reports about some of them threatening the life of a woman over naming a teddy bear mohammhed while their govt threatens her with a beating it just becomes ridiculous. lol. I am sorry that is just over the top

I don't think all muslims are wicked I am sure there are plenty of nice ones who look to it as a force of good. But, overall I think islam is more of a barrier to peace and happiness in the world than anything else

fascism is rightwing ideas taken to the extreme, just like extremist muslims (or others) take a few ideas and push them to the extreme to justify horrible things

i was always under the general impression that activities such as threatening the lives of cartoonists is supported in various countries by mobs of people. I have a feeling there are alot more 'extremists' than people want to admit when it comes to islam. but yeah..the government does tend to drown out the voices of the people who disagree

[Darkscull]

i was always under the general impression that activities such as threatening the lives of cartoonists is supported in various countries by mobs of people. I have a feeling there are alot more 'extremists' than people want to admit when it comes to islam. but yeah..the government does tend to drown out the voices of the people who disagree

I was making no comment on the numbers of extremists, just disagreeing with the idea that numbers or power make them any less extreme.

[Nocashvalue]

But, overall I think islam is more of a barrier to peace and happiness in the world than anything else

It isn't the religion itsself, merely the way some very select members choose to construe it.
In a similar train of thought, I would think Christianity a barrier to peace and racial/general equality more than anything else because of the KKK.

[Midget]

protip for the ignorant: mohammed and muhammad are different names

muslims do not called their children muhammad

[Darkscull]

protip for the ignorant: mohammed and muhammed are different names

muslims do not called their children muhammed

I thought the only difference was spelling, as there is no official spelling when translating from the arabic alphabet.
just like there are no official spellings of russian things.

the koran and qu'ran are the same book.

[Midget]

wikipedia seems to agree with you but i was always told that they were different names by my egyptian friend :s

[katt]

It isn't the religion itsself, merely the way some very select members choose to construe it.
In a similar train of thought, I would think Christianity a barrier to peace and racial/general equality more than anything else because of the KKK.

I never really associate the KKK with christianity because what they do is the opposite of what jesus taught. If they are christian it is in name only :)

I do not know a ton of information about what is in the koran but i am aware that mohammed was more willing to support the use of violence than jesus to protect himself and his message. and the 'jihad' or holy war does get its roots from somewhere in the koran.

of course i would have to read the whole book to get all the details. But I don't see myself doing that just to have debate fodder

[Darkscull]

I never really associate the KKK with christianity because what they do is the opposite of what jesus taught. If they are christian it is in name only :)

now you get to the crux of the matter, although indirectly:

it's all about interpretation.

it is clear to moderate christians that the kkk are pretty much the opposite of what christianity teaches, however they think that they're justified (and even inspired) by christianity, and people who know less about mainstream interpretations of christian teachings might think of them as a good example of what christianity teaches, even if only a minority follow those practices.

you are one of those who know little about mainstream interpretations of islam, and think of the extremists/jihadists as a good example of muslim teachings, even if not all muslims go out chopping bits off people.

there are many quotes you can take from the bible and use to justify all sorts of horrible things, ditto the qu'ran, and most authoritative texts (not just religious ones, think of what some people did in the name of communism that marx and engels would have vomited at). unless you find out how other people interpret those quotes, you are being willfully ignorant, and shouldn't feel that you're in a position to make judgements on a group in it's entirety.

[TheSheep]

I do not know a ton of information about what is in the koran but i am aware that mohammed was more willing to support the use of violence than jesus to protect himself and his message. and the 'jihad' or holy war does get its roots from somewhere in the koran.



i hope i dont need to say 'Crusades'
also the bible can be used to give almost any lesson including use of violence it just depends which bit you quote

[katt]

my whole point with the jesus vs. mohammed thing is that there is no getting around the fact that jesus was completely non violent (he laid down his own life) whereas mohammed was enthusiastic about killing his enemies off to spread his message when he needed to.

Those are just the facts.

I was only speaking for the teachings of jesus, denoted in red, from the bible....not random factoids from the old testament

[Bisyss]

... and the 'jihad' or holy war does get its roots from somewhere in the koran.You do know that Jihad doesn't just mean war, right? The strict translation is "to strive" or "to struggle". A Jihad could be anything from study, to getting over addictions.

[Darkscull]

well 'christianity' =/= the teachings of jesus.

although many christians just follow the teachings of jesus (and the rest of the new testament), many (possibly most) denominations also use the old testament, even if they just cherry pick bits they want.

so even if you don't consider the kkk christian, many people do.
presumably you would rather people accept that there are variations of interpretation within christianity, and try not to judge it as one entity based on one of those interpretations rather than you being lumped in with the kkk on race issues except for a vague qualification that: "obviously not all christians behave like that, but..."

so, given that jesus taught that you should treat others as you would have them treat you, you should try your hardest to make sure people know you accept that there are many variations within islam (and all religions), and not refer to all of a religion as one entity, even if it is simpler.
otherwise people will just think you're a prejudiced bigot.

[argh]

If some people come to a country and destroy two skyscrapers and several jet planes and cite a holy war for mohammhed you better be sure i will find the cause of 'islam' to be, overall, more pestish than a blessing. :P that is just common sense from my viewpoint. And when i hear other reports about some of them threatening the life of a woman over naming a teddy bear mohammhed while their govt threatens her with a beating it just becomes ridiculous. lol. I am sorry that is just over the top
Do you have any idea of what was done to numerous countries by America? America is a democrcy run by totalitarians.

I'm pretty sure the American military have killed at least one person by a. war b. "peacekeeping" or c. friendly fire.

They have been bombing Iraq and areas long before 2001. Operation Desert Fox. When was Russia forced out of Iraq again? America has fucked with the Middle East ever since they decided it's cheaper to bomb the hell out of a place instead of find alternative fuel. So you know what? In my opinion that is one moot point for 9/11. It took them years and years before they retaliated for all the meddling in their affair (and by medaling, I mean bombing and funding any dictator that would be more pro american) so I actually think thats pretty damn patient.

[InstaCpu]

I still think she should have known. If she went to teach in an Amish community, she woldn't have brought in a sattelite dish to show the children educative tv shows. The punichment she'll get for breaking the law will be compared to some punishment small, we're only so up in arms because to us, it's extreme, but in their ways it's not.


(from the Associate Press)

They were guilty of not doing their homework. If you're going to resuce orphans, make damn sure their orphans.

you're mixing up two different things here. :rolleyes: Who would have thought naming a teddy bear Muhammad is against Islam? I don't know where that is written in any rule book or the Koran given that real people are called Muhammad without a problem and most people would not make a connection between a teddy bear and the cartoons of a couple of years ago. Not every Muslim is even offended.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/7114439.stm

The Sudan Embassy in London said the situation was a "storm in a teacup", based on a cultural misunderstanding....

But a seven-year-old pupil in Ms Gibbons' class at the Christian, fee-paying school has jumped to his teacher's defence.

BBC News Sudan correspondent Amber Henshaw said the boy had chosen the name because it was the same as his own, and he had no idea that it would cause offence.
...

Dr Khalid al Mubarak, a spokesman for the Sudan embassy in London, said he was confident that Ms Gibbons would be cleared quickly.

He told BBC News: "We have Christian schools in the Sudan, we have Christian teachers who teach Muslim children, which shows a great deal of tolerance.

...

Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary general of the Muslim Council of Britain, also said it appeared to have been a "quite horrible misunderstanding" and Ms Gibbons should never have been arrested.

There was no apparent intention to offend Islamic sensibilities or defame the honour and name of the Prophet Muhammad, he said.




So if the seven year old boy who actually named the Teddy Bear didn't know, and the person from the Muslim Council of Britain thinks there was no harmful intent how could the teacher be expected to know? It seems this was overreaction both on the part of whichever authorities arrested her and the Western media.

The main point about the French charity was that those who should have known were held but the reporters and the flight crew were not, see the difference?

[argh]

Someone had previous mentions the French flight and I was responding to that, just forgot to put a note about the change of subject in.

I was pretty sure before that you weren't allowed to make an image of or out of Muhammed. Honestly the kids should've known that too.

[BlueIncaPilot]

Now I strongly believe in when in Rome, do as the Romans do - ie don't do anything in Sudan that wouldn't go down well over there - but - the punishments are ridiculously harsh I mean good God move with the times.

[Sorcha]

The single one man in the world today who has caused more death, starvation and crimes against humanity:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/George-W-Bush.jpeg/453px-George-W-Bush.jpeg

Guess what katt, he's Christian.

Christians make me sick. It sickens me that you can sit there and say X religion is better than X religion because of your jaded opinion. None is worse than the other, all have their fair share of contradictions and ridiculous doctrines so to say that Islam is the worst religion is not only hypocritical it's very unintelligent.

Do you even understand what a Jihad is? It is a "struggle" against an oppressive force. To take God on your side to help you through hard times. Extremists interpret this as God asking them to kill people who oppose them. Just like some Muslims believe that women are equal to men, but others do not, simply because there are conflicting counts of what Muhammad had taught through the Quran.

The Bible teaches "eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth" yet Jesus said to love thy neighbour, and turn the other cheek. How does that make sense?

Hundreds of THOUSANDS of people have died as a result of the Iraq war. How many died in 9/11? ~3000. Justice is not about taking your pound of flesh.

As far as this poor teacher is concerned, I hope she is not severely punished for this mishap, and hopefully the leaders of Sudan will forgive her uninformed mistake. It's not like she was burning an effigy or anything :S

[katt]

the argument 'other things are bad too' to deflect attention from the fact islam is nutz is weak.

It is evading the actual point which is that islam is a violent, retrograde force. some of you think you can justify the thought 'islam is wonderful and not a big deal' by trying to say oh other things are bad too. it holds no water with me cause it has nothing to do with the topic at hand (which is islam by its lonesome)

or blaming bush." oooh bush is so evil for certain 'crimes against humanity' which i actually cannot list so therefore christianity is just as negative of a force as islam "

its a rubbish argument if you are trying to prove the point 'islam is not a crappy retrograde force that keeps people in misery'

[Darkscull]

the argument 'other things are bad too' to deflect attention from the fact islam is nutz is weak.

It is evading the actual point which is that islam is a violent, retrograde force. some of you think you can justify the thought 'islam is wonderful and not a big deal' by trying to say oh other things are bad too. it holds no water with me cause it has nothing to do with the topic at hand (which is islam by its lonesome)


firstly: no one on here has said "islam is wonderful and not a big deal", or even anything that you could remotely interpret as being that. if you think someone's said that, quote it.

also, the point isn't that "islam is a violent, retrograde force", but rather that you think it is (and a few other people), and some people are trying to point out that 'islam' isn't that, since it isn't a single entity that has set attributes. it is a collection of various ideas and interpretations, just as anything is.

so the point is that you can't generalise about anything, especially not something as nebulous as the beliefs/intentions of a religion.
it would be fine if you said that it's crazy what these violent, retrograde muslims in sudan and other places believe/do/force others to do. the problem is that you are saying it is 'islam' that does these things.

I remember when you used to post in debates more, katt, you never did get a hang of analogies and the old 'if it was the other way around' thing. you get too hung up about specifics, and miss the point.

[doctor_fruitbat]

Katt, did you even listen to his point? He was pointing out that Islam is not an inherently violent religion, no more so than Christianity or any other major religion. It is simply interpreted by different sides in different ways, not all good. A lot of Muslims are highly opposed to violence; how can you possibly argue that it is, as you say, 'nutz'?

Plus, you took his Bush argument completely out of context, accused him of not listing Bush's crimes just to be pedantic, wholly ignored his points on the contradictory nature of the bible and the fact that it has also been used as a justification for violence countless times, and pretty much twisted what he said into a set of extremes that rendered your argument invalid as a counter to his.

Why am I even writing this? You've been pulled up on this sort of stuff before, and you never learn. Why bother debating this if you're going to ignore or twist what people write just to suit your own bigotry?

[Roachy]

Christians make me sick.

Wow, gee thanks. I respect the faith of Islam thank you and I'm a Christian.

All Christians are not bigots in the same way that all Muslims are not terrorists.

[Darkscull]

All Christians are not katt in the same way that all Muslims are not terrorists.

fixd.


sorry, i probably shouldn't have done that, since making katt angry will probably make her ignore what we're actually saying even more, but i suppose she's not listening as it is.

[katt]

so the point is that you can't generalise about anything, especially not something as nebulous as the beliefs/intentions of a religion.
it would be fine if you said that it's crazy what these violent, retrograde muslims in sudan and other places believe/do/force others to do. the problem is that you are saying it is 'islam' that does these things.

I think it is possible to generalize about something that has a high track record for causing problems in its actual practice

And I am not trying to dig through the actual religious doctrine and debate whether the koran itself is totally good or bad and whether this interpretation is good or bad. What I am saying is 'islam' (and i say islam to simplify) happens to be a uniting point for a lot unpleasantness these days. Regardless of its multifaceted intentions/layout on paper and the good character/intentions of some of its followers.

I really think that is not an outlandish claim to make. i only omit that magic buzz word "extremist" from before the word islam. because i think alot of islam is extreme enough to just say 'islam' without the clarificiation :)

that is my opinion and i know not everyone shares it.

[Roachy]

It is possible to generalise everything. That doesn't make it right.

Also Katt, you can't claim that Islam is a uniting point for horrible actions when Christianity has been used in the same way.
Have you never heard of the fights between Catholics and Protestants?

[piemastermike]

I think it is possible to generalize about something that has a high track record for causing problems in its actual practice

And I am not trying to dig through the actual religious doctrine and debate whether the koran itself is totally good or bad and whether this interpretation is good or bad. What I am saying is 'islam' (and i say islam to simplify) happens to be a uniting point for a lot unpleasantness these days. Regardless of its multifaceted intentions/layout on paper and the good character/intentions of some of its followers.

I really think that is not an outlandish claim to make. i only omit that magic buzz word "extremist" from before the word islam. because i think alot of islam is extreme enough to just say 'islam' without the clarificiation :)

that is my opinion and i know not everyone shares it.

Ok, Sirch made a thread similar to this in the cheese bin (http://forums.weebls-stuff.com/showthread.php?t=69367) and I replied with the following. It applies to you too, except I think you're going out of your way to be ignorant about a perfectly legitimate faith rather than naive as sirch seems to be.

----

sirch that first post was really really immature, you've made a sweeping generalisation about a normally peaceful and in no way fundamentalist religion and labelled everyone as the same. That is the same as foreigners saying all English football fans are hooligans when actually it's just a bunch of twats causing trouble. Same goes for this religion. It's a load of cockends spoiling it for the rest of them and us.

It's also people like you that reinforce this racist stereotype and for that, my respect for you has dropped sharply. Here is a diagram.

http://totallylegaldownloads.com/files/1/graph2.jpg
(graph is a new one for you, katt)

Just to make it clear, I think this was an amusing thread but sadly you totally ruined it by going off on an un-called-for rant about a religion you know nothing about.

[Nuclear Spoon]

I think it is possible to generalize about something that has a high track record for causing problems in its actual practice

And I am not trying to dig through the actual religious doctrine and debate whether the koran itself is totally good or bad and whether this interpretation is good or bad. What I am saying is 'islam' (and i say islam to simplify) happens to be a uniting point for a lot unpleasantness these days. Regardless of its multifaceted intentions/layout on paper and the good character/intentions of some of its followers.

I really think that is not an outlandish claim to make. i only omit that magic buzz word "extremist" from before the word islam. because i think alot of islam is extreme enough to just say 'islam' without the clarificiation :)

that is my opinion and i know not everyone shares it.

What needs to be simplified? Is it so hard to note that Islam IS in fact a religion of peace, and Muslim terrorists are simply a minority, and a very small minority, who follow a more literal and hence extremist branch of Islam?

[katt]

once again, the red herring 'but other things are bad too'. yeah of course a lot of things are bad and have been bad. I am fully capable of understanding that any organized religion/thought group can go awry.

and islam happens to be violent these days in many of the places where it is practiced. it is just an observation. it is not as big a deal as some of you are making it out to be.

[Roachy]

and islam happens to be violent these days

Please provide proof that there are more Muslims that use their faith to justify violence than there are followers of other religions that do the same.

[piemastermike]

once again, the red herring 'but other things are bad too'. yeah of course a lot of things are bad and have been bad. I am fully capable of understanding that any organized religion/thought group can go awry.

and islam happens to be violent these days in many of the places where it is practiced. it is just an observation. it is not as big a deal as some of you are making it out to be.

Islam as a whole has not gone "bad". There are terrorist cells using islam as a justification for their crimes. If you had read my post you would see what I mean and would have also seen my football hooligans analogy.

[katt]

to roach: well I am not going to do that. First of all it is the red herring AGAIN. "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly"

Use your eyes and ears when you scan the news headlines/watch the news. Although the attacks in Darfur come to mind as particularly bad off the top of my head.

I don't know why atheists often want to defend islam so much more tenaciously than any other religion (defend islam in one post and attack christianity in the same one). its very peculiar and interesting. Both are 'narrow minded' but i would say islam sorta has the upper edge on that right now in this present time :)

[piemastermike]

katt, please address my concerns. Thankyou.

[Nuclear Spoon]

katt, please address my concerns. Thankyou.

And mine.

[katt]

Piemastermike: no thanks. I took one look at that silly graph thing and took a pass.

[Darkscull]

I think it is possible to generalize about something that has a high track record for causing problems in its actual practice

as roach said, possible doesn't mean excusable.

And I am not trying to dig through the actual religious doctrine and debate whether the koran itself is totally good or bad and whether this interpretation is good or bad. What I am saying is 'islam' (and i say islam to simplify) happens to be a uniting point for a lot unpleasantness these days. Regardless of its multifaceted intentions/layout on paper and the good character/intentions of some of its followers.

in this case, simplifying changes the meaning. if you say 'islam' rather than 'fundamentalist muslims' or 'extremist muslims', or even 'these particular muslims' (referring to the specific subject, eg. the sudanese authorities in the bear case), then it changes the meaning from being: those muslims who act this way, to: all muslims.

if you don't mind people thinking you mean all muslims (or indeed, if you actually do mean all muslims), then by all means simplify, but people will call you a bigot for it, quite rightly imo.

I really think that is not an outlandish claim to make. i only omit that magic buzz word "extremist" from before the word islam. because i think alot of islam is extreme enough to just say 'islam' without the clarificiation

well i think it's outlandish, and ignorant and disrespectful.
what do you think of this claim: "you're a hypocritical fanatic who preaches peace but condones the killing/mistreatment/eternal damnation of those who make choices you consider wrong (e.g to have sex with someone of the same sex, or have sex before marriage, or use condoms*), even when those decisions don't affect you, and you want to impose your beliefs on everyone else."

what if i said that the above applied to 'christianity'?


*it's always sex, isn't it? I wonder why? freud would probably have something to say on the matter, and probably be talking out of his arse :)

PS. that claim isn't actually aimed at anyone, i wonder if katt will actually notice me saying this, or be frothing already

[piemastermike]

Piemastermike: no thanks. I took one look at that silly graph thing and took a pass.

I think you're just avoiding the fact that you are an ignorant racist pig-dog.

[Nuclear Spoon]

Piemastermike: no thanks. I took one look at that silly graph thing and took a pass.

I didn't post a graph. Are you going to address my points?

[katt]

: "you're a hypocritical fanatic who preaches peace but condones the killing/mistreatment/eternal damnation of those who make choices you consider wrong (e.g to have sex with someone of the same sex, or have sex before marriage, or use condoms*), even when those decisions don't affect you, and you want to impose your beliefs on everyone else."

:)

lmao. Since when did i condone killing/mistreating anyone? please stop lying.

I never want to impose my beliefs on everyone. I merely state them and it is just tooooo much to handle for some of you.

[Darkscull]

lmao. Since when did i condone killing/mistreating anyone? please stop lying.

I never want to impose my beliefs on everyone. I merely state them and it is just tooooo much to handle for some of you.

read the PS in my post.

I never said it was you. the point is is that claim is wrong. If it was addressed at you, i had no evidence for it. if i said that it applied to all christians, i'd be wrong.

however you are making similar claims (albeit different in specifics), and saying that they're justified because you think that most muslims act that way.

[Nuclear Spoon]

I don't think you saw my point the first time round, so I'll try posting it again.

I think it is possible to generalize about something that has a high track record for causing problems in its actual practice

And I am not trying to dig through the actual religious doctrine and debate whether the koran itself is totally good or bad and whether this interpretation is good or bad. What I am saying is 'islam' (and i say islam to simplify) happens to be a uniting point for a lot unpleasantness these days. Regardless of its multifaceted intentions/layout on paper and the good character/intentions of some of its followers.

I really think that is not an outlandish claim to make. i only omit that magic buzz word "extremist" from before the word islam. because i think alot of islam is extreme enough to just say 'islam' without the clarificiation :)

that is my opinion and i know not everyone shares it.

What needs to be simplified? Is it so hard to note that Islam IS in fact a religion of peace, and Muslim terrorists are simply a minority, and a very small minority, who follow a more literal and hence extremist branch of Islam?

[Roachy]

to roach: well I am not going to do that. First of all it is the red herring AGAIN. "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly"

Use your eyes and ears when you scan the news headlines/watch the news. Although the attacks in Darfur come to mind as particularly bad off the top of my head.

I don't know why atheists often want to defend islam so much more tenaciously than any other religion (defend islam in one post and attack christianity in the same one). its very peculiar and interesting. Both are 'narrow minded' but i would say islam sorta has the upper edge on that right now in this present time :)

I suggest you open your eyes and ears to the world. I hate to repeat what others have said but seriously, extremist Muslims are a minority, so you cannot get away with just saying 'Islam' when referring to extremists. The attacks in Darfur are carried out by that MINORITY.

Also, it is not simply a case of "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly". What it is that myself and others are trying to say is that you are wrong to generalise Islam as a 'narrow minded' faith based on the minority of extremists when, following this logic, Christianity could be generalised as 'narrow minded' based on the minority. But you seem to only want to apply these rules to the faith of Islam.

Also, you've just made a generalisation about Atheists too, which just proves that you are the one with the 'narrow minded' views as you only want to see what your roses tinted glasses allow you to.

Like I said, I am a Christian, not an Atheist. Thing is, I'm not afraid to admit that my faith has been used in the same way that the faith of other religions has been used. I do not believe that Islam is a violent religion at all based on this minority as that would make me a massive hypocrite due to the fact that my religion could also be seen as violent based on the minority.

[katt]

read the PS in my post.

I never said it was you. the point is is that claim is wrong. If it was addressed at you, i had no evidence for it. if i said that it applied to all christians, i'd be wrong.

however you are making similar claims (albeit different in specifics), and saying that they're justified because you think that most muslims act that way.


oh please. that is just silly

I am entitled to not like a religion. Heck anyone is entitled to not like a religion...or religion in general.

[piemastermike]

lmao. Since when did i condone killing/mistreating anyone? please stop lying.

I never want to impose my beliefs on everyone. I merely state them and it is just tooooo much to handle for some of you.

I think you'll find that what people object to is the sweeping generalisations you're making about a perfectly harmless religion based on tabloid and right wing newspapers and the like. Not everyone in a religion is an extremist. It goes for all religions. Christianity has extremists (just look to america), there are crackpot Jews. There are crackpot muslims and there are crackpot islamists. HOWEVER: this does not give you the right to cast a sweeping generalisation over all members of that faith and label them all terrorists.

I do agree that there is a bit of a frenzy in the press at the moment, but you have to see past that or we would all believe that every headmaster and vicar is a child moleter and a rapist. Seriously, take everything you read with a pinch of salt and do some research yourself. Having your own views is perfectly valid but as I said before: you are just labelling every member of a religion as a terrorist and that isn't a belief or a view. it's just plan WRONG.

[Darkscull]

oh please. that is just silly

I am entitled to not like a religion. Heck anyone is entitled to not like a religion...or religion in general.

but you aren't just saying that you don't like them.

you are saying that islam is nutz, and that islam is violent. you are making authoritative statements about something, not opinions.

if you said, "well i think that's nutz" it wouldn't be as bad.

[katt]

I think you'll find that what people object to is the sweeping generalisations you're making about a perfectly harmless religion based on tabloid and right wing newspapers and the like. Not everyone in a religion is an extremist. It goes for all religions. Christianity has extremists (just look to america), there are crackpot Jews. There are crackpot muslims and there are crackpot islamists. HOWEVER: this does not give you the right to cast a sweeping generalisation over all members of that faith and label them all terrorists.



I think you are misunderstanding me. I don't think all muslims are nuts and bad people and have said that many times in this thread. I just think islam is more often than not over the top lately and there are more extremists being brewed in this particular faith than others at the present time.

what i am saying is sooo not a big deal at all. I don't know why it was turned into one.

[Nuclear Spoon]

oh please. that is just silly

I am entitled to not like a religion. Heck anyone is entitled to not like a religion...or religion in general.

One is entitled to dislike a religion given they know all the facts.
You clearly do not know all the facts, or you choose to bend them round your misinformed opinions.

[Urlosenged]

Please provide proof that there are more Muslims that use their faith to justify violence than there are followers of other religions that do the same.

You know for a fact that, even if it was true, that would still be unprovable with actual evidence. So that's a fairly weak arguing point there.

As for what I think about Islam? I try not to, simply because I don't know anything about it other than what I see on the news, and most of what I see on there is the extremists playing up in some way again. If I don't know enough to form some kind of balanced opinion, I don't. It's just a religion. People that use religion to justify killing people are twats. That's all there is to it really, as far as I'm concerned.

Edit: Bloody hell, a whole PAGE of new posts went up while I was writing this.

[Darkscull]

what i am saying is sooo not a big deal at all. I don't know why it was turned into one.

you objected when someone suggested basing their view of christianity on the kkk, yet you think it's ok to refer to islam in general as being nutz and such. there's a discrepancy there, and that's what people have a problem with

you just need to qualify (eg. the muslims who do this sort of thing <referring to specific subject> are crazy imo) and people wouldn't mind.

[katt]

well who knows all the 'facts' then? do you know all the facts nuclear dave?

one is entitled to think wahtever the hell they want to think. a thought is just a thought.

[piemastermike]

I think you are misunderstanding me. I don't think all muslims are nuts and bad people and have said that many times in this thread. I just think islam is more often than not over the top lately and there are more extremists being brewed in this particular faith than others at the present time.

what i am saying is sooo not a big deal at all. I don't know why it was turned into one.

But what you've said is that Islam as a whole is a religion of terrorists which is what people are objecting to. It's not. There are just a lot of people using it as an excuse to indoctrinate people "in the name of islam" to fight the West. The point is that Islam is not a nutjob faith it's just been corrupted. Much like Christianity was in the crusades.

[Darkscull]

one is entitled to think wahtever the hell they want to think. a thought is just a thought.

but when you phrase a thought as a fact (and i think you even referred to your opinions as facts at one point, i shall look to quote it), then it isn't just a thought.

[Roachy]

You know for a fact that, even if it was true, that would still be unprovable with actual evidence. So that's a fairly weak arguing point there.

I know for a fact that it isn't true. That's why I made that post. :rolleyes:

P.S. -
I suggest you open your eyes and ears to the world. I hate to repeat what others have said but seriously, extremist Muslims are a minority, so you cannot get away with just saying 'Islam' when referring to extremists. The attacks in Darfur are carried out by that MINORITY.

Also, it is not simply a case of "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly". What it is that myself and others are trying to say is that you are wrong to generalise Islam as a 'narrow minded' faith based on the minority of extremists when, following this logic, Christianity could be generalised as 'narrow minded' based on the minority. But you seem to only want to apply these rules to the faith of Islam.

Also, you've just made a generalisation about Atheists too, which just proves that you are the one with the 'narrow minded' views as you only want to see what your roses tinted glasses allow you to.

Like I said, I am a Christian, not an Atheist. Thing is, I'm not afraid to admit that my faith has been used in the same way that the faith of other religions has been used. I do not believe that Islam is a violent religion at all based on this minority as that would make me a massive hypocrite due to the fact that my religion could also be seen as violent based on the minority.

That's my arguing point.

[Ozzylator]

one is entitled to think wahtever the hell they want to think. a thought is just a thought.

Then surely one is entitled to think that it's OK to lock up a teacher for blaspheming against your religion? Your logic is hypocritical.

[katt]

but when you phrase a thought as a fact (and i think you even referred to your opinions as facts at one point, i shall look to quote it), then it isn't just a thought.

the only thing i called a fact was that mohammed was more violent than jesus. That is provable from the material from the two religious texts.

the rest is just opinion. and i frequently say things like 'in my opinion' or whatever

Wow islam is some powerful faith...even atheists come to its defense! :P

gosh guys lighten up. I didn't even write 'fuck islam' or anything. just that in my opinion its a bit over the top lately

[Urlosenged]

I know for a fact that it isn't true. That's why I made that post. :rolleyes:

Would you care to provide some form of evidence to show that it isn't true?

I don't disagree with you, by the way. I just think it's stupid to use the old "provide evidence NAO" thing for something which has no possible evidence.

[piemastermike]

the only thing i called a fact was that mohammed was more violent than jesus. That is provable from the material from the two religious texts.

the rest is just opinion. and i frequently say things like 'in my opinion' or whatever

Wow islam is some powerful faith...even atheists come to its defense! :P

gosh guys lighten up. I didn't even write 'fuck islam' or anything. just that in my opinion its a bit over the top lately

I would defend any faith in this situation. I defend the right for people to have any peaceful faith they choose without fear of persecution.

[Nocashvalue]

I don't know why atheists often want to defend islam so much more tenaciously than any other religion (defend islam in one post and attack christianity in the same one). its very peculiar and interesting. Both are 'narrow minded' but i would say islam sorta has the upper edge on that right now in this present time :)

The fact is that if anyone were generalising christians/buddhists/jews/etc as much as you are muslims, we would still argue against it. If we're atheists, why would we take sides, when to us every religion is as wrong or pointless or whatever as the next? The reason people argue against your abhorrent patronisation of islam is that it's islam you're constantly dismissing. If you were to express a similar viewpoint about another religion, the same arguments would be expressed.

The thing that really astonishes me is that even when distinct parallels are drawn between islam and other beliefs that you respect (be them christian, political etc etc), you seem to have a remarkable ability to pull the wool over your own eyes and repeat the same argument over and over and over until everyone else in the vicinity either gets incredibly angry or just gives up trying to reason with you. I'm fairly amazed that you've lived your life insofar without any repercussions for your frankly baffling sense of reasoning.

As hard as I try, I can't seem to pinpoint your "RED HERRING", as you seem to like calling it - "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly". Nobody in this thread has argued that, as far as I can see. I think the argument you're misconstruing is the drawing of parallels from islam to christianity. We're not justifying fundimentalism from either party, but trying to open your eyes to the fact that your specific targetting of islam is hugely unjustified given the actions of extremists from any religion - be it muslim, christian, buddhist, scientologist.

If you're going to comment on fundamentalists then do it as a whole instead of selecting by religion. Or at least have the grace to refer to muslim extremists as muslim extremists, rather than generalising muslims and islam as wholes. We aren't begging you to change your beliefs. We're asking you to treat islam, muslims and muslim beliefs (every religion for that matter) with the same respect that we treat your christian beliefs.

[Roachy]

Would you care to provide some form of evidence to show that it isn't true?

I don't disagree with you, by the way. I just think it's stupid to use the old "provide evidence NAO" thing for something which has no possible evidence.

I was being sarcastic. You know, that thing you do when you aren't being serious. Do you think I actually expected her to be able to provide any of this 'proof'?

[Nuclear Spoon]

Why should being atheist have anything to do with it? Just because atheists don't believe in anything, doesn't mean that we can't have an opinion.

Also,
the only thing i called a fact was that mohammed was more violent than jesus. That is provable from the material from the two religious texts.


And you have scoured both texts thoroughly, have you, making sure to check what was meant to be taken literally or metaphorically?

[Darkscull]

the rest is just opinion. and i frequently say things like 'in my opinion' or whatever


very seldomly, and they appear carefully inserted. when you're in full flow, quick reply mode you present it all as facts.

eg:
... deflect attention from the fact islam is nutz...

... point which is that islam is a violent, retrograde force.

[katt]

I also believe in people choosing whatever religion of peace they want too. so long as it actually stays peaceful

[Urlosenged]

I was being sarcastic. You know, that thing you do when you aren't being serious. Do you think I actually expected her to be able to provide any of this 'proof'?

Ah, that thing that, 9 times out of 10, relies on tone of voice to portray. I follow you. I'm so sorry that I didn't grasp the obvious sarcasm in that post.

[Roachy]

I also believe in people choosing whatever religion of peace they want too. so long as it actually stays peaceful

So the religion you've chosen is 'peaceful' is it?

[piemastermike]

I also believe in people choosing whatever religion of peace they want too. so long as it actually stays peaceful

again, you aren't distinguishing between the peaceful religion and extremists that have hijacked it for their own evil means. I will reiterate my football hooligan analogy:

Football match, massive fights break out because hooligans have made it into the ground/to the pubs.
All England fans get branded as hooligans by foreign fans when actually it was just a bunch of thugs in England shirts (NOT ACTUALLY FOOTBALL FANS) that had gone there specifically for a fight, not to watch the football.

True story.

This is pretty much exactly the same as the islam situation.

[Nuclear Spoon]

Religion doesn't change. People's interpretation of religion however, changes with time and varies throughout the present.
So what you should really be thinking is that you don't mind people choosing a religion of peace as long as they use it for peaceful means and not, say, manipulating it for courses of violence.

[Darkscull]

I believe in people choosing whatever religion they want too, and respect them for it, as long as they remain peaceful. even then, i will still respect their choice of religion, just not what they chose to do in it's name.

I don't then stop respecting the religion they chose because of what they chose to do in it's name.

[piemastermike]

Religion doesn't change. People's interpretation of religion however, changes with time and varies throughout the present.
So what you should really be thinking is that you don't mind people choosing a religion of peace as long as they use it for peaceful means and not, say, manipulating it for courses of violence.

Precisely. People have jumped on the bandwagon of extremist islam to use it for evil as it's convenient.

[Nuclear Spoon]

Precisely. People have jumped on the bandwagon of extremist islam to use it for evil as it's convenient.

Ask any Muslim what they think of "Islamic extremists" and I imagine they will probably tell you the same thing;
They are not Muslims. They are terrorists.

[katt]

As hard as I try, I can't seem to pinpoint your "RED HERRING", as you seem to like calling it - "Other things may be bad too so therefore we shouldn't really criticize islam too strongly". Nobody in this thread has argued that, as far as I can see. I think the argument you're misconstruing is the drawing of parallels from islam to christianity. We're not justifying fundimentalism from either party, but trying to open your eyes to the fact that your specific targetting of islam is hugely unjustified given the actions of extremists from any religion - be it muslim, christian, buddhist, scientologist.

.

Well i do admit that there are other extremist groups.. and I have in this thread. The only thing i am saying is islam is apparently the biggest producer of chaos out of all the major religions right now at this present time.

There are plenty of educated, rational people who share my views (and, contrary to popular opinion in this particular thread I am as rational as the next ). Just as i will admit there are educated rational people (in this thread even) who regard islam less cynically than me.

[Darkscull]

Well i do admit that there are other extremist groups.. and I have in this thread. The only thing i am saying is islam is apparently the biggest producer of chaos out of all the major religions right now at this present time.

There are plenty of educated, rational people who share my views (and, contrary to popular opinion in this particular thread I am as rational as the next ). Just as i will admit there are educated rational people (in this thread even) who regard islam less cynically than me.

you miss the point, still.

the purpose of drawing parallels is not to show you that islam is not the only religion with extremists, but rather to show that the extremists in islam hold the same place as do the extremists in other religions.

ie. if you treat all of islam as you treat the extreme elements, but then treat another religion based on the mainstream (you shouldn't even be treating the religions as solid entities anyway), then that is bigotry. since you are deciding how to treat them on other factors than the ones you are commenting on.

[katt]

you miss the point, still.

the purpose of drawing parallels is not to show you that islam is not the only religion with extremists, but rather to show that the extremists in islam hold the same place as do the extremists in other religions.

.

do they? I think they are perhaps a bigger section of the total group than in other religions. but that is personal opinion/judgment

[Nuclear Spoon]

Well i do admit that there are other extremist groups.. and I have in this thread. The only thing i am saying is islam is apparently the biggest producer of chaos out of all the major religions right now at this present time.

There are plenty of educated, rational people who share my views (and, contrary to popular opinion in this particular thread I am as rational as the next ). Just as i will admit there are educated rational people (in this thread even) who regard islam less cynically than me.

Apparently. Key word there.

Anyway, it could be worse, you could be brandishing us all as loonies, but I've noticed that you've called yourself "rational", but not educated, like the rest of us "educated, rational" people.

I suggest if you have strong views such as this, and they are strong, as every thread that involves religious debate seems to have you at the centre of it, that you go educate yourself.

[piemastermike]

you miss the point, still.

the purpose of drawing parallels is not to show you that islam is not the only religion with extremists, but rather to show that the extremists in islam hold the same place as do the extremists in other religions.

ie. if you treat all of islam as you treat the extreme elements, but then treat another religion based on the mainstream (you shouldn't even be treating the religions as solid entities anyway), then that is bigotry. since you are deciding how to treat them on other factors than the ones you are commenting on.

indeed, I guess before I went off on a rant I meant to say that extremists shouldn't be treated as part of the religion but rather as a separate entity altogether. 9.9/10 members of $foo religion will say that they do not view the extremists as part of their faith and don't want to be associated with them. For this reason you need to make sure you don't discriminate about people just because their religion has been labelled as one that produces terrorists. It is simply not the case.

[katt]

Apparently. Key word there.

Anyway, it could be worse, you could be brandishing us all as loonies, but I've noticed that you've called yourself "rational", but not educated, like the rest of us "educated, rational" people.

I suggest if you have strong views such as this, and they are strong, as every thread that involves religious debate seems to have you at the centre of it, that you go educate yourself.

I held back the word educated out of modesty. Because I am very educated :) Maybe not as big of a super-islam-expert as some of you guys claim to be but I am educated

[Roachy]

Islam is not a violent religion. It is being used as a platform to justify violent and aggressive actions.

You know what, let me give you an example of just how easy it is to use something as a platform.

"I am a Jamian. I worship jam. We Jamians love the jam. The book of jam (foreword by Edith Bowman) teaches us that we should worship the jam and all those that do not worship the jam will not make it into jam-heaven. It teaches that we should make the world as jammy as possible"

"I am also a Jamian. I worship jam. I love the jam. The book of jam (foreword by Edith Bowman) teaches us that we should make the world as jammy as possible. I say that we should try to convert people to our faith and if they do not become a fellow Jamian, they are heretics that stand in the way of our destiny of making the world as jammy as possible. They should be slaughtered for standing against the jam. If we are to make the world jammy, we should eliminate all those who will not allow the world to become jammy"

You see? It isn't the same but that is how one would become violent using the faith of jam as a platform. Just because some Jamians want to eliminate all non-jammers, doesn't mean they all do.

Basically: Stop generalising.

[piemastermike]

00:21 <skoo> water is good
00:21 <skoo> too much water is bad
00:22 <skoo> agree/disagree

@katt

[Darkscull]

do they? I think they are perhaps a bigger section of the total group than in other religions. but that is personal opinion/judgment

they are more publicised, and unfortunately tend to have gotten into positions of authority in muslim countries, but on the spectrum of belief (or however you want to refer to it), the extreme is still the extreme, and in a minority, even if they manage to capture the attention of the majority.
extreme sides of religions (and other things) tend to have much support in grassroots-type movements, and are often sponsored by a few people in advantageous positions in society who have their own agendas.
This is apparent both in muslims countries in the middle east/africa, and in some parts of the US (indeed, in some circles Mr. Bush is seen as an extremist, or the public front of extremists), and also in the far-right resurgence in eastern europe.

since september 11th, and the terrorist attacks (and scares, an attack doesn't need to happen for the terror to take affect), islamic terrorists (and the extremists that they recruit from) have been in the spotlight, and they are the most active at the moment, i agree. however that doesn't mean that islam is more disposed towards extremism than other religions/causes, just that it is going through a phase of such radicalisation (due to many socio-economic-political causes, that's another debate).
that doesn't make the current extremism any less terrible, or justify anything, however it is fueling the fire when people forget the true nature of extremism and apply their feelings towards the terrorists to all of those who happen to share a religion. (as you said earlier, katt: the kkk's actions make them christian only by name, it's the same with islamic terrorists)

[Roachy]

Stop getting the Faith of the Jam wrong!!!

[Splush]

I hope nobody minds me moving this thread to the debates forum because damn.

[mrsnuffles]

i think katt tends to polarise all these debates on islam a bit too much.

I personally don't agree with half the things she says. However, I do agree that there are more 'extreme' muslims than there are 'extreme' believers of any other religion. And by 'extreme' I mean people who wish to force their beliefs on other people. By whatever method.

One of my housemates is christian. He disagrees with homosexuality, abortion and believes the world was literally made in seven days. I do not consider him to be 'extreme' in his beliefs because he does not try apply his own values to anyone else's life. Reading this thread, i wonder how many people would consider him 'extreme' - and through their own definition of the word therefore consider him not to be a christian. I wonder what they would consider the Pope to be.

In Saudi Arabia, children are taught in schools to hate jews. There are public executions in Iran. This is a part of what Islam is today in the world in the same way that intelligent design being taught in schools is a part of what Christianity is.

[katt]

i think katt tends to polarise all these debates on islam a bit too much.

.

I am guilty of that. Someone at one point mentioned that the religion is being used as a tool to incite stuff against the west (among other things). And that is probably very true. It is calling something out as black/white to say islam is 'bad' (when in fact its a bit more grey than that) but it is just the way i view the problem.. If islam has been widely hijacked for ill then it has became a 'bad' influence in a sense (regardless of its potential for good)

[mrsnuffles]

I am guilty of that.

i just think people ignore the fairly sensible points you make and concentrate on the more controversial ones. Which tends to turn debates into everyone vs katt. I don't think it's anyone's fault, it was just an observation.

[katt]

well i honestly don't mean to sound quite THAT controversial. :) maybe add a little thoughtful discussion on the matter but I certainly do not believe I am bigoted in the sense i have some reasons for my opinions on this one particular item.

In some circles generalizing about islam is the norm and defending it is considered pretty close to lunacy and poor judgment. I am not saying it is lunacy I am just giving an example of how the same message gets a different reception in different places. it is all a matter of perspective and audience

I certianly don't think every muslim is a bad person because that would be a crazy thing to think. I only generalize because i think overall islam is a bit of a negative thing. Any extremism is negative and I just happen to be of the opinion that islam has more than its fair share of extremists/fundamentalists (and population of people who are completley forced into the system in some countries).

and i do realize that not all of them are like that...people are ALWAYS individuals to me. I just think they are drowned out by the others in strength and the collectivist nature of really organized, powerful religion. things like this teddy bear story are disheartening

but the reasons people have for harming other people are always disheartening (religious, political or otherwise)

[Sorcha]

I think Christianity has the most extremists. Does that mean I'm right? Not necessarily.

If you think Islam has the most extremists, does that mean you're right? Not necessarily.

The point is, more death and terror in our world is being caused by Christian extremists than Islamic extremists. This point you completely misinterpreted, even though I made it very clear before.

When I said "Christians sicken me" in my previous post, it was a test to see if katt could pick it up as an offensive sweeping generalisation. Obviously she did not. I did not mean for this comment to offend anyone, as it was false in my opinion.

[faragher]

Wow. You guys get so upset.

I'm interested in the "Islam seems to have more nasty dudes" thing. Very interested. I'm going to think out loud for a moment, so expect rambling and disjointedness. Also, I'm not presenting this as what I think, just as a starting point for what we could consider, so please don't be mean.

We live (all of us, no exceptions) in states that I will describe as "Westian" for want of an accurate word. These states are characterised by:
- Being broadly Christian in religion
- Being broadly Free-market-capitalist in economic terms
- And having well developed and mature economies
- Having long history of democracy (of a kind)
- Having a well developed media that is independent of the state and that has demonstrable political bias
- Having well organised and large armed forces
- Having a general sense of individual > society/community/whatever
- Being broadly right of centre politically
- Being broadly resource and capital rich compared to the rest of the world

We believe, pretty much absolutely, that this is the right way to live. And we are not afraid to use a number of tactics to promote this, from advertising Coca Cola, through the use of economic sticks and carrots, through to sending in the troops.

Living in these "Westian" states, we see certain types of behaviour as wrong:
- 'Terrorism' (!define terrorism: ???)
- State Controlled economies
- Left of centre politics (yeah, I know we have an above average amount of lefties here, but this is not typical)
- Putting state/community/whatever against the individual
- Not being Christian. Or at the least, being militantly anti-Christian
- People doing things that challenge or threaten your way of life

Therefore we can't help but see Islamic extremism as threatening, and Islamic states as faintly worrying.

Part 2 of this, is to kind of reverse this, and try (and it will only be trying) to do this from the point of an "Eastian". Here we go...

Characteristics:

- Being broadly Muslim in religion
- Being broadly state-controlled-socialistish in economic terms
- And having emerging and unstable economies
- Having long history of dictatorship (and try not to assume this is bad for this exercise) or theocracy
- Having a media that has demonstrable political bias, and tends to be local and stat controlled
- Armed forces mainly consisting of small groups of individuals - lots of them, but not centralised
- Having a general sense of society/community/whatever > individual
- Not having a political system that makes much sense in terms of left/right (I'm really unsure about this one...)

They believe, pretty much absolutely that this is the right way to live.

Living in these "Eastian" states, we see certain types of behaviour as wrong:
- 'Terrorism' (!define terrorism: ???)
- Putting the individual above the state/community/whatever
- Not being a Muslim. Or at the least, being militantly anti-Islam
- People doing things that challenge or threaten your way of life

Now, with this point of view in mind, do we still see Islam as the religion with the most extremists, or is our media broadcasting constantly about how the Christian Right is saying that we should be wiped off the face of the earth, and getting irritated with the ads for coca-cola, or fighting back against those who have the cheek to invade your country. From the point of view of the "Eastians" Christianity looks like the most militant and aggressive religion.

So maybe what we have is this:

1. Our own views, no matter how liberal and right on we are, are at best a little bit "westian".
2. Us "westians" have stolen a bit of a lead from the "eastians" in development terms - we got a bit lucky with the resources, and a whole load of lucky with some warmongering in the last two centuries.
3. This lead means that "westianism" is the dominantly observed and broadcast (and this is important - us westians control the media pretty much - you can watch CNN in afghanistan, but you can't watch Al-Jazeera in the USA)
4. Our views are reinforced by the westian media (and this is not always deliberate on their part, remember that they are "westians" too, and share the same basic values and beliefs.

So, to (finally and a bit belatedly) conclude - does Islam really have a larger proportion of bad guys, or is it just that "westians" and "eastians" have slightly different definitions of bad?

Like I said, just some discussion points. And specially for katt - these points are not meant to undermine your viewpoint - I'm kind of hoping that this will be interesting for you, but also interesting for others and allow them to see where your point of view comes from. There is not a right and wrong in this, just some very entrenched cultural beliefs ON BOTH SIDES.

[MLynas]

I just think we can't force these people to abandon their Shariah law...even if we find it a disturbing violation of human rights. Who are we to determin how the whole world lives?

Lets face it people in the west exploit human rights just as much as anywhere else, don't agree with me just go through the tags on your clothes.

But when they arrest someone from the UK our diplomats need to swoop right in and scoop her out. It has to be said though the muslim community isn't doing itself any favours in the global community by not extrediting her immediatley. The west is afraid of suicide bombers, oil ransoms, "terrorism" and loss of free speech. As Yoda would have said. "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate..leads to a republican US government."

When we go to countries that employ Shariah law then we need to integrate into that culture. However it is a two way street and in reality the UK is a country very tolerant of other cultures, however if a clash occurs we need to make sure we fall on the western side of the fence, despite how un PC that might appear.

[Darkscull]

faragher, very good post.

in the spirit of clarification and avoiding people getting held up by specifics, i would suggest that rather than each side being "broadly x in religion", they "have societies/cultures developed from a broadly x ethos", because even militant atheists can't deny the affect religion has had on our cultures in the past.

[Wahoo]

Yes, but in this country, if someone is anti-christian then we don't lock em in jail for half a year.

[katt]

The point is, more death and terror in our world is being caused by Christian extremists than Islamic extremists. This point you completely misinterpreted, even though I made it very clear before.


Prove it then. That is what I was asked to do with regards to Islam and if i bothered I could find a wealth of sources supporting my views. But I was lazy and did not. If there has been one thing wrong with my past posts it was not being arsed to go dig up the numerous well written articles documenting the terrible things being done in the name of islam; both in fundamentalist countries and elsewhere.


We live (all of us, no exceptions) in states that I will describe as "Westian" for want of an accurate word. These states are characterised by:
- Being broadly Christian in religion

I would disagree with that. There are plenty of atheists in the United States as well as other religions ...even in the bible belt. It is true that christians make up the majority of those practicing faiths but the united states was specifically created to keep religion and religious doctrine out of the government and there are people who fight (almost always successfully) to uphold this if they see it as being threatened by something or someone.

There is probably a trend among people in my own age group to be less religious...I think it is diluted with each new generation.

We believe, pretty much absolutely, that this is the right way to live. And we are not afraid to use a number of tactics to promote this, from advertising Coca Cola, through the use of economic sticks and carrots, through to sending in the troops.



Therefore we can't help but see Islamic extremism as threatening, and Islamic states as faintly worrying.


Well that is one reason behind why i find islam (in its fundamentalist form) to be worrying: because I think we have a way of life worth protecting and it does seem to conflict with various.... ways.. of thinking. And in fundamentalist islamic states things like honor killing are happening . to be honest I find some of the stuff that happens in places like that distinctly terrible.

I think we have a good way of life in the west compared to what a lot of people around the world have to suffer in the forum of overbearing religion, no real opportunity for individual voice and exceptionally unfair, poor quality governments.

- Being broadly resource and capital rich compared to the rest of the world

I would argue that there are many countries that are rich in resources and have many poor people. I think what keeps them poor is being held down by horrible governments and other social things that broadly deny individual property/rights. It is a shame.......

I would also argue that there are probably loads of people in fundamentalist countries who wish they didn't have to be quite so religious but they feel compelled to go along with the flow. People are people all over after all and overbearing religion is tedious generally.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0825424003?tag=anncoulter-20&camp=14573&creative=327641&linkCode=as1&creativeASIN=0825424003&adid=0J84H91Z64BDTF4WEWW6&

this is a book i want to read called "Unveiling Islam". It was written by two former muslims who write about their old religion in a fairly revealing and antagonistic way. But the important thing is it was written by people who actually experienced what they are talking about.

[Splush]

Whole lotta words
Nice post. I generally agree with this, you've always got to remember that your perceptions are unavoidably distorted by the lens of your cultural context. But this postmodernist type of thinking can be dangerous, it can lead to a situation where everything is permitted on the basis of all truths being relative. I feel like we've got to hang on to objective moral truths at some level. For instance I think honour killing is objectively immoral, and I guess some people think the exact opposite, but I've got to be honest with myself and say that they're wrong. Not that I'm suggesting that you would support honour killings, just that a failing to condemn things as objectively wrong because you're scared of having a non-PC "west is the best" attitude can be a dangerous thing.

It's a really interesting area of thought though. Everyone should keep their cultural context in mind when they're thinking about other cultures, but I think when relativism goes to far it can be used as a smokescreen for all sorts of bad things in various spheres of life.

I would disagree with that. There are plenty of atheists in the United States as well as other religions ...even in the bible belt. It is true that christians make up the majority of those practicing faiths but the united states was specifically created to keep religion and religious doctrine out of the government and there are people who fight (almost always successfully) to uphold this if they see it as being threatened by something or someone.
I don't think whether the people are actually believers or not matters, the cultural context of both the UK and the US is built in christian values, for better or for worse. I think Darkscull's point on semantics is probably right. There's an old joke that if somebody gets asked their religion in Ulster and they reply with "atheist" they'll be asked "catholic atheist or protestant atheist?". Religion's influence runs way deeper than whether people are actually believers or not. I'm a christian athiest in a sense, when I think about the god that doesn't exist it's the christian god that I'm thinking about, silly as that sounds. I'm surrounded by christian imagery every day, I say things like "for christ's sake" or "thank god for that" and they're much to deeply embedded in my psyche to get rid of. I think it's fair to say the UK is a christian country still.

[GorillaBearBear]

I agree with that post for the most part splush, except that I would objectively say that this particular case is ridiculous, because while objective thought about other cultures is good, I think for it to work peacefully some basic things have to be the same, and one of them is seperation of Church and state. So trying her with charges of "insulting religion" for me seems like a wholly spurious charge that no civilised country should have on their books.

[basstard]

do they? I think they are perhaps a bigger section of the total group than in other religions. but that is personal opinion/judgment

This is an opinion in the disguise of pretending to be a fact - on wikipedia it would get a dirty great 'citation n