If this senator should get his way even Islamic charges of adultery will be legal here–and a lot more. Should fathers be allowed to kill their daughters? After all, “religious belief justifies breaking any law.” In fact, bombing te World Tade Center would be justified, too.
Lois
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/14/gop-favorite-in-nebraska-senate-race-claims-religious-belief-justifies-breaking-any-law/
I think its very difficult for Muslims to convince the world they are not a violent religion when their violence extends beyond the world of terrorists and becomes state policy.
The most frightening thing here is that he is likely to win in the election. Moderates and liberals let this kind of crazy talk keep them away from the pols in a non-presidential election year. This coming midterm election is far more important than the 2016 election is likely to be.
You are both quite right, lois and Handy. It’s the election of nuts like that, and many more of our legislators and powerful wealthy who are equally unbalanced that makes me much less negative about having only another up to, say, twelve years of being around. :lol:
Occam
http://www.cnn.com/2014/05/14/world/africa/sudan-christian-woman-apostasy/index.html?hpt=hp_t3 If this senator should get his way even Islamic charges of adultery will be legal here--and a lot more. Should fathers be allowed to kill their daughters? After all, "religious belief justifies breaking any law." In fact, bombing te World Tade Center would be justified, too. Lois http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/05/14/gop-favorite-in-nebraska-senate-race-claims-religious-belief-justifies-breaking-any-law/Obviously, he actually meant that only particular religious beliefs justify breaking any law. His religious beliefs. No doubt he'll clarify this, soon.
You are quite right, Ciceronianus. I’m sure he believes that only correct (his) religious views supersede human law, but that erronious religious views (all others) can’t really be called “religious”, therefore don’t justify using to break any law.
Occam
You are quite right, Ciceronianus. I'm sure he believes that only correct (his) religious views supersede human law, but that erronious religious views (all others) can't really be called "religious", therefore don't justify using to break any law. OccamI'd like to hear what he has to say about it. More hogwash, no doubt. Lois
I think its very difficult for Muslims to convince the world they are not a violent religion when their violence extends beyond the world of terrorists and becomes state policy.Depends on which state policy your talking about. Muslim countries have mixed results if you were to try to live in them. I've visited Pakistan numerous times and think it is one of the worst places ever (or at least the city karachi) Saudi Arabia was decent, but could have used some major improvements. On the flip side. California was too boring but Chicago is pretty nice. Plus side of living in America is that people of all faiths are generally more open minded and you are more free to speak your thoughts w/o government fear. (I have even heard this in mosque sermons) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B7YcCuwlG_4 In any case, though, Islamic law is not implemented anyware in the world. One CIA agent wrote Promoting fear of Shariah law is essentially a red herring. There are more than 50 predominantly Muslim countries in the world.. only two have it as their criminal codes. The countries that do not have Shariah as their criminal codes have modeled their laws on European and American models, some borrowing from Roman law and others from British common law. http://original.antiwar.com/giraldi/2012/04/03/the-islamophobia-excuse/ Certianly would be interesting to see about studies done on those isolated parts of islamic law that actually are implemented.
Shariah law may not be imposed by the government of the countries, but when a brother or father kills the thirteen year old girl because she was raped, or when a girl whose father was a nonpracticing Moslem, and is raised as a Christian by her Christian mother, marries a non-Moslem and is now being considered for capital punishment, it’s hard to say, “well, very few governments impose Shariah Law, so it’s not really a problem.”
Occam
Shariah law may not be imposed by the government of the countries, but when a brother or father kills the thirteen year old girl because she was raped, or when a girl whose father was a nonpracticing Moslem, and is raised as a Christian by her Christian mother, marries a non-Moslem and is now being considered for capital punishment, it's hard to say, "well, very few governments impose Shariah Law, so it's not really a problem." OccamMy thoughts exactly, Occam. Sharia law may not be part of Islam, but if millions of Muslims want it, who's to stop it? Lois
Don’t count this guy out as a witless kook. He’s a Harvard grad, also Yale with a PhD in philosophy and a rising star in the ultraconservative camp. He’s steeped in evangelicalism and and a close associate of Ted Cruz. His blatant reactionary views won’t play well in the beltway but he’s now the darling of the Teabaggers and he has a shot at the Senate. Moderate Republicans had better wake up soon and fight this extreme element or their party is going to split. He even attacked McConnell saying that he is a failed leader. Now BTW the Teabaggers want their own TV channel; they claim that FOX is not conservative enough.
Cap’t Jack
Don't count this guy out as a witless kook. He's a Harvard grad, also Yale with a PhD in philosophy and a rising star in the ultraconservative camp. He's steeped in evangelicalism and and a close associate of Ted Cruz. His blatant reactionary views won't play well in the beltway but he's now the darling of the Teabaggers and he has a shot at the Senate. Moderate Republicans had better wake up soon and fight this extreme element or their party is going to split. He even attacked McConnell saying that he is a failed leader. Now BTW the Teabaggers want their own TV channel; they claim that FOX is not conservative enough. Cap't JackOf course it isn't. Anything left of Atilla the Hun is not conservative enough for the teapartiers. Lois
Of course it isn’t. Anything left of Atilla the Hun is not conservative enough for the teapartiers.With the crap they espouse you'd think that they're to the right of the Westboro Baptist wackos (wave snake flag and blame the fascist-communist Kenyan who blew up the towers and let Katrina destroy New Orleans). Cap't Jack
Shariah law may not be imposed by the government of the countries, but when a brother or father kills the thirteen year old girl because she was raped, or when a girl whose father was a nonpracticing Moslem, and is raised as a Christian by her Christian mother, marries a non-Moslem and is now being considered for capital punishment, it's hard to say, "well, very few governments impose Shariah Law, so it's not really a problem."Yes, such occurences are indeed dreadful. Many of these are dumb cultural practices which can even be seen in Latin America and other developing countires. A good review can be seen here http://www.loonwatch.com/2011/09/honor-killings-the-epidemic-that-isnt/ Interesting though, women in many Arab countries try to use religion as a way of promoting the rights which their government doesnt give them. Here is one interesting way some people tried to promote girls education http://www.burkaavenger.com/ (looks kind of like batman to me :) ) I know there are a lot of Saudi women, for example, who like the criminal justice part of Shariah, but dislike their government for not giving them their other right permitted by Islam. See this Interesting interview from an american scholar to Saudi women https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2sVcUnA-Fls
I agree that all religions have a violent history, but it seems that Christianity is about 200 years closer to giving up these practices and fading away than Islam is. As bad as Christianity has been and still is and Judiasm is as demonstrated with the Palestinians, I have to rate present day Islam as far more harmful to many people than the rest of the major religions. Just because I see the harm from other religions, doesn’t mean that I should not criticize Islam. And, I do not accept the critical thinking fallacy of “you do it, too” as a defense of their actions.
Occam
I think I wasnt clear about my point. I am not trying to point a “you do it too”. I was demonstrating that a certain practice is cultural which can be observed in
several developing countries. So logically, one has to wonder if it is culture or religion to blame.
A principle I was taught in my first year of engineering school was “correlation doesn’t imply causation”.
Finding a clear cause-effect relation ship requires detailed study of variables and see how they react over different circumstances.
If we see religious (in this case muslim) areas as violent, then we need to take several variables (economics, politics, culture, religion, demographics, etc) into account.
Considering that there are dozens of muslim countries, that would requires a HUGE study.
Fortunately one such study was done and you can view the results here (presented by Gallup Poll experts and scholars from Georgetown University)
Abdul, the video you cited, points out that, by far, most Muslims are not outlandish violent extremists. They suggested that less than one percent of Muslims comprise the extremists. (I wonder how they came up with that figure.) The problem is that, even if only one out of a hundred Muslims are ready willing and able to commit, what appear to us as, atrocities, in the name of their god, it is still a very high number. There is so much of such atrocities occurring everyday in our world that can be attributed to such extremist Muslims. That these atrocities may actually not be consistent with a “true understanding of Islamic principles” does not excuse Islam from being the dogmatic framework from which these actions are emboldened and justified.
Sure, violations of human rights are also often due to political, cultural, and other factors. But Islamic beliefs obviously play a role also.
If one out of a hundred Christians were ready willing and able to commit such violence against other humans, in the name of Jehovah, while emitting “Jehovah is great”, I would want to see such Christians taken out. And I would be speaking out as harshly against Christianity. (All religious beliefs, seem to me to be superstitious nonsense, but some are worse than others in their adverse effects on humanity. Islam appears to me to be, at the top, in this respect, in today’s world. But that is not to say that we should not, also, be vigilant against the potential and actual threats imposed by extremist Christians.)
Abdul, the video you cited, points out that, by far, most Muslims are not outlandish violent extremists. They suggested that less than one percent of Muslims comprise the extremists. (I wonder how they came up with that figure.) The problem is that, even if only one out of a hundred Muslims are ready willing and able to commit, what appear to us as, atrocities, in the name of their god, it is still a very high number. There is so much of such atrocities occurring everyday in our world that can be attributed to such extremist Muslims. That these atrocities may actually not be consistent with a "true understanding of Islamic principles" does not excuse Islam from being the dogmatic framework from which these actions are emboldened and justified. Sure, violations of human rights are also often due to political, cultural, and other factors. But Islamic beliefs obviously play a role also. If one out of a hundred Christians were ready willing and able to commit such violence against other humans, in the name of Jehovah, while emitting "Jehovah is great", I would want to see such Christians taken out. And I would be speaking out as harshly against Christianity. (All religious beliefs, seem to me to be superstitious nonsense, but some are worse than others in their adverse effects on humanity. Islam appears to me to be, at the top, in this respect, in today's world. But that is not to say that we should not, also, be vigilant against the potential and actual threats imposed by extremist Christians.)We should be vigilant against potential and actual treats from all religions. It doesn't matter what the faith is, nor whether it is peaceful in its purest form. It is always corruptible and some people will use it to justify every kind of atrocity. True believers of any faith are potentially dangerous and will fight to the death for their version of their religion. A sad truth. Lois
We should be vigilant against potential and actual treats from all religions. It doesn't matter what the faith is, nor whether it is peaceful in its purest form. It is always corruptible and some people will use it to justify every kind of atrocity. True believers of any faith are potentially dangerous and will fight to the death for their version of their religion. A sad truth. LoisSure, but Islam and Christianity are currently the most successful, and thus, IMO, the most dangerous... And Islam, more so than Christianity, currently, and probably in the future.
We should be vigilant against potential and actual treats from all religions. It doesn't matter what the faith is, nor whether it is peaceful in its purest form. It is always corruptible and some people will use it to justify every kind of atrocity. True believers of any faith are potentially dangerous and will fight to the death for their version of their religion. A sad truth. LoisSure, but Islam and Christianity are currently the most successful, and thus, IMO, the most dangerous... And Islam, more so than Christianity, currently, and probably in the future. I couldn't agree more. Lois