537 replies to this topic

[Chad Vander Veen]

That's my point; it is  "radical Islam" and not Islam that is taking these phrases literally. People are knocking Islam and they're quoting the Koran as justification for knocking Islam. If there were a radical group of Christians quoting murderous clauses from the Bible and using them to justify murderous acts, would others be justified in knocking Christianity as a whole and knocking the Bible as a whole?

People already knock Christianity as a whole based on the actions of a few. I've seen it on this forum. Lots o' folks that are Christophobes frequently refer to Eric Rudolph or even Tim McVeigh (who admitted himself he was anti-Christian but no one pays attention to that part) as representative of fundamentalist Christianity which is an absurd comparison in size and scope when looking at radical Islam. There are thousands, even millions more, who believe the tenets of radical Islam than believe in acting out violence in the OT.

I will be the first to admit that in the past, Christianity was just a rife with evil and greed and cruelty as Islam. But the Reformation changed that. The reason many people fear a mosque in town is because Islam has had no reformation of its own, and there are literally millions of followers who to this day take the Koran and use it as justification to kill.

[Deb aka Resume Lady]

Lots o' folks that are Christophobes frequently refer to Eric Rudolph or even Tim McVeigh (who admitted himself he was anti-Christian but no one pays attention to that part) as representative of fundamentalist Christianity which is an absurd comparison in size and scope when looking at radical Islam.

Making the point that some kill in the name of Christianity does not make one a Christophobe. If your point is that the numbers of Christians who kill in the name of Christianity is less than the numbers of people who kill in the name of Islam, can't you make that point without assuming and accusing that those who made the initial reference are somehow anti-Christian? Where does that come from and what purpose does it serve?

[Cloud9]

The first amendment prevents Congress from making laws regarding an establishment of religion. It does not prevent state and local governments from doing so.

So in theory all 50 states can do so and make the first amendment meaningless?

[Cloud9]

If your point is  that the numbers of Christians who kill in the name of Christianity is less than the numbers of people who kill in the name of Islam,

There we go again, obviously you must be a Christophobe (no such word by the way) to point out that Christians are less committed to their religion for if they were the numbers would be about equal.... those lazy Christians....

[Chad Vander Veen]

There we go again, obviously you must be a Christophobe (no such word by the way) to point out that Christians are less committed to their religion for if they were the numbers would be about equal.... those lazy Christians.... 

Sure it is a word, it is just a made up word like homophobe (although that's made its way into the dictionary now)

Anyway, you completely missed the point so I suggest reading the posts again. If its too hard to figure out, I'll try and sum it up for you in 3-easy-to-read steps.

[Cloud9]

Aren't you a writer by profession CV?

As a teacher once told me, if most of the class is getting the question wrong, it's not the student's fault, it's the teacher's for not being clear enough so that the students could understand and learn.

So if you have more than one person that's missing the point, perhaps it's a reflection of how you're expressing yourself in your writing.

So please, I'm here to learn, walk us through your 3 easy steps.

[Chad Vander Veen]

1. Comparing the tiny handful of Christian radicals to Islamic radicals made sense centuries ago but today is absurd.

2. Of the billion or so Muslisms there are out there, only 1 or 2 percent likely support terrorism. However, 1 or 2 percent of a billion is still 1 or 2 million.

3. Given that there are most likely millions of Muslims who agree with terrorism (see #2), that gives cause for concern about a mosque being built in town.

Summary:

As I mentioned earlier in this thread, my original intent was to discuss some of the reasons people may be opposed to a mosque. I have mixed feelings personally but I lean toward freedom of religion.

As is typical of such a thread, people have made ill-informed posts comparing things that are so entirely dissimilar as to not even make sense when thought about logically. In addition, people make wildly innane and hypocritic assumptions in order to prove a point. These things contribute to a quick deterioration of reasonable discussion and serve to illustrate just how poorly many people understand things they fear.

[Cloud9]

Well thank you for your thoughts on the matter, they are sincerely appreciated.

On #1, perhaps it's simply a difference in where the evolution of each respective religion stands, maybe this time period with lead to reform in the Muslim faith.

On #2, it's unclear to me how you've determined that the number is 1 or 2 percent of Muslims supporting terrorism, and what you mean by 'support' - if that includes people that jump up and down and are happy when terrorists kill Americans, then I might agree that it's a fair number. But when it comes to people, regardless of their origin, they're mostly talk and no action.

I've not seen any study put the number of terrorists at 1-2 million.

On #3, it's unclear to me how we've linked however many terrorists there are to the mosque being built in Folsom. I don't buy the premise, even if it were a fact that there are 2 million terrorists, that any of them would be expending their efforts in the building of a mosque. Surely, they have better use of their time, like terrorizing others.

That being said, lets go with your assertions and flip the coin around to the other side.

1.3B Muslims minus 2 million terrorists/supporters = 1.298 billion peaceful Muslims that seek to practice their religion.

I prefer to think that what we have in Folsom is merely a few of the hundreds of millions of Muslims that simply want to practice their religion.

Could I be wrong? Of course.

Could those that oppose the mosque for those reasons be wrong? Of course.

Which is more likely to be wrong? I like my odds on this one.

[bordercolliefan]

Back to questions about how the mosque may impact Folsom. One thing I have wondered about is whether the mosque will create an FBI presence in Folsom. I don't know whether the FBI's strategy is to infiltrate mosques generally to find out what is going on, or if they only begin to pay attention to a particular mosque once they have reason to believe that there may be suspicious characters in it.

Here is another thought. Some have stated that the purpose of the mosque is to provide a "home" for approximately 200 Muslim families in Folsom who are currently conducting services at a Rotary Club. However, I believe I also read that this mosque will be one of only two in suburban Sacramento. Further, Folsom's mosque will also have a school attached to it (is this a regular day school, or just a part-time religious ed. school, like Sunday School)? Thus, I think we can surmise that the mosque will become a "Muslim center" for much of the surrounding area, since there are no other mosques in surrounding towns.

[Chad Vander Veen]

I've not seen any study put the number of terrorists at 1-2 million.

I know this violates the rule but I think it is ok in context of our discussion:

One in four Muslims sympathises with motives of terrorists
By Anthony King
(Filed: 23/07/2005)
News.Telegraph
Read Entire Article

The group portrait of British Muslims painted by YouGov's survey for The Daily Telegraph is at once reassuring and disturbing, in some ways even alarming.

The vast majority of British Muslims condemn the London bombings but a substantial minority are clearly alienated from modern British society and some are prepared to justify terrorist acts.
The divisions within the Muslim community go deep. Muslims are divided over the morality of the London bombings, over the extent of their loyalty to this country and over how Muslims should respond to recent events.

Most Muslims are evidently moderate and law-abiding but by no means all are.

YouGov sought to gauge the character of the Muslim community's response to the events of July 7. As the figures in the chart show, 88 per cent of British Muslims clearly have no intention of trying to justify the bus and Tube murders.

However, six per cent insist that the bombings were, on the contrary, fully justified.

Six per cent may seem a small proportion but in absolute numbers it amounts to about 100,000 individuals who, if not prepared to carry out terrorist acts, are ready to support those who do.

Equally remarkable are YouGov's findings concerning many Muslims' attitudes towards Western society and culture.

YouGov asked respondents how they feel about Western society and how, if at all, they feel Muslims should adapt to it. A majority, 56 per cent, believe "Western society may not be perfect but Muslims should live with it and not seek to bring it to an end".

However, nearly a third of British Muslims, 32 per cent, are far more censorious, believing that "Western society is decadent and immoral and that Muslims should seek to bring it to an end".

Among those who hold this view, almost all go on to say that Muslims should only seek to bring about change by non-violent meansbut one per cent, about 16,000 individuals, declare themselves willing, possibly even eager, to embrace violence.

For a graphical representation of survey:
http://www.telegraph.../npoll23big.gif

[Cloud9]

I read the whole thing... even slowly...

This is a study about Muslims in Britain, and 1% was the figure for those that would be moved to violence.

32% expressed their opinion that the west was decadent and should be brought to an end, which just goes to prove my point, most people (32%) are talk not action (1%).

Heck, in our own country, among our own people, plenty oppose abortion, that doesn't move them into terrorist activity of bombing clinics.

They're entitled to their opinion, just as many Americans are entitled to theirs that "most of those Muslim countries are backward" and should be wiped off the face of the earth.

Expressing contrary opinions, even hatred for others, doesn't change anything. For if it did, well, the list in our own country would be a long one, we'd have to take action on everything people opine.

[Chad Vander Veen]

I read the whole thing... even slowly...

This is a study about Muslims in Britain, and 1% was the figure for those that would be moved to violence.

32% expressed their opinion that the west was decadent and should be brought to an end, which just goes to prove my point, most people (32%) are talk not action (1%).

this is what I posted: 2. Of the billion or so Muslisms there are out there, only 1 or 2 percent likely support terrorism. However, 1 or 2 percent of a billion is still 1 or 2 million.

You said you had never seen any study indicating such. I gave a study from 5 days ago that proves at least 1% do exactly what I posted.

It is general knowledge that there are around a billion Muslims. My estimate may even be conservative when you consider the number is likely much higher than 1% in non-Western countries.

Therefore, I basically laid the smackdown on you.

[Cloud9]

For starters, it was a study of Muslims in Britain, and even then, the study you quoted did not get you to the 2% mark.

Not that it matters since I gave you the benefit of doubt and took the 2% figure into my calculation.

That leaves 1.298 billion Muslims that aren't terrorists nor support terrorism, but apparently that's still not good enough for most people.

Maybe we should lock up all Americans since 1% are criminals.

[Chad Vander Veen]

For starters, it was a study of Muslims in Britain, and even then, the study you quoted did not get you to the 2% mark. 

Not that it matters since I gave you the benefit of doubt and took the 2% figure into my calculation.

That leaves 1.298 billion Muslims that aren't terrorists nor support terrorism, but apparently that's still not good enough for most people.

Maybe we should lock up all Americans since 1% are criminals.

Pfft...more than 1% of Americans are ciminals.

Anyway, the whole farking point of this was to simply illustrate why people have understandable concerns about a mosque in town. If 1% of British Muslims would gladly kill you, it is reasonable to worry that maybe 1% of Folsom Muslims would too.

[Cloud9]

Pfft...more than 1% of Americans are ciminals.

Anyway, the whole farking point of this was to simply illustrate why people have understandable concerns about a mosque in town. If 1% of British Muslims would gladly kill you, it is reasonable to worry that maybe 1% of Folsom Muslims would too.

I disagree.