Islam: Is it inherently Evil?

[Value Collector]

yes lived in sin for 4 or more years in a house we both built when I was 21. Loved her to bits right up to her passing away a little over 3 years ago....knocked the stuffing out of me and I still weep a tear for what we had ...she was my best friend and a cracker in the looks dept = bonus.

Weddings and bonded marriage suits many, but not me, the ties that bind should be worked on daily with love, affection, admiration and individualism celebrated to create 2 people power, not an absorption model so many couples seem to melt into.

I am sorry you had to go through that, my sincere condolences.

I totally agree with your post, as I said I think the government should butt out of the marriage recognition business, but as long as they are in it, it needs to be fair, with no discrimination. If you and your partner love each other, and commit to each other, who is the government to tell you your marriage doesn't count.

 

[Julia]

A solution to this endless discussion about whether gay marriage should happen etc., would be for all marriage to not exist at all.
A legal arrangement via civil unions should be available to everyone if that's what they want in terms of protection of property etc if the love dies and the hatred sets in.

So much fuss about something which is essentially meaningless. No ceremony or bit of paper, piles of wedding presents, bridesmaids and honeymoons, will ensure a sound relationship.

Relationships are what they are. Dependent on the individuals involved and their mutual commitment.
Nothing to do with the gratuitous frills round the edges.

 

[Calliope]

Relationships are what they are. Dependent on the individuals involved and their mutual commitment.
Nothing to do with the gratuitous frills round the edges.

Quite right...and nothing to do with this thread either.

 

[herzy]

A solution to this endless discussion about whether gay marriage should happen etc., would be for all marriage to not exist at all.
A legal arrangement via civil unions should be available to everyone if that's what they want in terms of protection of property etc if the love dies and the hatred sets in.

Quite right. It is entirely inappropriate for a supposedly secular government to take a stance here.

 

[luutzu]

I appreciate your difference of opinion as it is thought provoking. In line with the thread topic and the post by Bellenuit of the mob burning of those three (one unborn) Pakistanis. Specifically, I condemn those actions perpetrated by this religion on those innocent people. To support these religious actions is not acceptable in this country. The goal is some future freer world.

I don't agree with the U.S. interventions and their attitude toward their own country folk. Documents set in stone (Constitution) should be debated and voted upon on a more regular basis. Particularly the right to bear arms and the fanatics that grieve not, as more school children get shot up. It borders insanity why nothing has been done to remove the free availability of guns in their society. Their 'international agenda' has obviously disturbed a hornet's nest and it is their self righteousness, arrogance and wanton intervention that irks people. Even angers people to perform hideous acts of violence in "retaliation".

There is defense on one hand and there is intimidation by forcing will on the other hand. But. And a big but. What would the world look like without the U.S. interventions around the world?



My comment about leaving the country concerns the religious fanatics pushing their fanatical religious agenda in Australia.


Yes you are right. These people need a spokesperson or activist. It would be a different world with everyone getting what they want during their lifetime. The low cost of general education in Australia along with parental guidance is a great place to start.
Thankfully, and one of the reasons why people love living in Australia, is the wide expanse of land with more opportunity than any other country in the world to have a go.

I agree with you.

Any religious or cultural practices that go against Australian law have no place here. There's "honour killing" or child brides, stoning or whatever. That's just wrong even our the law permit it - which I'm glad it does not.

So with these local village chiefs or whoever that order these crimes, they may claim it's Islam and can probably point to some passage in the Koran to prove it... it's wrong either way. But to use that as an example of Islam being evil... you can ask VC and he can point to the Bible for similar lines that can be interpreted that way or any way you like.

Religion is just a tool. Some use it to unite the people to do good work, others use it to wage war - war on their own people or war of invasion, depends on what is more beneficial to God's representative on earth.

--
America has a lot going for it, but there's a fair number of problems. Gun is a major problem yea, but it seems income inequality is another major and growing problem. One that Robert Reich, Chris Hedges is saying is the major reason economic growth is unstable and recover is slow. I mean the average CEO earns about 300, that three hundred, times more than an average employee at the same corporation; real wages for workers hasn't grown much even though efficiency from them has increased a great deal over same period.

Its gun issue is a good example of corporate agenda buying politicians and hijacking the Constitution to make more money. The 2nd Amendment said something like "a well regulated militia must have the rights to bear arms", you know, the fight possible British invasion. But context and key words like "militia" and "regulated" are ignored and it's just all citizens must bear arms as enshrined by the great founding fathers. So yea, you have kids being killed whenever some idiots decided to shoot up the place and then you have NRA leaders coming on TV saying the reason these children got kill was because the teachers weren't armed, because there are no security guards with guns.

---

If US or Western intervention were actually what they say on TV, then yes, we ought to join and go do what we're told is the aim. But that's not reality. That's just the art of war, and all wars are based on deception, as Sun Tzu said.

Take Afghanistan... The Taliban has been as evil as they always were and we didn't do anything until they act as a base to launch terror attack on the US. And we took them out, not just to avenge, but to also control access for oil pipelines being planned from the Caspian down through Afghanistan and into the Indian Ocean... that and an estimated "discovery" of a few trillions worth of rare mineral deposits, the kind that has been proven most efficient for batteries.

Maybe Bush did try to create a democracy in Iraq, maybe... but after it proved too costly, they simply secure Green Zones around important assets and forget about the other parts of the country. Then out of that neglect come ISIS... and when we return there, Khobani or some town was being hammered by ISIS and I heard Kerry saying it's tragic and all that but it's not to our strategic interests to intervene there.

I mean, our families live well because of Western power and influence so trust me when I tell you I am all for us remaining so. But if you look at history, no power can remain rich and powerful, remain unchallenged if majority of its people are getting poorer, if its economy are not stable, if it is rich on borrowed money. And the kind of interventions we're all used to, it might not prove as effective as it used to be.

---

Activists or representatives of the people... they're supposed to be the MPs but yea... I think it needs to come from the top, and the top wouldn't do anything unless there's social unrest or potential uprising... that would give the top more incentives. That or you get a real leader - say the two Roosevelt presidents.

When you have career politicians, they tend not to want to be unemployed and no boats will be rocked. But with enough noise and a strong leader who realise the job of a leader is to strengthen the people and the nation, something good might come of it. Though it tend to get really bad before that happen.

 

[luutzu]

yes lived in sin for 4 or more years in a house we both built when I was 21. Loved her to bits right up to her passing away a little over 3 years ago....knocked the stuffing out of me and I still weep a tear for what we had ...she was my best friend and a cracker in the looks dept = bonus.

Weddings and bonded marriage suits many, but not me, the ties that bind should be worked on daily with love, affection, admiration and individualism celebrated to create 2 people power, not an absorption model so many couples seem to melt into.

My condolences Tisme.

I can imagine but I know it won't be anywhere close to know what it'd be like to lose a life partner like that.

 

[Value Collector]

A solution to this endless discussion about whether gay marriage should happen etc., would be for all marriage to not exist at all.
A legal arrangement via civil unions should be available to everyone if that's what they want in terms of protection of property etc if the love dies and the hatred sets in.

So much fuss about something which is essentially meaningless. No ceremony or bit of paper, piles of wedding presents, bridesmaids and honeymoons, will ensure a sound relationship.

Relationships are what they are. Dependent on the individuals involved and their mutual commitment.
Nothing to do with the gratuitous frills round the edges.

The most simple solution is just to recognise a marriage as a union between two consenting people, just take the gender language out and the problem is solved.

 

[Tink]

VC

Maybe you should ask the Brits how their politically correct garbage is going, and the destruction of the family institution, that is all it seems to be doing, attacking and destroying.

Self pity and ingratitude have taken over their state.

No traditional honour or morals.

Christianity is the foundation of our civilisation, and for me, our Christian heritage is worth standing up for.

 

[Value Collector]

VC

Maybe you should ask the Brits how their politically correct garbage is going, and the destruction of the family institution, that is all it seems to be doing, attacking and destroying.

.

When seeking equality and ending discrimination is considered "politically correct garbage", I think your idea of "honour and morals" is a bit off.

I can't help thinking that you would have a completely different opinion if you or your children had been born gay.

Do you have children? Would you want them discriminated against if they had been born gay?

Christianity is the foundation of our civilisation, and for me, our Christian heritage is worth standing up for

Yes, I know you feel that way, but not every one does, I think society is past needing a super natural imaginary friend. Especially when the a lot of the things that make modern secular society great are things that go against teachings in the bible.

Any further comment on Gay marriage needs to be in another thread though, perhaps the Gay thread or the religion and science, you choose.

 

[Tink]

I have already said, VC, I am doing it for the children.
Rights for children to know their biological parents.

I don't have a problem with people being gay, I just don't agree in changing the Marriage Act,

I have already given my opinion and not really interested in going into it again.

 

[Garpal Gumnut]

There is an interesting article in today's Weekend Australian on the attraction Islam has for the mentally unwell and the incarcerated criminal class.

It is about the obsessive nature of the observances and the sense of community in enclosed environments that Islam engenders.

It is worth a read.

gg

 

[SirRumpole]

There is an interesting article in today's Weekend Australian on the attraction Islam has for the mentally unwell and the incarcerated criminal class.

It is about the obsessive nature of the observances and the sense of community in enclosed environments that Islam engenders.

It is worth a read.

gg

The radicalisation of young men by Islam is no different to the radicalisation of young men (and women) by Hitler Youth. Young people's brains run on hormones rather than reasoning capability until their brains mature. That's why they take risks in the pursuit of pleasure. They drive too fast, drink too much and take too many risks. If you throw in these factors along with the prospect of power over others and having women as your slaves, as well as a sense of belonging to a group instead of being isolated, then you have a very attractive proposition for some people already inclined towards psychopathy and megalomania.

It's hormones and psychology that seduce these people, rather than religion, as the radicalisers well know.

 

[Craton]

And smoking is just meant to be a harmless leisure activity, but things don't always work out that way, and when we learn the real side effects are harmful, we should avoid the dangerous activity.

VC, don't agree with this statement. Poisoning the body via smoking is not the same as poisoning by the scriptures. Medical Maryjane not withstanding...

Can you think of a single positive benefit of religion that can not be achieved in other ways?

And if you can't think of any positive benefit that can not be achieved in other ways, why take the pill with the terrible side effects, it's my opinion that religion should be avoided.

Your opinion and that's fair enough.

Some need to feel they have "seen the light" to make sense and to cope with the world we/they live in. Many feel the need for a sense of purpose and religion gives it, that's a positive. I would hazard a guess that's why some Christians have embraced or turned to Islam (not I), for that very same reason. If it helps to lead fruitful and socially acceptable lives, so be it.

I'd also say that for many without a dogma to follow, and for want of a better word, anarchy would ensue and I don't think that would be a good thing either however, I do agree that certain people should avoid any religion, you know, the ones that have a penchant for fanaticism and blind devotional faith.

Having said that, I don't need any religion nor anyone to tell me how to live, how to treat others, how to love, how to have faith, trust and respect for my fellow man, for nature, for the planet we live on. Perhaps my quest for knowing more about the other religions, other ways of life have lead me to a deeper understanding of what really is important. I don't want to post a diatribe so back to the OP title.

I would also conjecture that chasing/worshipping the almighty dollar is evil too but hey, that's the world we live in and perhaps, just perhaps because of that chase those that follow Islam see our way of life as evil too. No, I'm not condoning what ISIL et al are doing, that's plain evil, just saying.

 

[SmellyTerror]

Thanks y'all who read mah post.

Fighting the urge

Yeah, that was poorly phrased. I'm saying that blaming Shiites for terrorism is like accusing Catholics of being in the IRA. Not only are they not even in the right religion, they're actually the main TARGET of the terrorists.

 

[DeepState]

err, no, it doesn't. It again conflates a multitude of factors. Are all immigrants created equal? No.

What? You indicated that higher criminality was explainable by immigration as new migrants tend to be more criminal and then settle down as they go through a few generations. That's why I apparently can't compare African Americans (who have been around a while) to Muslims (who are recent migrants).

Here's the quote verbatim:

You shouldn't compare African Americans to Muslims. African Americans are well-established in America. Most Muslims in the US are first or second generation immigrants. That's entirely different, and it takes a while for cultures to assimilate (e.g. Italian gangsters).

Now, given that immigrants to the US exhibit a lower level of criminality than the general populace, the concept of new migration provides an opposing explanation to what you have suggested. When you imply that immigration contributes to a higher rate of criminality than the Afro American population because of their more recent immigration, but recent immigration as a statistical factor is actually associated with lower incidence of criminality, your statement is actually entirely inconsistent.

All immigrants are not created equal. Of all immigrants, Muslims show high criminality. They do show higher criminality in the second generation as previously discussed. Can you, with a straight face, really suggest that this "second generation effect" (because it cannot be the first generation and, according to you, should have washed out after that) effect closes a 3x criminality gap in the US vs Afro Americans? Especially when the other explanatory factors like education, average income etc. are so much better for Muslims than Afro Americans? Furthermore Muslims are actually very well accepted in the US. This acceptance was not significantly dented after 9/11. Do you have any idea of what that explanation actually requires in terms if underlying crime rate for the second generation of Muslim immigrants after standard factors are considered?

It could easily warp results, if almost all Muslims in Italy come from these backgrounds (hence almost all are criminals). Remember, as you said - it's proportion that matters, not total numbers. Aborigines are 10x overrepresented in Australian jails. By your logic, a) this enormous gap can't be explained by a range of societal factors and b) it's definitely thus because they believe in dreamtime.

That is not my logic. I would never say that and am a heck of a lot more careful about this stuff by training and experience in very serious situations than you seem to allow for. The only observation that I would make about the aboriginal population and incarceration is that there is a higher level of criminality than could be explained by education, wealth, income, health... than the general population. Given there is a strong line-up between belief in dreamtime and aboriginals, all I can actually say is that they correlate. That's it. There are ways to deal with highly aligned dependent data, but let's not go there.

There is a higher criminality in the Muslim population. Period. The evidence is very strong. The standard factors do not explain it away. I have not said anything about numbers of times prayed per day, color of skin, belief in Islam.... nothing. Just the observation of higher criminality.

If you must know, my actual guess (I do not have the data) is as follows. In general, after allowance for all these factors, the average Muslim is a decent, law abiding citizen. Some may not like the Muslim ways or agree with the viewpoints. Nevertheless, the Muslim population just wants to get on with life in relative peace. Here's where I'll just break with convention because I cannot know 1,000 Muslims and do a pairwise Latin Squares analysis of variance. The Muslims I have met were incredible people and simply amongst the most admirable people I have ever met. I cannot understand how the debates like this one actually happen based on what I have experienced. If anything, I would have thought the debate would be about how to harness these skills to knit a tighter community and build an even better nation.

Nonetheless, I think there is a 'fatter tail' of criminal behavior. That is, a minority are criminally inclined. They may be more proportionately represented than the general populace (more bad eggs), more intensive (some really evil smelling eggs) or some combination of both. I have no firm view as to what causes it. A book full of evil sitting on a table doesn't actually kill or steal. What else is going on? I don't know.

The data states there is more criminality in the Muslim population. I am not condemning this population. I just observe the data. I do not offer a data based rationale for it. The proportion incarcerated, whilst larger than the general population, still allows for the fact that the great majority are not criminals to the point of incarceration. This is most definitely not some BS Kung Fu wannabe one-bad all-bad argument. The data states that this is certainly not the case.

I'm not disagreeing with you. I'm disagreeing with any inferences drawn from that that relate to Islam. Yes, Muslims are overrepresented in jail populations, and hence display higher criminality than others, at least in the US and Italy. That's about the only conclusion one can draw, and nobody is denying that.

+1, except I have not mentioned Islam in any of my correspondence on this issue. That is your assumption. I did not make it. I refute the 'accusation' that I made the inference. You are free to infer what you want from the data. Please don't attribute it to me.

How exactly did you strengthen your argument that Islam is an explanatory variable? Almost all North Africans are Muslim, and are hence susceptible to the destitution, lack of education, and range of economic factors that create the gap which you referred to. Nothing necessarily to do with Islam, despite almost all of Italy's immigrants coming from there.

Never said anything was to do with Islam.

Luutzu sums it up well.

That's a perfect example of confirmation bias Luutzu - people see what they expect to see, which reinforces their previously held (mis)conceptions.

Exactly.

Ummm. As usual, your primary source provided an inaccurate summation complete with meditation, what's more. One suspects that some people think I am attacking the Muslim population and Islam just by presenting data or debating methodology. Seeing what they expect to see. Much has been said condemning my apparent view that Islam does or does not cause higher Muslim criminality. Expecting any reference to Muslims to equate to Islam is the confirmation bias which has been shown clearly. There has been an argument against a straw man that doesn't even exist. Seeing something which does not exist.



I hope the irony does not escape you. I thank you for the exchange.

 

[luutzu]

RY,


Ha ha!




Seriously, you know how some debates you just can't win? This is one of them. Stop digging buddy.

 

[luutzu]

What's Kung Fu wanna be? It's Bruce Lee wanna be. And who wouldn't want to be Bruce Lee? He made Keanu Reeves look like a girl scout.

 

[darkhorse70]

VC, ive never rrad anywhere in the bible that stuffs witches etc should be stoned, byt thats not to say ive read it completely. But the difference between the koran and the bible is that christians acknowledge it was written by man and definitely mantipulated while muslims believe the koran is the words of god.

Id still rather be a christian anyday haha.

 

[darkhorse70]

So what im saying is Christians can bend rules which seem irrational where as muslims cannot.

 

[drsmith]

Larry Pickering's been going on about this,

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-11-...fication-due-to-social-media-pressure/5877584