Terror attacks by Islamist groups

[Mugwump]

^ i'm no religious scholar, and I think atheism is by far the most likely hypothesis about the world. But having read both, I think Jesus's teachings are far more tolerant and less warlike than Mohammed's. That may simply reflect the fact that JC was operating in a time when he had little power so could not be aggressive. But if I had to choose between one body of teaching and another, I think any kindly person would prefer that of Jesus. Having said all of that, in my view we are arguing about deeply acculturated versions of fairy tales, here.

[David]

Dog with a bone.

Mohammed started his career claiming to be a Jewish prophet and based the early bits of the Mecca Koran on the old testament until he ran afoul of some Jewish scholars in Medina and from then on there's more hate speech in the Koran against Jews than there is in Mein Kampf.

I'll repeat what you clearly can't process, the new testament is the teachings of Jesus and the Koran is the teachings of Mohammed. Yes the old testament has relevance to christianity but not to compare the philosophies of the two prophets.

You want to bring the old testament into it, find me an equivilent to the 10 commandments in the Koran.

Hey, it takes two dogs...

Actually if you want to get technical, Jesus' teachings only make up a small percentage of the New Testament (four books, to be exact). Most of it is actually the writings of Paul and a couple of other apostles of Jesus, most of which are drawing on both Jesus and Old Testament stories, laws and prophecies.

In any case, this is all just an exercise in shifting goalposts and semantics. It tells us little about whether a Muslim would make a competent Australian prime minister (isn't that where we started?) or whether Islam is compatible with Western society. Once we get beyond the semantics, don't you basically agree with me that the majority of Muslims can get along perfectly fine in Western society and be fit to hold office?

[Mugwump]

^ why do you ask....

[HAL]

Tell me more about your reservations about an Islamic party holding the balance of power but it's not a takeover number in absolute terms.

[stui magpie]

Dog with a bone.

Mohammed started his career claiming to be a Jewish prophet and based the early bits of the Mecca Koran on the old testament until he ran afoul of some Jewish scholars in Medina and from then on there's more hate speech in the Koran against Jews than there is in Mein Kampf.

I'll repeat what you clearly can't process, the new testament is the teachings of Jesus and the Koran is the teachings of Mohammed. Yes the old testament has relevance to christianity but not to compare the philosophies of the two prophets.

You want to bring the old testament into it, find me an equivilent to the 10 commandments in the Koran.

Hey, it takes two dogs...

Actually if you want to get technical, Jesus' teachings only make up a small percentage of the New Testament (four books, to be exact). Most of it is actually the writings of Paul and a couple of other apostles of Jesus, most of which are drawing on both Jesus and Old Testament stories, laws and prophecies.

In any case, this is all just an exercise in shifting goalposts and semantics. It tells us little about whether a Muslim would make a competent Australian prime minister (isn't that where we started?) or whether Islam is compatible with Western society. Once we get beyond the semantics, don't you basically agree with me that the majority of Muslims can get along perfectly fine in Western society and be fit to hold office?

Nope. You really didn't take in what I've been writing.

I think that Muslims can get along fine in western society provided no enclaves are built, they're "encouraged" to assimilate, with appropriate support, and they remain a minority.

In regard to holding office in a western society, I have serious reservations but am open to being convinced depending on the individual,

[David]

^ why do you ask....

Because that, unbelievably enough, is what we were discussing in the first place.

It seems to be a pattern on here: someone makes a basically outrageous claim (in this case, 'god help us if we ever have a Muslim prime minister') and, in arguing that point, we proceed to get bogged down in an unwinnable debate about whether Islam is fundamentally different to Christianity and whether Quran verse A can be used to justify atrocities while Bible verse B can't. It's like being five goals up with five minutes to go and ending up with a draw.

I'm beginning to understand why some people give up on rational argument and just resort to screaming epithets instead.

[Mugwump]

^ sorry, the "why do you ask" line is part of an old joke involving two dogs. I assumed it was what you meant when you said "it takes two dogs." Sorry if it caused confusion. The joke will pop up quickly if you put "two dogs" and "why do you ask" into google.

[David]

Ah. My bad.

[think positive]

^ sorry, the "why do you ask" line is part of an old joke involving two dogs. I assumed it was what you meant when you said "it takes two dogs." Sorry if it caused confusion. The joke will pop up quickly if you put "two dogs" and "why do you ask" into google.

............two dogs f&cking!!

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/jokes/read/81178249/

gees thats as old as the hills, but still funny as!

[Mugwump]

^ sorry, the "why do you ask" line is part of an old joke involving two dogs. I assumed it was what you meant when you said "it takes two dogs." Sorry if it caused confusion. The joke will pop up quickly if you put "two dogs" and "why do you ask" into google.

............two dogs f&cking!!

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/jokes/read/81178249/

gees thats as old as the hills, but still funny as!

Yep, one of those jokes that keeps on giving !

[watt price tully]

Never realised til just recently that Muhammad married Aisha at 6 year of age and had sex with her at 9!!!!!

I think that's assuming the years were following the Gregorian calendar. What calendar were they following at Mohamed's time or when the Koran was written?

[stui magpie]

^ why do you ask....

Because that, unbelievably enough, is what we were discussing in the first place. .

Actually it was only you, hung up on a point again. I'd moved way past that when referring to islam in general.

You were also the one who keeps wanting to do the comparison with Christianity.

[David]

The main reason I keep bringing up Christianity is that every time someone makes a far-reaching claim about Islam - that it's incompatible with Western values, that it can never reform or that it is a 'religion of violence' - I think it betrays a serious misunderstanding of how religion actually works, and betrays a lack of awareness about our own cultural history.

Take, for example, the idea that our society is founded on 'Judeo-Christian' values. As if liberal democracy, the Western scientific method and Western art came directly from Biblical teachings; when, in fact, the history of social, artistic and scientific progress in the West is largely one of testing out the boundaries of acceptable thought, something that often placed these fields in a direct struggle with Christianity.

Why is this relevant? Because the 'Judeo-Christian values' myth reinforces the fallacy that progress (or, at least, tolerance of progress) is an essential function of Christianity, and that the fundamental differences between Islam and Christianity mean that Islamic societies will remain trapped in a permanent Middle Ages. That's a specific statement about Islam, amd a hugely popular argument and one that we see on this forum on a regular basis.

It is impossible to leave Christianity out of this discussion precisely because it gives us an opportunity to see how a religion like Islam can both evolve and slowly lose its grip on a society. It's the only thing that can move this discussion beyond the purely theoretical.

But even if you think the two religions are fundamentally different or you're just sick of talking about Christianity, all we need do is actually look at the Islamic world today and see the great breadth of ideologies and religious adherence in its varying societies. Thus, while women can't drive in Saudi Arabia, they can become president in Pakistan or Indonesia. While Iran remains theocratic, Albania has a secular government. While children are mutilated in Somalia, such a practice is completely unheard of in the gulf states. And it goes on. The very fact of these (and many other) differences should be enough to prove that there is no one Islam and no one Muslim-majority society, and that things can (and inevitably do) change. Our own history demonstrates that.

[stui magpie]

Well said, 2 dogs. Even if it does have holes you could drift park a b double in.

[What'sinaname]

Never realised til just recently that Muhammad married Aisha at 6 year of age and had sex with her at 9!!!!!

I think that's assuming the years were following the Gregorian calendar. What calendar were they following at Mohamed's time or when the Koran was written?

Does it matter, because Muhammad was in his 50's, so the age is relative. Even if Arabia years were twice Gregorian, she was 12, he was in his 100's.