SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
Two days after 19 year old Mohamed Osman Mohamud was arrested for allegedly trying to set off a bomb at a Christmas tree lighting in downtown Portland, a fire was set at a mosque in Corvallis. Mohamud had occasionally attended services there.
A guest on our show later that week said she's concerned about Islamophobia in the Northwest, which she described as "a very real threat."
One recent example cited by the Council on American-Islamic Relations was a non-credit course called "What is Islam?" that was to have been offered this winter at Lane Community College. It was canceled when CAIR criticized the instructor for aiming to "promote anti-Muslim bigotry."
Comparisons of the Mohamud case and the Turnidge bombing trial have raised questions about stereotypes of Muslims as the "enemy" playing into media coverage. (Bruce and Joshua Turnidge were found guilty this week on multiple counts of murder after planting a bomb that killed two people in a Woodburn bank.)
A small fraction of people in the Pacific Northwest follow the Muslim faith. There are a growing number of mosques and Islamic schools.
Are you Muslim? Have you seen a recent shift in Oregonians' attitudes towards you or other people in your community? If you're not Muslim, what questions do you have for people who are? Whatever your faith or background, how do you see fear of Islam affecting you? What does Islamophobia mean to you?
GUESTS:
- Arsalan Bukhari: Executive director of the Seattle chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations
- Saba Ahmed: Student at Lewis & Clark and University of Portland who blogs about political issues on World Pulse and Facebook
- Sister Mollie Reavis: Co-chair of the Institute for Christian-Muslim Understanding
- Mikal Shabazz: Local Imam and director of the Oregon Islamic Chaplain's Organization
NOTE: We ran out of time during the show just as Arsalan Bukhari was trying to say two websites where he suggests people visit. They are www.ing.org and www.groundzerodialogue.org.
Photo credit: Jim Boud / Creative Commons
-
or atheist
-
I have a lot of friends that are muslim and they are very nice people. So, i am not scared of islam. I used to volunteer with refugee families and although i worked with a hindu family, I got to meet many families from Iraq and Ethiopia. They are very kind and friendly. We cannot judge an entire community based on what a few lost souls do.
-
Agreed. We should not fear any organized religion in and of itself, what should be abhorrent is extremism in the name of religion. Yes, I think this should include "The Crusades" back in the 11th and 12th Centuries, as well as the acts of terrorists such as those who carried out the 9/11 attacks and the attack on the USS Cole. The suicide bombers who are attacking busloads of civilians in places like Tel Aviv and Jerusalem fall into this category, also.
-
"...a few lost sould"
I doubt those few lost souls would consider themselves "lost". The fanatics that your refer to are some of the most religious of their faith. They are even prepared to die for their religion - their God.
I know plenty of "nice" Christians. Family people. Loving and generous. But they are Christians. They go to Christian church, listen to right wing christian hate radio and read the bible. Their Christian kids are in the US armed forces and are fighting the wars against Islam in Afghanistan and Iraq. The religious beliefs of these people scare me.
There's a religious war going on here. There's nothing nice about it. This war is taking place in the middle east, in America and right here in Portland. Religions have created this mess. How can you follow a faith that will eventually lead to the destruction of mankind?
-
?
-
We need more people like you, Mya.
-
Hey DavCam, you have provided a great example of the monolithic thinking that creates societal divides, whether between Christians and non-believers, or Muslims and non-Muslims. The truth isn’t that simple. I am a catholic, hence a Christian, but I don’t “listen to right wing Christian hate radio and read the bible”, and neither do most of the other people have I known. Your quick conclusion that this is how things are and this is who to blame is not only naïve, it is also just goes to perpetuate the basic problem.
The same can also be said in regards to how we view Muslims, which tends to be incredibly ignorant, mainly because it is so monolithic. Muslim society is just not as simple as we Americans tend to view it. While I live in Portland, I have worked exclusively in Saudi Arabia since 2004 and Egypt for 2 years preceding that. Saudi society does have a very similar divide between conservatives and progressives as we do, it just happens to be relative to the environment in Saudi Arabia (meaning both groups are admittedly more conservatives than the US, but a very real and recognizable divide does exist). The divide in Saudi Arabia also seems to correlate directly to the level of education and income, although, as everywhere, there are exceptions.
My general point is that we are not making constructive contributions to finding soluionts to the problem, when we just resort to generalities, assumptions and trying to assign blame in such simplistic measures. Life, and the world, is just much more complicated than what some would like to acknowledge.
-
The show on Monday will go like this: The Muslim guests will talk about their faith and how "average american", normal and moderate they are. Christians will call in and voice their support. The blame for any "threat" or fear will be pushed onto a small group of "extremists", radicals, the "lost souls". The show will end on a happy note with everyone hugging and feeling good inside.
My point is that believers of all faiths need to accept responsibility the the actions of their religions and need to stop pushing blame onto others. It's the liberal minded followers of religion that need to wake up to the horrors perpetrated by their religion. You are living in denial.
Catholics are just as bad. You are blind to the hate in the Catholic church. You want to think that you are good Christians, making constructive contributions to finding solutions to the problem. Well that's not how I see it. All I see is happy smiling people stabbing each other in the back when no one is looking.
I think I've said enough. I'm not trying to offend anyone here. I just see all religions as evil and I don't see things getting better. And that scares me, because as religious believers continue to destroy each other, it's innocent bystanders like me that are going to be caught in the cross fire.
-
I would agree with your point about how religions should take responsibility, but after that, you lose me.
Your projected sense of enlightenment seems so humorous (actually sad) because your view of the world, and people, is so simplistic. Putting labels, as well as signing up people for these group think philosophies, might make your view of the world all neat and simple, but that isn’t reality.
-
Sadly, our anger over what a few people have done to America has affected our view of an entire people group. But there is hope. My wife, Renée, learned this firsthand. Her story, excerpted here, swept across the Internet within hours of 9/11:
I don’t know what I expected when I wandered into the Saudi Arabian exhibit at the World’s Fair, but I wasn’t there long before I wanted out. Brown-uniformed guards watched our every move. Even before leaving the oppressive atmosphere of the exhibit I determined Muslims weren’t anywhere in my future. Let other people with different hearts reach out to these people—I didn’t want anything to do with them.
Within a year, however, my husband, David, and I found ourselves in a Portland coffee shop greeting a friendly man and his traditionally dressed wife. We chatted and found out that not only were they Muslims, but Hamid and Fatima were from Saudi Arabia. Not only were they from Saudi Arabia, they were from Mecca—Muslims to the core.
Rebuked by visiting relatives for their lack of American friends, Fatima and Hamid were thrilled to meet another couple with children. We began to spend time together as friends. That winter, we took their family to the mountains to go inner tubing. The next summer, we spent a delightful day at the beach. We ate American meals together and enjoyed Fatima’s wonderful Arabic cooking.
We began to see Hamid and Fatima not simply as “Muslims,” but as unique individuals we knew and loved…
-
Suppose someone from a Muslim country visited a local church this weekend. How would he or she be greeted? Warmly? Or with suspicion? Sadly, I think the latter is more common.
My friend Abraham Sarker found this out the hard way. He gladly shook hands with a church greeter. The greeter’s ready smile quickly disappeared, however, when his hand brushed against something hard in Abraham’s suit jacket pocket. Immediately, the greeter led Abraham to the side of the foyer and frisked him. The hard object in Abraham’s suit turned out to be a cell phone. Still, Abraham felt embarrassed and humiliated. If this had happened a few years ago, Abraham would have walked out of that church and never returned.
Abraham was born into a devout Muslim home in Dhaka, Bangladesh. At age thirteen he joined the Jamati Islamic Party, trained to be a Muslim leader, and successfully began evangelizing people in his own country. At age fifteen, however, Abraham had a terrifying dream about hell, prayed all night, and then heard God tell him: “Go and get a Bible.” Abraham’s Muslim faith was shaken. Still, at age nineteen Abraham was sent to the United States on a student visa to help convert Americans to Islam.
Upon arriving in America, Abraham received a Bible in his own language as a gift. Later, an American named Peter befriended Abraham, heard his claims about Islam, and over time introduced Abraham to the life-changing gospel of Jesus Christ. At first, Abraham was skeptical, but he earnestly prayed, “God, lead me in the right direction.” Like many Muslims, Abraham wanted to know more about Adam, Noah, Moses, and Jesus, but he was not familiar with their English names (he knew Jesus as “Isa”).
Abraham wanted to hear what Peter and others did (and didn’t) believe about God, but he reacted negatively if anyone referred to Jesus as “God” or as “the Son of God.” Peter realized he had to choose his terms carefully and build on the truth that God is One (as Jesus did repeatedly with the Jewish people).
Eventually, Abraham surprised his friends by committing his life to Jesus Christ. He went on to earn his doctorate at a prestigious Christian university.
Unfortunately, as the story of the cell phone illustrates, this doesn’t mean Christian churches always welcome Abraham—or others from Muslim nations—with open arms. Our anger over what a few people did to America has affected our view of an entire people group. It’s also affected our relationship with God. In many ways, we’ve pushed the real God out of the picture.
-
“Immediately, the greeter led Abraham to the side of the foyer and frisked him"
What church did this occur in? I cannot even fathom that this happened in any mainstream church.
Your first story doesn't surprise me in the least, Muslims are pretty much like anyone else. But some random greeter takes it upon themselves to lead someone aside, and then frisk them? Pretty hard to swallow.
-
Ironic that the Muslim visitor in this story was named "Abraham," since collectively Judaism, Christianity, and Islam are referred to as "Abrahamic Faiths," meaning that their founders all came from the line of descendants that began with Abraham, who was told to go into the wilderness and sacrifice his only son, Isaac. (Sound familiar? This is echoed in the story of Jesus, as well, and summed up in John 3:16.)
But I do think it is entirely possible that a greeter might take a Muslim visitor aside and frisk them...this is not much different from the "offence" of driving while black (or brown), which many blacks and Latinos have been pulled over for. (Ask Professor Gates about his adventure with the Cambridge Police last year.)
-
Islamophobia? Americans need to be a very great deal more concerned about fanatics, whether they're Christian, Muslim, Fundamentalist, etc. Let's remember that red-blooded Americans, i.e., Oklahoma City bombers, Branch Davidians, and Jim Jones loudly proclaimed their Christian membership. Their terrorist acts combined killed almost as many as 9/11. Christian terrorists, euphemistically known as "militia groups," like the Huttaree, are capable of equally lethal acts. Finally, the most powerful and politically fearsome terrorist group, the NRA, deserves our eternal and utmost fear. The astonishing collateral success of its incessant demands for an ever-widening array of guns in the hands of an ever-widening group of people directly translates into blood-spattered America. With mind-numbing regularity, news media report daily gun maimings and killings of Americans.
-
Hallelujah, (pun intended) newts,
The fanaticism you speak of is the root cause of the worst of our (world's violence) problems. It is interesting that the psychopaths that claim Christian identity do not make a convincing argument to paint the religion with the broad brush.
All three religions of the book (Jeudaism, Christianity, and Islam) all have violent parts to their teachings. It might have something to do with the fact they were not written recently.
As a an owner of a number of guns, I disagree with your opinion on the NRA and private firearm ownership. Although I would rather donate my money to the FMF than the NRA, I don't view the NRA as a threat.
-
I am not Muslim, but feel very concerned about growing islamophobia, not just here, but in all of the U.S. and in Europe. I worry that politically conservative extremists are spinning a message of fear and hatred. Instead of challenging the fear and hatred, the media reports it as "news" and gives it credibility. Economically, times are hard, we are involved in senseless wars and there is a lot of angst among many people about the security of their futures. That is when it becomes dangerously easy to find a scape-goat. I am very worried that the right wing in this country is creating this scape-goating histeria toward Muslims.
It would be so great if Portland could be different. My dream would be that we could show that we are a community that comes together and truly honors and respects everyone--of all faiths and nationalities.
As a community, we are only as strong as the compassion and understanding that we hold as our standard. Once we have lost that, any one of us could be a victim.
-
I think that fanaticism for religious matters is bad for the society and the people. Faith is a very personal thing and I think that everybody should be free to believe whatever he/she wants. I think that Muslims are more fanatic with their religious because their educational level is usually lower than the people in the west.
Car Insruance For Women
-
FROM PRIOR POST OCT2010.
Our Constitution has no problems with a defined role of religion in society and politics. There is FREEDOM of religion guranteed by the Constituition. And it has largely been successful for over 200 years. We have welcomed believers from thousands of peaceful religions and they have been integrated successful.
However WE CANNOT TOLERATE VIOLENCE: religious sponsored violence, violence in the name of religion, crusaders, martyrs or TERRORISM. And this is the critical issue of our generation.
Let say there is a hypothetical religion that has in its central tenets a ritual of human sacrifice, murder of a victim and cannibalism. (Their theoretical basis is that they are all part of one oversoul and particular traits or genes of the vicitim such as courage or strength can be shared and personal sacrifice begins in the circle of life--life begins, after a life ends.) Even if it is a spiritual base of this religion, IT CANNOT BE LEGALLY be permitted under the rubric of Freedom of Religion. IT violates human rights and is a crime. So we have tolerance of religion based on PEACE. WE SHOULD NEVER TOLERATE RELIGION USING VIOLENCE.
In our time we see not state-sponsored violent revloution like Red Communism, but rather an international religious-sponsored violent revolution (Also called the Green Revolution, based on Arab flag colors) that has even reached Oregon. Oregon is the only state to have hosted an Al Quaeda Cell complete with target practice and bomb making training. We have a PDX mosque linked with plastic bomb residue. FBI investigation continue actively.
jacob — Wed Oct. 6th 8:58a.m.
-
In the past 30 years, 95% of world wide terrorism is related to Radical Islam. Islam has veins of violence. The Koran gives prescriptions for stoning(ie. Death by rock throwing not MJ), amputation for stealing, and sundry whipping for varous misdemeanors. In 30 Islamic countries, religious conversion from Muslim to another faith is a crime of Apostasy, punishable by death. Talking favorably about the Bible, Buddhism Vinaya Pitaka, or even Wiccan beliefs in an Arab country is punishable by death for prosletyzing. Drawing a stick figure cartoon of Muhummad is punishable by death. If my house burned down, my library consumed with my copy of my Koran and my other religious text references, I will get a Death Threat for the burning of my Koran Copy. Singing Christmas Carols or Kumbaya will get Death Threats. Believing in Santa Claus and decorating a Xmas Tree in Saudi Arabia will get death threats.
There is a choice put forth by the Koran: Convert or Enslavement.
And now there are active threats to Americans traveling to Europe, but there has always been long standing threats in travel to Arab countries, Muslim countries, and countries struggling with violent Green Revolution.
Critical Survival Skill: Recognize a threat when you see it. Violence and Terrorism has NO role in MODERN SOCIETY. And Freedom of Religion cannot be a bridge to VIOLENCE and the flaggarant violations of Human Rights.
Let Islam be a Peaceful Religion, But We Cannot be Tolerant if it is otherwise.
jacob — Wed Oct. 6th 8:58a.m.
-
You can also get threats from having a nativity scene in the US. Some Saudi's, as well as some people in other Muslim nations, also get really worked up about Valentine's Day, happens ever year.
I spend a lot of my time in Muslim countries, and have met and gotten to know hundreds of Muslims in the past 10 years. I have yet to feel threatened, preached upon, or at all rejected. Quite the contrary, the Muslims I have known have always been gracious and welcoming. Your view of the Muslim world is quite typical for Americans though, and that is unfortunate.
-
A few years ago, we had a City Manager down here in Eugene who got his panties in a bunch over a Christmas tree in the Hult Center, and took it upon himself (without consulting the City Council, if I recall) to issue an edict banning all holiday decorations -- whether they were for Christmas, Hannukah, Kwanzaa, or the Winter Solstice -- in city offices. Now if that isn't intolerant, then I don't know what is.
-
Soggy,
I have traveled to Muslim countries. The Mosque is generally the oldest, most ornate and most historic building in a town. But I have universally been denied access to mosques--sometimes politely other times not. I am also forbidden from entering the city of Mecca before even asking. Why so secretive? Why so forbidding? Why do they reguard strangers with paranoia?
Are your experiences more open?
-
Of course no non-Mulsim can go to Mecca or Medinah. Not my country. The only mosques I have gone to have been more historical, like the one next to the Citadel in Cairo, or the one by Khan Al Khalilli bazaar. Haven't tried to go to any others
-
That would apply to Cathedrals in places that are historically Catholic, as well. They often were the most ornate, most important building, aside from the castles of nobility (kings, dukes, etc.) in the land. Think of such examples as Notre Dame Cathedral in Paris. (Yes, I know that France is Officially a secular society, but historically they were predominantly Catholic.)
-
Soggy,
Have you ever asked Why can't a tourist go to Mecca?
A muslim can go to St Peter's Basilica. A muslim can go to the Taj Mahal, the Cathedral of Canterbury, the Pyramids or the Moromon tabernacle in SLC.
Mecca is supposedly one of the most wonderous sites in the world in architecture and in spirituality.
What if someone forbid you based on your race from ever visiting or experiencing the Grand Canyon?
These laws are arbitrary and unfair. And unjust laws must be violated for a just society to emerge.
Your beliefs are very limited based on annecdotes. Sorry but the real world is wider and deeper.
-
With respect (sincerely), you are wrong. Up until around 2006, the country with the largest number of terrorist incidents was...get ready for it: Columbia. Terrorism is not the exclusive domain of any religion and by taking an emotional stance on the issue you empower the architects of terror. This divide that is increasing is exactly part of the goal of separating muslims from non-muslims. What you and everyone else outside the counter-terrorism community need to understand is that the goal is not an Islamic one; it is the goal of the terrorists who want to unify them against the "west." Terrorism isn't a REAL threat to the United States. Obviously no one believes me so do this: research the stats for the number of annual deaths from: auto accidents, deaths related to trees (falling trees/industrial accidents), and terrorist related murders. If we are serious about recognizing and avoiding threats, stop driving and start biking everywhere.
When we accept jihadi propaganda (letting terrorists be identified as Muslim) we are empowering the terrorists. "Hearts and minds" works both ways. If we have to accept ABL as the massiah (caliphate in the Islamic venacular), as Christians we have to accept David Koresh, Jim Jones, and Eric Rudolf as our lords and saviors.
Whatever your opinion is on any religion:
religion (any of them) does not equal terror
If you are a Muslim, you are not a terrorist
If you are a terrorist, you are not a Muslim; you are an apostate (read a book NOT A BLOG listeners if you don't know what that is).
-
Have I asked why I can't go to Mecca? Because there is complete intollerance of any religion besides Islam there. Yes, I am quite aware of this. Doesn't change the fact that individual muslims can be completely tolerant, while the goverment(s) act differently.
-
Soggy:
If an American Jumbo Jet is blown up in mid air today---Quick-- Who would you suspect?
ALL MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRRORISTS.
However today, 2010...
ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIM.
It is a sad fact, if you have read the news headlines for the last 30 years.
Yes we have mentally ill violent Americans who use religion as a tool. Statistically 2% of the American population is Schizophrenic.
However we only have 2% Muslims, and they are associated with 95% of all bombings. It is not just the mentally ill, but the violent religious sects.
We have to deal with our mentally ill. But we do not have to be inflicted with violent exports of international terrorists.
-
Yes, if a bombing occurred on a plane today, I would immediately suspect an Islamic terroist because they have been behind the majority of these types of incidents in the recent past. I do not disagree.
So what is your solution? Eliminate all Muslims because that is the only way you can effectively get rid of the "few bad apples"?
My recommendation is for more interaction between all peoples, so we can unite against our common enemies. Not like I see that happening anytime soon either.
-
ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIM. -- jacob — Mon Dec. 13th 9:59a.m.
Really?!?!? What about Timothy McVeigh, Terry Nichols, David Koresh, Unabomber Ted Kozinsky (I admit...I may have misspelled that one), Scott Roeder, Eric Rudolf? All professed to be Christians, so your assertion that all terrorists are Muslim just does not hold any water.
How about the terrorists who released the Sarin gas into the Japanese subway system about 15 years ago? They weren't Muslims, either.
How about the Spanish terrorists who bombed the trains in Madrid in March 2003? They weren't Muslims, either.
Or how about the "Troubles" in Belfast, Northern Ireland? These are Protestants and Catholics who are at odds with one another, as well as Irish Nationalists who are at odds with the English Crown government. Again, none of these parties are Muslim, are they?
-
Penny. You have an error of fact. The Madrid Train bombings in March 2004 was due to a islamic cell of 30 immigrants inspired by Al Quaeda resulting in 10 simultaneous train bombs killing 191 persons.
"ALL MUSLIMS ARE NOT TERRRORISTS.
However today, 2010...
ALL TERRORISTS ARE MUSLIM. "
My statement refers to the present, TODAY.
The Unabomber, Koresh, and OKC bombings were all over 15 years ago.
Interestingly, after 9/11, many terrorists groups foresworn terrorism because of the brutality of the single incident.
How do you cure IRA terrorism?
Ans: a 9/11 Event.
We will always have our own domestic nut cases like the Wilsonville bombing. But we do not have to give Iranian, Afganistan, and Pakistan bombers free access to our Christmas Tree lighting ceremonies.
Be safe. And keep a watchful eye.
-
I'd like to see a citation for that statistic, to verify that it originates from a reliable source. I value your input, however that particular statistic seems rather off-base, and I agree with Soggy Portlander. There is a great deal of terrorism from Columbia, in addition to the LRA that is based in africa. The LRA is based off of radical Christianity. Because that man who started and commands the LRA believes that he is conducting the work of God, does not mean that the rest of Christianity endorses that claim.
-
Thank you for having this much long needed show. As a Muslim I often feel helpless when the media portrays the truly peaceful Islamic faith through the actions of extremists who use and abuse Islam for their own political agenda and when the media uses so called pundits who know very little about Islam to slander it. The true Islam to me and to over 1.5 billion people around the world is a religion of kindness, peace and tolerance. The constant media portrayal of Islam through the wrong actions of ignorant or psychopathic individuals who misrepresent the faith is as if the actions of the Klu Klux Klan were portrayed of being representative of Christianity or the terrorist Kahane group the representation of Judaism. Please have more shows like this in the future.
-
I think people of your faith or mine or anyother faith must all work harder at dealling with the people in our midst who pervert the teachings of faith. The problem is you canot just as I canot expect of you to learn all aspecs of every religion and therefore only the people of a perticual religion or any religion for that matter have to be responcible for their own religion. Otherwise people of no faith will try and slove it and there lack of knowledge will end up gutting any religion into just a shell of what it is really meant to be.
-
Actually I am more scared of extreme constitutionalist militia types than followers of Islam. The USA exceptionalists that somehow believe our Constitution was divinely inspired and who are constantly preparing for the "coming conflagration" are more numerous in the PAC NW.
The root problem seems to be the consistent efforts of strident Christians to "convert" everybody else to be "disciples for Christ". It just pisses everybody off and sets up a perpetual "us vs. them".
The basic cultural clash between the West and Islamic extremism is no illusion. There really is something to guard against. However, I don't think the conflict will be resolved on any sort of religious tolerance basis. Violence and conflict are secular issues and need to be addressed outside of any religious framework.
-
Why would you be afraid of the constitution? Weather or not you believe in god there is a very good reason it sais our rights come from god it is because our founders came from contries where rite were given and taken away by governments. If your rights come from God then they can not be taken away by government.
The constitution is rather remakable in that wren something is repealed or replace the old stuff stays in as a reminder to people of the things that were tried and failed.
The constitution has only failed such as in the case of slavery when the bill of rites was considered to be seperate thing. Had people looked at the two as one as it was meant to be. Slavery would not have ben or would have been abolished sooner.
-
I agree with the comment "If you're not scared, then you're not paying attention." Except I would up that a notch to "terrified." I consider myself middle-of-the-road when I think of politics (which I try very hard not to do - think of politics, that is, just thinking of politics makes me want to go wash up to get the "dirt" off). I do honor diversity. Despite this I frankly fear Islam and here is why. Our own laws in this country are currently being used against us to permit the creeping in of the application of sharia law. Google the news about that topic and look at what already happened in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Oklahoma. The latter state's citizens were so concerned about the increasing application of sharia law per se that they "tried" to pass laws against it. You can read the results online. It is only one small short step to having sharia law imposed upon non-Muslim persons once it has gained a foothold. So if you think down the road that you would like to punish rape victims by stoning them (not their rapists) to death, or cutting off the hands of thieves, if you are women being forced into child marriages and wearing of clothing not of your choice, by all means, support the presence of Islam in this county. If they will attack Sweden which is arguably the most peaceful, nonviolent, nonpartisan, immigrant-welcoming country in the world, they will attack anything.
-
My Comments To-day:
We tolerate ALL religions. BUT WE MUST NOT TOLERATE VIOLENCE.
And Violence in a community must be addressed especially by all members of that sect, especially leaders. And quiet condoning and private support is not an option.
Our society must make crucial long term sustainable a rational choices.
Imagine if a transcontinental plane flying from LAX to NYC blew up today killing hundreds--likely due to a passenger carried on-board bomb. And Two weeks later the same thing happens on a flight from SFO to ATL. And Three weeks later a United 747 goes down in the Pacific Ocean with loss of 500 persons.
And simultaneously there are nationwide attacks of Public gatherings, sports events and churches killing dozens from Boston to Bend.
Even the most progressive liberal, would argue for a military presence, comprehensive body cavity search of passengers, racial and religious profiling, and a 'No flying while Muslim Policy.'
Liberalism has its limits; Humans under stress will only take so much when existential survival is the bet.
But this is not the rational and sustainable policy.
The solution lies with convincing our muslim brothers of the legitimacy of Change through NONVIOLENCE. Like Martin Luther King and Gandhi. We must reward legitimate nonviolent protests like the Tibetan Buddhists who have been peacefully mounting protests for the past 50 years. We should give them a forum, moral support, our money and land....Not oil money to Arabs. Medieval muslims think of conversion by the sword. But secular Northwesterners are too post modern to be badgered. We must not just punish the bad, but reward the good.
IGNORING A PROBLEM WILL NOT MAKE IT GO AWAY.
-
Perhaps the guest can differentiate between "sensible wariness and care" from "Islamophobia". There is obviously murderous intent out there that needs to be guarded against.
That said, everyone's civil liberties need to be protected and respected.
-
I come from a mixed religious tradition of Paganism and Buddhism. I don't think the issue is really that hard to see: people are so afraid of what they don't understand and what they have misinformation about.
The mistaken belief that all Muslims are waging violent war on every American or non-Muslim, or that they are all violent or in support of those who are is incredibly ignorant. It falls into the same line of thinking of saying that just because a handful of Christians have attacked gay people or organizations that ALL Christians will, or that because some Pagans (my own religious group) have been associated with Satanic rituals that we are all linked to them.
People need to understand that religions are made up of PEOPLE who are always interpreting and REinterpreting the tenants, and that people are subject to bias, politics, and corruption. It isnt religion's fault, Islam or otherwise, it's HUMAN FOLLY on both sides.
-
The major religions are all violent in the end. Even if the believers themselves don’t condone violence, they outsource it to ‘god.’ God who will get rid of the wicked, or send them to a hell. To suggest that most religions are not inherently violent is a luxurious view, the threat of this violence is what keeps people in shape, this fear of god’s wrath is largely what makes these religions work as they do. It is fair to question whether one religion favors or is prone to violence more often then others. And many people come to the conclusion that Islam is more violent.
The religious can’t have things both ways, they can’t claim they are all the same---they don’t have that right because it doesn’t make logical sense. If all religions were the same then why are there many? Because they are all different, it is fair to assess those differences, and it is fair to go a step further and decide which religions are more of a threat, which religions you respect and which religions you dislike.
Religion is not race and ethnicity. Because of atrocities like the holocaust, in an attempt not to repeat them, it has become impolite to speak ill of a particular religion. Which is completely inaccurate! Religions are ideologies of choice. If it is fair to dislike Republicans or Democrats then it is fair to dislike Christians, Jews and/or Muslims, because you don’t like where their ideology leads.
I don’t like Muslims, but I also don’t like Jews and Christians either. Why would I? They all believe I deserve death, some because I am gay, and others because I am a non-believer---the flock may not personally carry out my demise, but god will take care of me in the end. And you have to ask why I don’t like them? Why I don’t like people who can’t stand me? And not only can’t stand me but go a step further and think I don’t deserve life. In return, I don’t go that far in my views towards them, because that would be crazy. But I am not going to make nice and pretend we are all apples and apples. I am only intolerant in response to their inherent intolerance. I don’t take any action against these religions, I simply don’t have room for their views and don’t respect their ideologies or the people who believe them. Which seems like a healthy and rational response to intolerance.
-
Despite your stereotyping, I don't believe you deserve death.
Although I do pity you because of your all encompassing views of other people. An excellent example of why many of those who preach "diversity" are actually some of the least tolerant people.
-
Soggy Portlander,
What stereotyping? Perhaps you would also encourage me not assume all white supremacists are racists? Is that the sort of thing you want? You want me to ignore the ideology of religions or make exceptions for people who may not really believe those things they allege to believe, and they align themselves with, because they take a lose interpretation of the faith they supposedly follow? Exactly what are you on about because it is not making sense?
Now that I have read your other comments I can see why it is not making sense. You seem to propose that Muslims must be nice, good people because they are polite in public. What a laugh! Lots of egregious people have good manners and can be polite. You don’t use superficial qualities to attempt to speak deeply about an ideological group. You look at their beliefs and what they actually mean and say about the world and the other people in it---where these beliefs lead and the implications of them.
I think what you are inaccurately doing is requesting I pretend all Muslims are somehow 'French,' and, well, French people are all different so Muslims must be too. But the important and paramount distinction is that France is a country, it is not an ideology. To be French means nothing concrete, or nothing beyond the superficial. To be Muslim, means you attach a complete ideology to yourself, an ideology I do not like, because it does not like me. It is an ideology that is inherently exclusive, and at base, bigoted towards other views about the explanations of the world. I can tell you have many good intentions but unfortunately they are, for all of us, sadly inaccurate.
-
What stereotyping? Don't insult my intelligence, re-read your own post.
I'll stand by my statement that "many of those who preach "diversity" are actually some of the least tolerant people."
I don't have "absolute" opinions about any collective group of people. You also seem to have some "anger issues".
-
I'm sorry your experiences of people of religious faith have been so negative. Sorry NOT because I think you should change your spiritual beliefs, whatever they are, but because it is an unhappy way to view the world. But it is a false generalization. For at least one corner of Christianity that doesn't think God will send you to hell for either "non-belief" (although, as a one-time hospital chaplain, I would say "different belief," because everyone puts faith in something) or for being gay, see, e.g., http://www.goodshepherdberkeley.org/.
I'm not trying to sugar-coat. I know that your description of Christianity is accurate with respect to much of it in this country, and that Focus on the Family is a much more powerful organization than Progressive Christianity in an Episcopal church in Berkeley with gay priests as members.
But one of our persistent logical fallacies is to think that because we can use a single word to describe something, that it therefore has an existential unity. And then we compete for who gets to define that single reality. And then we confuse "numerical majority" with "normative," and end up with ideas like "most people are disposed to love people of the other sex, therefore all people should love people of the other sex." Or "most Christians believe in a divine judgment and condemnation, therefore all Christians believe non-Christians go to hell." Which makes as much logical sense as to say "most dogs have four legs, therefore this thing that appears to be a three-legged dog isn't really a dog."
And one of those Christians may well reply to this post to say that I'm wrong and that all "true" Christians believe non-Christians will go to hell. Because that is the next step in this logical - or illogical - path. If the word necessarily refers to a single "thing," then we have to compete over who defines "that thing." But if we could see "Christian" as a term used in our language to refer to a field of beliefs and practices, with respect to some of which there is significant overlap and with respect to others of which there is significant divergence, then we wouldn't need to argue about who is a "real" Christian.
-
Thank you JWMS, I could not (and obviously did not) have said it better.
-
Soggy Portlander,
I would prefer you actually address the profound objections that I have provided or combat them, because you have done neither. All you have alleged is that I am stereotyping, whatever that means in this instance? It is a nice buzz word, but, you need more then that. Saying I don’t like Muslims, Jews or Christians because of their ideologies is um, not stereotyping. Or at least not in the negative way it can be assumed you are alleging. I would prefer that I am incorrect, because it would mean better things for the world, but you have certainly provided nothing to invalidate what I proposed.
-
I don’t like Muslims, but I also don’t like Jews and Christians either. Why would I? They all believe I deserve death.
I am Christian, I don't believe you deserve death.
OK, so you made me take the trouble to point out the obvious.
Anything else you need?
-
Soggy Portlander,
Yes, I need a better argument from you. Then you alleging how you are the minute minority Christian that doesn’t believe I deserve death, based on some new interpretation of Christianity. So what exactly is the point of your version of Christianity? If nothing bad is going to happen to me, then what is the benefit of Christianity for you personally? What will happen to me exactly in your interpretation of Christianity assuming I don’t believe in god and am gay? -
Sorry, but you seem to have mistaken me for a public school system, not my responsibility to educate you.
-
Soggy Portlander,
Good work! Exactly as I expected, when you are cornered you have nothing to say. I am well versed in the religions of the world thanks, that's why I find your views unbelievable and when challenged it is clear you couldn’t provide them. It is obvious that most religions wouldn’t last long without a good and bad component, what would be the point? If you didn’t get eternal benefits from practicing a certain faith then why bother? Oh to lead a better life here and now?! There are many other ways to do that without getting wrapped up in a religion.
-
Glad you are happy. And I was thinking you were just filled with anger, but you evidently have more depth than you project.
-
Soggy Portlander,
Nice to know you are changing the ‘stereotypes’ you felt about me. I would have felt much happier with an answer to the questions though. You would think that someone who actually pitied someone would provide them, but pity is pretty dirty and slippery word... .
-
How refreshing Soggy!! I'm from Somalia, 100% Muslim and would love to take you out for Coffee/Tea anytime as a token of our peoples' gratitude :)
-
JMWS,
I don’t have any spiritual beliefs. I am not entirely sure what you mean by ‘it is an unhappy way to view the world?’ That my allegedly bad generalizations are just unproductive? Or, the implications of them, if they are true, provides a sad outlook on much of the world?
Even if we disregard the gay issue to make room for the watered-down brand Christianity has become, or just assume that all Christians love gays, you are still left with the fundamental problem, that you have in almost all religions, that some people must deserve an added benefit in life or after-death from believing or practicing that religion or else what is the point. If some people get a benefit then it automatically makes a statement about the people who don't. Even if a religion doesn’t implicitly say what will happen to non-believers, it can be assumed that something different will, or that there must be some benefit from practicing this religion that people who don’t won’t receive. Even if they don’t implicitly claim their way is the correct way, it can only be assumed it must be the better way, or why do it at all? People who claim they love people of all faiths, but they practice only one specific faith, have made an unequivocal decision in on direction, and by proxy that decision is exclusionary of other ways or that there must be a way at all.
Many are grasping at straws with these secular interpretations, trying to market one branch of religion to a modern audience. They try to twist things in unbelievable contortions to try and not be held accountable at all, sometimes for their bigotry, and other times, simply because they have decided that they have found the answer to life’s potential mysteries and all the other answers are wrong, even though they won’t come out and say it. So now I am asked not to say things about Christians as a group, because they are all different, but they are not all different in the very real sense that they are Christians, just as all dogs are dogs. I can say I dislike ALMOST ALL Christians because of their ideologies or I can say I dislike Christians because of their ideology. I think that distinction is a bit insulting to everyone, that one needs to modify commonsense when speaking about Christians to make room for the unbelievable contingent that has utterly modified any standard view of the religion to suit their demographics to the point that if they really believed everyone was equal then the religion would be rendered useless.
-
Scott, you really come off as a tortured sole. I do hope that I am mistaken, but it does seem to border on paranoia to think all of these people are so focused on you. Most people, religous or not, have no real interest in you.
And while I do think we have drifted away from the topic of today, I do believe that your view of the world is consistent with what most Americans think about Muslims. So many seem to be obsessed in thinking that Muslims actually have an interest in taking over the west. From my experience, the muslims that I have known are mainly interested in: 1) their family, 2) their career, 3) their faith, 4) their friends, 5) SOCCER, and, 6) basically living a peaceful and enjoyable life. Pretty much the same as anyone else.
-
Soggy Portlander,
I have no idea, based on what I wrote, why you would come up with, that I think all these people are focused on me and am somehow paranoid about it. I assume it is because you are using cliched assumptions and generalizations about the type of person that would claim not to like Christians, Muslims or Jews. Which is entirely the problem with much of what you have written today, it is all cookie cutter banal rhetoric, that doesn’t understand the conceptual complexities of religion and it implications, whereas JMWS comes from a similar angle (even though I don’t agree), but at least shows the intelligence to think about these issues on a deeper, challenging level. And instead of answering the question you have now resorted to another angle of attack. Perhaps I am tortured, tortured by the fact that people who you would expect to display more thought, ‘liberals’ are almost as incapable as everyone else, it doesn’t bode well for the future, though I assure you, I am not paranoid about it.
-
Scottmill states:
I have no idea, based on what I wrote, why you would come up with, that I think all these people are focused on me and am somehow paranoid about it.
But, Scottmill previously stated:
I don’t like Muslims, but I also don’t like Jews and Christians either. Why would I? They all believe I deserve death.
Not much of a leap for someone to suggest that might sound a little paranoid.
-
Deqa - I'd take you up on your offer of coffee anytime. But it really isn't necessary for you to extend a token of gratitude on behalf "your people" (as you stated). My boss, most of my co-workers and all of my customers are Muslims, so it isn't necessary for you to convince me of something I am already aware of.
But you can never know too many people :)
-
Soggy Portlander,
It does not sound paranoid. Perhaps you don’t get it! Hum... Yes, that is correct, most religions think that gay people don’t deserve salvation in whatever form, heaven, everlasting life, etc... and usually that results in death or at the least in no-life. Not sure how stating that makes me paranoid? And considering I mentioned how many have outsourced this de-lifing to god, and considering I don’t believe in god, then I am not much, paranoid about it!
Perhaps you were being overly literal and felt I thought the religious people were all going to come and kill me now---nope!, I know enough about religion to realize it isn’t that crazy.
-
You did not originally say "most religons", you originally cited absolutes in regards to whole populations of people.
You originally said, ALL CRISTIANS, ALL MUSLIMS and ALL JEWS ALL believe that YOU DESERVE DEATH.
In my book, that is completely paranoid, as well as obsessively narcissistic. You need therapy, not a dialogue with me
-
Soggy Portlander---Your level of dialogue is definitely not worth my time, or anyone’s, not because it is rude or impolite, it merely isn’t any good. It is perfectly acceptable to think of me however you would like, and additionally to twist the context, the syntax, and quite frankly the content, of what I have said to suit you. Have fun with it! Why do you keep clinging to this limited angle that isn’t even working for you? Even if you could substantiate that I was somehow paranoid (which I am not by the standard definition), it doesn’t do anything to further your argument or to combat my argument.
-
Your guest from CAIR makes a good point -- why do we not refer to Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols as Christian Terrorists? That's exactly what they were, whether they were acting on their beliefs or not. If we are going to call the Shoe Bomber, the Underpants Bomber, or the 9/11 hijackers "Islamic Terrorists," then we need to be even-handed and do the same with all terrorists, regardless of their faith (or lack thereof).
-
Here's some lyrics I enjoyed from the last of Montreal album:
"An afterlife is nothing to live for
Nothing to die for, nothing to fight for
If those in this life are not sacred
Then nothing that's a part of it is sacred either" -
I like that.
-
I am angry at, and resentful of mainstream Islam, because I think it has reacted inadequately, and not forcefully enough, against the Jihadist element within it. I am also resentful of today's guest, because by comparing the Jihadist element within Islam to a Christian fundamentalist who murders an abortionist, he minimizes the strength of the Jihadist element. He treats it as if it is a fringe element, but in fact it is a strong one, that in fact controls an entire nation -- Iran -- exerts a strong influence in another -- Saudi Arabia -- and exerts strong influence in many other Islamic nations through the Muslim Brotherhood.
-
The lack of a "perceived" response from mainstream Islam is common complaint. A lot of that is attributable to the fact that there is not a "central hierarchy" for Islam in the way it exists in other religions. At the same time, there is no shortage of outrage and condemnation of Islamic Terrorists, but you actually have to pay attention to find it. Trying exposing yourself to more media organizations based in the Muslim world and you will find it for yourself.
-
Soggy: Yes, there is no hierarchal structure in Islam. But there are symptoms; for example, a few years ago, the Imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca gave a sermon during the Haj. Thus, this was a speech to the faithful, delivered by the spiritual leader of one of the most holy, if not most holy mosques in all of Islam, during its most holy time. The Imam concluded his sermon by asking Allah to "glorify the Muslims, and destroy the Jews.' A similar remark during similar circumstances in a Jewish or Christian setting would have been met with widespread condemnation and outrage. Do you think that is how this sermon in Mecca was received?
-
I have no idea because I never heard about this incident. Which is my same complaint about the condemnations, there is very little coverage of either in the western media.
My guess, is that there was a reaction to his statemet by King Abdullah (although that was probably also private). You had better believe the government of Saudi Arabia has been implicitly instructed that Israel is off limits to them. The huge weapons sale that recently occurred would not have without assurances that they would not be used against Israel.
-
Goggins is absolutely correct. Christians should denounce fundamentalists who use violence and muslims should do the same with Jihadists.
When you are talking about life numbers may be to some degree meaningless but there is something different about killing 10-20 people at a abortion clinik and 3,000 people. They are both wrong but claiming them to be the same thing is not rite either.
-
My first exposure to Islam was in the 80s in a Religions of the World class at BYU in Provo, UT, where we used a text book written by Spencer J. Palmer. We learned in one of the sections about Muslim beliefs including the life of Muhammad, the Qur’an, Allah, the Five Pillars of Islam, etc. We also discussed the commonalities of our religions: although they do not believe Jesus is the son of God, they do accept him as a prophet born of a virgin; they believe in physical resurrection, they fast and pray, dress modestly, pay tithes and have an emphasis on family. ... I had an opportunity to meet some wonderful Muslim families while living in the melting pot of Houston, TX. in the 90s. I babysat a disabled child for one family from Saudi Arabia, and my 5-year-old son was best friends with a boy from Iran (we had other neighbors from Poland, Russia, Turkey, Bangladesh and India). This was before 9/11, however, I still believe Muslims are wonderful people, and we shouldn’t judge them harshly based on a few radicals.
-
A "fear" trigger for many of us is the covering or masking of one's face. We have been programed to be wary because this is common among people who create violent crimes. Even a full beard is concerning since that is an unusual fashion in western society.
George in Portland
-
I do not harbor any fear or apprehension towards muslim people any more than I hav fear or apprehension towrads christians, jews, or catholics.
I am always wary of these cult followers, as a great man once said:
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -Blaise Pascal
All religions are based on fear and hatred yet they claim they are about peace and love.
As Edgar Allen poe said
"All religion, my friend, is simply evolved out of fraud, fear, greed, imagination, and poetry."
Until people stop following religion blindly there will continually be violence against any who are different.
I apprecaite the diversity that otehr cultures bring such as the culture from the middle east, however I do not welcome their religion any more than I welcome the many organized religions in this country.
The greatest diservice to the USA is the tax exemptions for these large organized for profit cults.
-
Of course, no one should "follow religion blindly." If a faith demands blind obedience you should avoid it. Also, no one should assume that their own mind is infallible and that they could not benefit from hearing other people's insights in ultimate reality. Including poetry, and including a space in which one can experience grief and fear and imaginatively make creative and healing connections. And profit-making enterprises of churches are subject to tax: the unrelated business tax. In my own church, we would be happy some year to just break even!
-
I think most people relise it is the minority of muslims who are terrorists I think people get tire of having to say Muslim extreamists, especialy since no one really gets bent out of shape if you do not say christian extremist if a christian does something wrong.
I find it interesting that a bomber or a person who atempts a bombing is not considered a hate crime??? Isnt it isnt bombing pioner square an attempt to kill those you hate?
The bomb may be fake (thank God) but if at the time the peson who attempted to set it off did not know it was fake and they beleived they were going to kill people and that persons reasoning is they do not like the people or the culture of the people he wants to kill, how is that not a hate crime?
-
Hello Folks!
It's ISlam NOT I-Z-lam
In other words: The S is an S as "Must" or "Sister"
It's not a Z as in Zerba
so again iSSSSlam not iZZZlam!
And MuSSSlim not Muzzzlim!
Thanks! it's just annoying to keep hearing the Z sound...
-
yeah and New Orleans is pronounced New Awlins, but the rest of the country still pronounces it New Orleans. What's your point?
Germany is Deutschland,
Japan is Nippon
etc
edit: my point is, language is fluid, not static
-
To look at it from historical precedent, 1000 years ago Christians were performing these acts and were called Crusaders. The weapons are different, the tactics have changed, and it's for a different religion, but the intent is the same: "Destroy the outsiders, so we may reclaim our holy lands for our people."
As we see things today, the destruction is taken to where the outsiders are strongest, and just as then, the religious followers are split over the use of violence. The only way to resolve the issue is to encourage non-violent behavior, and to accept the non-violent more completely into our communities. By learning more about the religion, and finding common ground, we can move forward in a productive way and meet the needs of all of our neighbors.
-
I was surprised and saddened to hear your commentor from the group purporting to promote understanding of Muslims referring to Muslims as "these people" and making stereotypical comments such as that they speak the language and would be likely to come into contact with terrorist extremists. "These people" she refers to are our friends, our neighbors, our coworkers. They may have been born here, may speak English as their only language, and may be indistinguishable from you and I except for the manner in which they choose to worship. I'm disappointed that even someone from a group that is supposed to promote understanding chooses to look only to a portion of the Muslim community, and by doing reinforces stereotypes.
-
Louisa (the caller) has her times wrong. The attacks on 9/11 all occurred in the MORNING, not the afternoon. My partner and I woke up to the news as delivered by Bob Edwards on Morning Edition. We turned on our tv to CBS's video feed, but kept the radio on NPR for the audio.
-
I'm sorry but Louisa was just plain ignorant!
-
I try really hard to not be scared of all Muslims. But when encountered I feel fear and panic grip me in a way that is hard to ignore.
I am sure that 9/11 has something to do with it.
But this fear really formed from my dealings with Muslim individuals as a resident manager at Portland State.
They were rude and aggressive. The men that lived in my building had no problems making threats directly to my face.
The women, one of which was my lab partner wouldn’t allow me to touch her* it was a hands on A&P class!* or even really communicate with her.
I guess my real problem is the times that I have had to have daily interactions, I came away feeling that I’m better off avoiding, since it always seems to be a negative experience. I don’t know if that make me phobic, or just a person who has learned from my personal experiences
-
Of course, it is minority of Muslims who participate in violent jihad, just as is is a minority of Roman Catholic priests who are pedophiles, and it was a very small minority of Puritans who actually burnt witches in New England. But I think that the term "islamic terrorist" still pretty accurately describes the problem. Pretending that they are just "a few bad apples" may prevent both Muslims and non-Muslims from seeing the problem, and if you cannot see the problem you cannot solve it. Imagine if we said that there is no achievement gap, but instead it's just a few smart kids and a few not-so-smart, and color does not matter? If we put it that way, we cannot solve it, because there is no problem--just a few kids with a few differences. People are driven by ideologies, and wahabi Islam clearly has a very strong ideology of violent jihad. This ideology produces not just a few bad apples, but hundreds and thousands of militants who are fighting and are ready to die. I am not saying who is right and who is wrong: maybe they are fighting for a good cause, and maybe the West really offended them in some way. But to pretend that these are just a few bad guys with no country, no religion, no ideology, and no cause--is just ridiculous and dangerous, as it gets us nowhere.
-
While I'll defend the Muslims I have known, I have no problem with terms like Islamic terrorists.
At the same time, I'd take issue with your statement " I am not saying who is right and who is wrong: maybe they are fighting for a good cause, and maybe the West really offended them in some way." Really, you are not going to condemn anyone who kills innocent people? Some people fear being termed judgmental, when that is the most appropriate thing to be.
And the one guest who finished by being a 9-11 denier just lost all credibility.
-
No actual "witches' were burned in New England. They only burned people who were falsely accused of being witches.
-
No, no, I am not at all saying that it is ok to kill innocent people. I do condemn 9-11. Of course! That kind of stuff cannot be justified. But I also find no justification for invading Iraq. We teach our kids that two wrong do not make a right. Well, instead of killing bin Laden (who, btw, is still alive and well!!!), we invaded some other country that had nothing to do with our 9-11 and the civilian death-toll is now around 100,000--that is 37 times (!) more than the 9-11 deaths. I don't know who started this conflict--the Muslims when they invaded the Christian Constantinople (it is still occupied and known as Istanbul), the popes who sent knights to free the city (unsuccessfully), the British 100 years ago, the American oil companies in the 20th century--I don't know, but that's why we have all'em politicians who are supposed to be fixing the problem. Instead we pretend that bin Laden and the millions who support him and ones like him are jest a few bad criminals. It is indeed criminal not to see the larger issue.
-
You will get no argument from me on what you have stated. Unfortunately you are exception, most people can't be bothered to contemplate the "big picture" because they want every neat and tidy with the good guys in white hats and the enemies in some foreign garb!
-
I think of religious and political leaders as ventriloquists who use their unseen supernatural-"God"-dummy to tell their followers what to do and believe.
If the ventriloquist is a good person they have their supernatural-god-dummy tell the followers to do positive Secular Humanism to each other, love and forgive, live the Golden rule, and other things like that that are relatively good and not harmful.
If the ventriloquist is an evil person they have their supernatural-god-dummy tell their followers to do evil things, like G W Bush declaring "let's attack Iraq" and then putting the supernatural-god-dummy stamp of approval on that Declaration of War with "God Bless America".
But it is important to always remember that it is the ventriloquist who is speaking the words, not some "real" supernatural-being-god.
People who believe in religion put their control outside of themselves and potentially in the control of evil people.
And that is why I am anti-religion. I would rather teach people to take internal control of themselves and build and reinforce their own inner moral compass, so that when some "ventriloquist" tells them to do or believe something in the name of his/her supernatural-god-dummy, the person checks inside and rejects the ventriloquist.
Religion has always been used politically to manipulate and control The People and just as we have rejected the idea of kings and other such dictator types and embraced democracy, we ought to embrace personal responsibility and self control and reject religion and religionists.
-
I am a counselor in Dallas, Oregon and have a couple of comments. It is common for people to generalize their fears; it takes conscious consideration to see individual differences. This in no way excuses the tendency to generalize but explains the human instinct to protect ourselves. So, it becomes important to provide clarity and contrast to these ways of thinking. And, from what I hear from your Muslim participants it is a risk to do that.
My other comment relates to to thousands of military personnel that are returning from Muslim countries. These soldiers/marines have met pain and death at the hands of "Muslims." I understand this may be a limited percentage(terrorists) but the impact is felt on a deep and traumatic level by many.
-
I agree that person-to-person friendship is the best way to move from stereotypes to understanding. But it should not be on the shoulders of Muslims to educate everyone and counteract the ignorance and lies being spread. (Sharia law taking over London, for example.) We all have a duty to educate ourselves, and not just by cherry-picking pieces of the Koran and thinking "I understand Islam." As a Christian with an M.Div., I wouldn't assert a complete understanding of even my own faith! And it is one of the principles of inter-religious dialogue that we not take the best parts of our faith and compare it to the worst of others. A good place to start is with the statement by Islamic scholars in response to Pope Benedict, about those common principles held between Islam and Christianity. There are passages in the Koran that appear to promote violent spread of the faith, and historically that was mainstream at some points, just as there are passages in the Bible that, taken literally, promote violence and genocide and, historically, that was mainstream at some points (the Crusades, for example). But religions, like other parts of culture, change and mature. We owe it to ourselves and our neighbors to acquire religious literacy.
-
This fear of Sharia law being imposed amazes me. If someone came up with the idea of putting "In God We Trust" on our money today, the opposition would be deafening (and this would occur in a country where +80% would consider themselves Christians). I think this fear of Sharia Law being imposed is more just one of those "rabble rousing" topics for right wing politicians and talk show hosts.
-
By the way, Soggy, it hasn't been all that long since "Under God" was inserted into the Pledge of Allegiance (1954). In fact, there was a non-custodial parent a few years ago who tried to sue over that when his little girl recited the Pledge of Allegiance in school. The Courts ultimatetly decided that he lacked standing to bring the suit, as the Mom had custody of the little girl. But yet, he is more than happy to collect his pay in U.S. Currency that bears the motto, "In God We Trust."
Most, if not all, religions have similar core beliefs, and chief among these I believe is "Do unto others as you would have others do unto you." I have heard a more eloquent way of stating it, however.
That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. That is the whole law; the rest is explanation; go and learn.
-
Soggy Portlander
In New Jersey I believe a judge did nto convict a man of beating and raping his wife. the reasoning behind the desision was it would impose on the mans religios beliefe that his wife was his property. Do you want to guess what religion this man claimed?
-
As you must know, the Abrahamic religions espouse (yes, literally) violence. It seems naive or disingenuous (if one is literate) to use phrases like "appear to promote violent......" when the passages in the bible AND the Koran, when read by any reasonable person, advocate violence. Fundamentalists DO read their "holy" books literally. Why can't "moderate/tolerant" christians and muslims admit that their bibles promote violence? To paraphrase Goldwater--- "moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue". As recently as the 1960's the bible was used to justify slavery (the new testament condones slavery) and today the Koran is used by some Muslims to justify the killing of infidels. Western Christians seem to have evolved to the point where suicide bombers are not revered by their mothers. We do go to war and kill, but at least give lip service to the "collateral damage" we inflict on non-combatants. Our Imams (Falwell, Robertson, Graham) are controlled by the rule of law.
-
I haven't heard anyone address the misogyny and oppression that Islam perpetrates against minorities and women.
Is a fear of Islam because of the violence and hate toward women Islam-phobia?
Every time I see a woman in a head scarf I see an oppressed woman with no way out. It makes me fear the ignorance and small mindedness of the Islamic faith.
-
Head scarves are a very personal piece of many religions that signify a multitude of things. Are there persecuted women in head scarves? Sure there are, and that is unfortunate. Are all scarved or covered women, Muslim or otherwise, oppressed? Absolutely not. Education about these traditions, reasons, and beliefs would benefit everyone.
-
My understanding is that a woman in a head scarf is much more likely to be asserting her own personal religious identity, like a Christian woman wearing a cross on a necklace. I watched a seminar from Trinity Wall Street with a participant who is a feminist Muslim scholar, and had lawyer colleagues who only stopped wearing a head scarf when they faced persistent job discrimination from it.
I do have a negative reaction when I see a woman in full burkha walking with a man wearing ordinary "western" dress. It makes me angry, and I do think she is being oppressed. (It is different when both a man and a woman wear distinctive religious dress, like Hasidic Jews.)
But I have the same reaction when I hear the Pope reaffirming strictures against birth control, which I think deprives women of their moral choice, or when I go to a fundamentalist Christian wedding and hear a sermon on "wives being subservient to husbands." I fear the power of oppression and reaction. But I am trying to get over fearing Islam as such because of that, because I think fear of Islam is being whipped up for an agenda that is part of what I fear.
-
I have been staying quiet this whole show but I have to say this: Nice to know we now have 9/11 conspiracy theorists on TOL. Give me a break! How ridiculous. Those attacks were carried out in the name of Islam. Plain and simple. Don't get me wrong. I have have Muslim friends and family. But statements like that are outlandish.
-
Spot on, she really lost me when she started talking about no human remains being found in Pennsylvania.
-
Why is it that terror atacks are put in the frame of a hate crime against western culture?
-
Well, opposition to being assimilated into western culture is a pretty much a collective goal of Islamic terrorists. Maybe I missed your point?
-
I think not wanting to be a part of wester culture is fine if you do not live in a western country mving to a western country and then changing it is a problem.
My point was more to that you do not hear terror atacks labeled as a hate crime but isnt it?
Isnt a terror ist bombing whoever did against whomever basically saying, I hate you, or I hate your culture or whatever so I am going to blow you up? Yet if someone sais calls someone else a terrorist that is a hate crime?
I gues in general I dislike the whole hate crim thing the crime is the crime If I beat someone up because the owe me money or if I beat someone up because I do not like something about them the actions I took were wrong what does why have to do with it unless it was elf defense.
I gues what I am saying is no one wants to say that the Jihadists are commiting a hate crime but you never hear it labeled that way Why? A terror attach seems like an impersonal demeaning of the action.
For instans first worl war we had shell shock
the combat fatige in WWII
Now it is post tromatic stress dissorder.
The term are less and less personal and we wonder why the people with sufer more and more from them Maybe because the term is less personal and more clinical there for whe treat think clinicaly rather than remembering there are people involved who need to be treated as person not a desees or alfiction.
So why is it we are supposidly committing a hate crime but the terrorist are committing terror attacks. It makes it sound like people are atacking our system and we are attacking people but the dont knock down building they kill people.
Because of the language difference creats a feeling that they are fightins system and we are fighting people which implies a morral posative to them or a negative to us which is byass
-
I lived briefly with my French relatives in the South of France.
Of course, it is irrational to apply any generalization to every individual in the domain of the generalization. But, I am generally fearful of fundamentalists of any creed. I certainly, as a generalization, fear fundamentalist Christians as greatly as I fear "Muslim extremists." Frankly, I have difficulties with the argument that only peaceful Episcopalians and Quakers are Christians, but violent or bigoted Christian fundamentalists are not.
A large percentage of the Muslims in France seem to be hostile to historic French culture (for example, of equality, especially when it applies to Women), of separation of church and state, etc. I believe that the preponderance of practitioners of some forms of Islam really favor some form theocratic government, just as do American fundamentalists do who want their dogma to be enforced by laws.
I support secular government, and think we ought to think twice about encouraging immigration from sub-cultures, whatever they name the religion they practice, that are hostile to the idea that people with different ideas can live together peacefully without fear of having someone else's views imposed on them.
-
I think that Mark Twain put it best when he said,
"No generalization is any damn good, and that includes this one."
If nothing else, it is a warning against generalizing, I think.
-
Humans divide up into in groups and out groups, but we share very much as we are humans. Those with Autism, for what ever reason, do not build or can read the emotions and feelings of others, those with Narcissism see only them selves also but in a very different way. Most Humans can see and read and understand others and the divisions are there and enforced by our need to divide up into groups and cancel out that empathy by making the other not the same form or type of human or to de-humanism them.
Within any religion one can find all different mixes of emotional and moral types, but authority and purity of a particular sect or group determines how thses are accepted or suppressed, and it is by groups withing any of the religions of the world.
We need to understand morality at a deeper and more human level and to see that the patterns can be seen as how certain things are weight amoung just a few axis.
here is an excellent video on how moralities can be analysed that works and crosses across religions and cultures. This is a TED Talk about 20 minutes long:
http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html
hope the link works in the comments.
-
it is interesting that many believe that it is wrong to kill in the name of religion, but not in the name of one's country.
according to all major religions of the world, and human ethics, killing is wrong. period. not for God, nor i believe for country, nor for retribution, punishment (as in capital punishment).
islam, whose name translates to peace, is no more violent than any other religion (such as christianity, which killed thousands or more during the crusades and inquisition, as with capital punishment today), and is not being true to itself when it resorts to violence and war and killing.
bottom line.
salaam and shalom, peace to all in this world.
-
Why is it that the crusade are always used to say christians killed tons of people but christians were not always the instigator and the other side killed just as many people
-
Islamophobia is RACISM, plain & simple!
It is such racism that has saddled Muslim people with, say for prime example, the so-called 9/11 attacks. Considering that Muslims - extremist or otherwise - had absolutely NOTHING to do with 9/11! Why all this focus on so-called "Islamic extremists", considering that this very country was "founded" by European, illegal alien, CHRISTIAN invaders who wiped out 90% of the aboriginal population, imported SLAVE labor, & held up a system of APARTHEID for more than a hundred years post-slavery?!
Ask yourselves, HOW did the twin towers fall? HOW did Building no.7 fall? WHY were there NO human remains found at the PA crash site? WHY is there NO video footage of an actual PLANE crashing into the Pentagon???
Question, or wallow in ignorance - your choice...
http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2010/11/403954.shtml
-
I suggest you look at the history channel show about consperacy theories involving 9/11 and get your facts strate.
-
Also it seems to me that while that may be a part of our past as westerners we have moved on and made great stides in how we treat all people since then.
In comparison I would have to say that I do not think the musslims have move as far especially when you take into account things like seria law.
-
Umm "frankj", it's spelled straight & muslims. And this country is still awash in CHRISTAIN terrorism. America hasn't come as far as [you] think.
-
Feel free to correct my spelling all you like it make my point no less valid. Yes there are christian extreemists as well and christian should call them out as well as muslims should do with people of their own religion.
I did not say we were perfect or that we did not have far to go. What I am saying in basically a hundred years we went from having slaves to going to other contries to try and keep people from being enslaved or killed.
Somehow in in the same time period Sheria law still want to chop off the hands off of those who steal and stone those who comit adultery. Wait is it only woman who comit addultery? or is it only woman who get stoned for it?
I thinkn there are things in everyones past we should learn from and thing s in everyone past we can be proud of none of us are perfect or even close. I think some parts of the east or muslims or how ever you want to catigorize it have not take some of the stepps we have.
Did they take stepps ahead of us two or three hundred years ago in sertian aspects of life absolutely. We took other steps forward but all still have more to go.
-
I'm "Michael from Tigard," today's first caller.
"Islamophobia" literally means "fear of Islam." Who's afraid of Islam? A few years ago, Yale University published a book about the Danish Cartoon Incident. The book did not contain the actual cartoons. Why not? The publishers were afraid they'd be murdered the way that Theo van Gogh was for making a movie that some Muslims objected to. That's fear of Islam.
To call those of us who are determined to continue the fight against jihadism "Islamophobic" is fundamentally mistaken. We are not "afraid of Islam," we are angry at the jihadists. Calling us "phobic" is either inaccurate thinking or an act of propaganda.
Our country is under threat from jihadism. Not all Muslims are jihadists. But jihadism emanates from within Islam. We are under no obligation to be stupid about defending ourselves by ignoring the source that jihadism springs from.
We remember watching thousands of Americans faced with a choice between a raging inferno behind them and 100 stories of empty space in front of them. We remember a big hole in the wall of the Pentagon. We remember the heroes of Flight 93. We remember.
We live in the world of 9/12, not in the world of 9/10. I choose to think clearly about jihadism. That's more important to me than worrying about whether someone might decide to (inaccurately) call me "Islamophobic."
-
The mistake most people make is underestimating the STRENGTH and SUPPORT of the Jihadist faction within Islam, as compared to any similar faction within Judaism, Christianity, or Hinduism. There is nothing comparable in other religions to the Muslim Brotherhood, or Hamas, or the tens of thousands of Imams in Pakistan, Iran, and other countries who DO preach militant Jihad. There simply is a much, much stronger strain of triumphalism and militarism in Islam, than there is in other religions, and, as Mr. Trigoboff suggested, it is more like a "phobia" to IGNORE that thread, in today's climate of repeated, violent attacks, than it is to look clear-eyed at the truth.
-
Michael, fyi flight 93 was completely empty when it crashed into that field in PA, just so you know. Hence, NO bodies were recovered from the crash sight. Sure, we got to see afew token body bags - Hell knows what was actually in them. And why would you hang up as soon as the show's host took your call?
Anyways, good luck battling against "the eeevil jihadists"... in Tigard.
-
DamosA said: Michael, fyi flight 93 was completely empty when it crashed into that field in PA, just so you know.
Sorry, I don't buy the various 9/11 conspiracy theories. The vast majority of the American People don't, which is to their credit.
And why would you hang up as soon as the show's host took your call?
They were having trouble with their system. It's supposed to beep and then you're on. The first two times, it beeped and then there was nothing but static. I called back each time, and the third time it worked like it was supposed to.
Anyways, good luck battling against "the eeevil jihadists"... in Tigard.
I have a Brooklyn accent, not whatever it is you're trying to evoke by the way you're spelling "eeevil."
Mohammed Mohamud came from Corvallis. If it can happen there, it can happen anywhere.
-
"I have a Brooklyn accent,..."
Well apparently you live in Tigard,OR now, but that's really aside the point. There's no "jihadists" in Brooklyn, either. So again, good luck & godspeed on your personal "crusade".
"Mohammed Mohamud came from Corvallis. If it can happen there, it can happen anywhere."
What happened in Corvallis, besides some redneck attempting to burn down a mosque? Where are these killer jihadists that you speak of?
-
It seems to me good old-fashion casual racism has been part of a proper "post-9/11 mind set"
Fear and loathing has run ranpant in the republic.
No religen will help. No partry will help. No corp. will help.
Befor the republic can stabilize and sustain us into the future we must wilfully overcome our ignerance and paranoia to see the path we are all on togather.
OOPS guess we'r SOL
-
It seems to me good old-fashion casual racism has been part of a proper "post-9/11 mind set"
It seems to me that you are too quick to accuse anti-jihadists of "racism." That's a pretty serious charge. It's perfectly possible to be anti-jihadist without being racist.
-
It's also very possible & most probable to be totally racist & xenophobic, while hiding behind a phony front that one is simply "anti-jihadist".
Gotta love how the racists are too cowardly to admit being racists. Which is why they invented codespeak.
-
Some Muslims won't acknowledge conflict between Qur'an and Sharia law. Qur'an (XXIV.2) penalizes adultery by 100 "stripes" (lashes); Sharia law requires death. In Portland in 2003 Dr. Seyyed Hossein Nasr, then University Prof. of Islamic Studies at Geo Washington Univ., said there's no conflict. Difficult to have rational discussion on this basis. We're waiting to learn if an Iranian woman will be executed for adultery. The young unmarried mother of a 2-yr.-old child was sentenced to death by stoning in 2002(?) in Nigeria (?), but sentence overturned on appeal. "Taqiya" (permitted dissimulation of one's true beliefs) said to be obligatory for Shi'ites when dominated by others. Imam Ja'far said "Mix with enemies openly but oppose them inwardly when authority is a matter of question. " Sunnis were in charge then, but does it apply now to dealings with the West?
-
Here are some books that are relevant:
What Went Wrong?: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East, Bernard Lewis, 2002.
The Looming Tower, Lawrence Wright, 2006.
It's good to understand the context from which our jihadist enemy emerges. That knowledge can help us defeat them.
-
Hmm, so what is so wrong with actual reality that people pretend to believe in the supernatural-god-dummy of the ventriloquists?
Hello!
Reality calling!
Any takers beside me?
It's too quiet out there.
...
-
I'm with you Tom. The best we can is to stop glorifying faith in general. I'm sure we "non-religious" people out number all the delusional ones...too bad we can't get together on Sundays to raise tax-free money.
-
Art.
Hmm, United In and For Reality! Sounds good to me.
-
well my Name is Hasaan & i was amazed to see that Think out loud team had cut my call from the recording , You guyz did not limit your show to one state or country , If someone is listening abraod and he want to speak , i think that is ok, But was really amazed that what sort of freedom of press u guys have , that if a pakistani called in your show , you cut his piece from the program recording, take care Julie & All of think out Loud Team
from
Hasaan
Pakistan
shanihashmi01@gmail.com
-
Comments are now closed.
If you're not scared, then you're not paying attention.
Anyone that prays to an imaginery "god" is dangerous as far as I'm concerned. Be they Muslim, Christian, Jew, Hindu or whatever!
Humanity has to evolve beyond these destructive religions before they blow up the planet.
God is great......BOOM!