P
purple
Guest
The real debate?
This is a real debate and while we should be very careful not to be racist of xenophobic and make comments like "Go to any mosque in a western country - they are the guys in nightdresses with the long beards" as they undermine any argument that one makes. We should equally not brand everyone who questions the wisdom of allowing a culture that is totally alien to secular democratic values to take a foot-hold in the secular democratic west as a racist.
Europe went through two hundred years of religious wars in the 14 and 1500's before the modern nation state that allowed religious freedom as long as is took second place to loyalty to the state.
Islam seeks to create a society or state on earth that is totally bound up in the writings of the Koran, as does Christianity. The difference is that Christianity no longer seeks to impose this on th outward workings of the state and so in that sense is an internalised religion. In other words what goes on in your head and the purity of your intentions are what matter; it aint what you do, it's why you do it.
Islam on the other hand does still seek to impose it's rules on everyone within it's sphere, even if they abide by the rules only in body and not in spirit (i.e. if you fast and pray etc at the right times you will go to paradise even if you fantasize about murder every day) and so Islam can be said to be an externalised religion.
Because of this Islam, in it's still very fundamentalist form(when compared to modern Christianity), is not compatible with the society in which we live and sees the liberties and personal freedoms that we enjoy as undesirable and immoral.
Fundamentalist Christianity, if it was distilled to the same extreme extent, is just as dangerous.
The issue here is peoples fear of the loss of liberty and freedom which goes with any form of totalitarian or fundamentalist system.
How can you not agree with that Piggy?"If it just means the replacement of one genetic stock with another genetic stock, that doesn't matter too much. But if it involves the replacement of Western Civilization with a different civilization with different cultural values, then it is something we really ought to discuss."
This is a real debate and while we should be very careful not to be racist of xenophobic and make comments like "Go to any mosque in a western country - they are the guys in nightdresses with the long beards" as they undermine any argument that one makes. We should equally not brand everyone who questions the wisdom of allowing a culture that is totally alien to secular democratic values to take a foot-hold in the secular democratic west as a racist.
Europe went through two hundred years of religious wars in the 14 and 1500's before the modern nation state that allowed religious freedom as long as is took second place to loyalty to the state.
Islam seeks to create a society or state on earth that is totally bound up in the writings of the Koran, as does Christianity. The difference is that Christianity no longer seeks to impose this on th outward workings of the state and so in that sense is an internalised religion. In other words what goes on in your head and the purity of your intentions are what matter; it aint what you do, it's why you do it.
Islam on the other hand does still seek to impose it's rules on everyone within it's sphere, even if they abide by the rules only in body and not in spirit (i.e. if you fast and pray etc at the right times you will go to paradise even if you fantasize about murder every day) and so Islam can be said to be an externalised religion.
Because of this Islam, in it's still very fundamentalist form(when compared to modern Christianity), is not compatible with the society in which we live and sees the liberties and personal freedoms that we enjoy as undesirable and immoral.
Fundamentalist Christianity, if it was distilled to the same extreme extent, is just as dangerous.
The issue here is peoples fear of the loss of liberty and freedom which goes with any form of totalitarian or fundamentalist system.