Ideas To Stop Islam

[Ahh!]

The title of this thread pretty much speaks for itself. How are we going to stop Islam from causing more trouble than it already has?

[Dhampir]

Stop giving in to it? Fuckin'-A man, most of fundamentalist Islam (not just the terrorists) would to most people appear to be a bully that's forcing everyone to un-ass their lunch money. The reality is that it's an 18-month old baby who cries for everything because it knows that it's parents will cave eventually.

 

PUT the little motherfucker in it's crib, shut off the goddamn baby monitor, and let it throw a couple tantrums for the next 2 weeks or so, and then it'll learn what it rightfully deserves, and to demand nothing more than that.

 

In other words: Stop giving into it!

[The Sage Nabooru]

Short answer: You can't.

 

You can't stop "Islam" from causing trouble any more than you can stop rape, murder, theft or any other crime in the world. The best thing you can do is make sure that a person grows up and lives happy, healthy and well-treated so that they have no reason to attack others. If you try to suppress them you're only going to make them angrier.

 

Besides, you can't "stop" Islam, simply because of practicality. Many people seem to think that they really can eradicate religion or atheism or feminism or sexism from the globe if they just work hard enough, and can depend on their followers to do the same. But you cannot stop people from being Muslim if they choose to be. You can stop them from carrying bombs into airplanes and stop them from insisting that stores they drive past on the way to work paint their windows black lest women be inside, but you will never get rid of all the Muslims. Might as well learn to work with them rather than against.

 

Of course even then some of them will kill. That's the nature of reality in the human world; you cannot eliminate the vices that plague it entirely, ever. In the US we've had birth control for about fifty to eighty years now (depending on what you define as "birth control"). We have abortion clinics open and offering their services and sex-ed classes in school. And yet millions of kids get pregnant with unwanted or unsuitable pregnancies every year. The fact is despite the push we have towards wearing rubbers there are still people who will not do so for whatever reason. Look at those countries which try to suppress such movements. Has China succeeded in eliminating religion? Has Iran not produced a single atheist or ex-Muslim? Did George W. Bush assure the salvation and Rapture of every American citizen? You cannot control what people feel and decide in their hearts and minds.

[Legion]

I'm no sociologist, but I think the best way would be to support Ex-Muslims. They have their own apostates just as we are apostates of Christianity. I think Ex-Muslims would be best equipped to deal with the mind set of Islam.

[Ahh!]

Short answer: You can't.

 

You can't stop "Islam" from causing trouble any more than you can stop rape, murder, theft or any other crime in the world. The best thing you can do is make sure that a person grows up and lives happy, healthy and well-treated so that they have no reason to attack others. If you try to suppress them you're only going to make them angrier.

 

Besides, you can't "stop" Islam, simply because of practicality. Many people seem to think that they really can eradicate religion or atheism or feminism or sexism from the globe if they just work hard enough, and can depend on their followers to do the same. But you cannot stop people from being Muslim if they choose to be. You can stop them from carrying bombs into airplanes and stop them from insisting that stores they drive past on the way to work paint their windows black lest women be inside, but you will never get rid of all the Muslims. Might as well learn to work with them rather than against.

 

Of course even then some of them will kill. That's the nature of reality in the human world; you cannot eliminate the vices that plague it entirely, ever. In the US we've had birth control for about fifty to eighty years now (depending on what you define as "birth control"). We have abortion clinics open and offering their services and sex-ed classes in school. And yet millions of kids get pregnant with unwanted or unsuitable pregnancies every year. The fact is despite the push we have towards wearing rubbers there are still people who will not do so for whatever reason. Look at those countries which try to suppress such movements. Has China succeeded in eliminating religion? Has Iran not produced a single atheist or ex-Muslim? Did George W. Bush assure the salvation and Rapture of every American citizen? You cannot control what people feel and decide in their hearts and minds.

 

See above; stop from causing trouble, not stop period.

[pandora]

I'm no sociologist, but I think the best way would be to support Ex-Muslims. They have their own apostates just as we are apostates of Christianity. I think Ex-Muslims would be best equipped to deal with the mind set of Islam.

 

I think that is a great idea. Are there any famous Ex-Muslim writers? I seem to vaguely remember one I read about in the New York Times.

[מה טבו]

See above; stop from causing trouble, not stop period.

 

I'd have to disagree with even that. Simply put, it's not going to happen in our lifetimes. Remember the history of Christianity - the witch hunts, inquisitions, and Crusades? The legalized discrimination and abuse of non-Christian citizens? That's very reminiscent of the current state of Islam. Christianity lost its hold on world governments over time, which is why you don't see the widespread legally sanctioned violence in the name of Josh that you once did. Islam, however, has quite a foothold in international politics, and will likely continue to have it for some time to come. Christianity is still widely practiced, and with much douchebaggery, but without the power of the state sanctioning the barbarism of the church, the church has lost some of its former brutality. Christianity had to evolve into a less violent version of its former self, which is why Christian fundies are usually dicks, but only a few go about killing people. Hopefully the same will eventually happen to Islam. In that day, however, it will probably be replaced by some other new and violent religion. (Warriors for Scientology, perhaps? Extremist Oprah-ism?)

 

I've observed from my limited study of history that religion tends to lose its stranglehold on government and on the populace at large around the same time. Which causes which - I don't know.

[Dhampir]

I'm thinking if it were relegated to islamic countries, it wouldn't be such a problem for Ahh! wouldn't be a problem for any of us, I imagine. The christian atrocities were committed largely because they went unopposed, and that was mainly because there was next to no one to oppose them. We are hearing more and more stories about how islamists are forcing their beliefs to take precedence over the laws and ethics of non-islamic countries, with the people giving ground because of the fear of being intolerant, as well as the fear of violent reprisal. Hence my earlier comments.

 

The sorts of things that go on in islamic countries will probably last the next few centuries, however, the shit that's been happening outside of them CAN be stopped.

[Astreja]

I like the idea of supporting ex-Muslims.

 

Even better is challenging those pesky Islamic apologists who wander onto discussion boards. Raise difficult questions and demand answers. Pound away at presuppositions until the façade of certainty cracks and they have to think outside the doctrinal box. It also serves the purpose of educating neutral parties who may be observing the dialogue.

 

Whatever you do, don't stop trying. It's only hopeless if we think it is. And, personally, I think it's quite doable.

[Legion]

I'm no sociologist, but I think the best way would be to support Ex-Muslims. They have their own apostates just as we are apostates of Christianity. I think Ex-Muslims would be best equipped to deal with the mind set of Islam.

 

I think that is a great idea. Are there any famous Ex-Muslim writers? I seem to vaguely remember one I read about in the New York Times.

Hey Pandora. It may have been “Infidel” by Ayaan Hirsi Ali. I don’t know. Or perhaps it was Dr. Wafa Sultan. Apparently she is working on a book now.

 

 

This is a transcription of what Dr. Sultan had to say on Al-Jazeera...

 

"The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on the other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations to not clash, but compete. ... ... ...

 

The Muslims are the ones who began using this expression. The Muslims are the ones who began the clash of civilizations. The Prophet of Islam said: 'I was ordered to fight the people until they believe in Allah and His Messenger.' When the Muslims divided the people into Muslims and non-Muslims, and called to fight the others until they believe in what they themselves believe, they started this clash, and began this war. In order to stop this war, they must reexamine their Islamic books and curricula, which are full of calls for takfir and fighting the infidels. ... ... ... I am not a Christian, a Muslim, or a Jew. I am a secular human being. I do not believe in the supernatural, but I respect others' right to believe in it. ...

 

You are free to worship whoever you want, but other people's beliefs are not your concern, whether they believe that the Messiah is God, son of Mary, or that Satan is God, son of Mary. Let people have their beliefs. ... The Jews have come from the tragedy (of the Holocaust), and forced the world to respect them, with their knowledge, not with their terror, with their work, not their crying and yelling. Humanity owes most of the discoveries and science of the 19th and 20th centuries to Jewish scientists. 15 million people, scattered throughout the world, united and won their rights through work and knowledge. We have not seen a single Jew blows himself up in a German restaurant. We have not seen a single Jew destroy a church. We have not seen a single Jew protest by killing people. The Muslims have turned three Buddha statues into rubble. We have not seen a single Buddhist burn down a Mosque, kill a Muslim, or burn down an embassy. Only the Muslims defend their beliefs by burning down churches, killing people, and destroying embassies. This path will not yield any results. The Muslims must ask themselves what they can do for humankind, before they demand that humankind respect them."

 

Whatever you do, don't stop trying. It's only hopeless if we think it is. And, personally, I think it's quite doable.

I agree Astreja.

[Legion]

We are hearing more and more stories about how islamists are forcing their beliefs to take precedence over the laws and ethics of non-islamic countries, with the people giving ground because of the fear of being intolerant, as well as the fear of violent reprisal.

Heaven forbid that one is labeled intolerant Dhampir!

[Vigile]

I think if we stop invading Muslim nations they will be more apt to leave us alone.

[Grandpa Harley]

I'm no sociologist, but I think the best way would be to support Ex-Muslims. They have their own apostates just as we are apostates of Christianity. I think Ex-Muslims would be best equipped to deal with the mind set of Islam.

 

I think that is a great idea. Are there any famous Ex-Muslim writers? I seem to vaguely remember one I read about in the New York Times.

 

Salman Rushdie springs to mind... the Satanic Verses was fictionalised account for him 'falling out of love' with Islam.

[BobbyCole]

It make take years and decades to stop the spread of Islam and its warped sense of what they think is right. But as a start to put a dent in the numbers and distract them for quite a while would be a nice 9.0 earthquake right in the center of Mecca at the height. This way,earthly justice could be done by the God of nature and not man himself. I wouldn't cry or have any sense of sorrow for these sick bastards who follow their sick leader. Christianity in 2007 is ill, sick, warped, and the list of adjectives can go on and on. But Islam in 2007 is dangerous. They want to take over the world and will kill anyone for the sake of getting into their phony heaven. They must be stopped in their tracks by a means other that by human hands.

[Ro-bear]

I think reducing and eventually eliminating our dependence on foreign oil will go a long way to end our problems with the Muslim world, because with the decline of oil as a commodity we lose our only reason to involve ourselves with Muslim society at all. When we aren't even there, it will be hard for Muslims to perceive us as the enemy. It would also help if we cut the apron strings with Israel. They are really nothing but a liability to us at this point. Without us, they would be forced to make peace with their neighbors or ultimately succumb to them.

[Legion]

I think if we stop invading Muslim nations they will be more apt to leave us alone.

I guess we're back at it Vigile.

 

Do you really believe that if we pulled up stakes and left all Muslim nations that they would just leave us alone?

[R. S. Martin]

I'm no sociologist, but I think the best way would be to support Ex-Muslims. They have their own apostates just as we are apostates of Christianity. I think Ex-Muslims would be best equipped to deal with the mind set of Islam.

 

If exMuslims are as successful in dealing with the fundamentalist Muslims as exChristians are in dealing with fundamentalist Christians, well, need I say more........

 

It's fundyism that needs to be understood and attacked. And that's the aim of my "Foundation." I'm not too hopeful of accomplishing more than accumulating info in my lifetime but we can at least do that. Getting a handle on sociology and psychology of religion are key, in my opinion. This is deeper than theology. We gotta figure out what makes the fundy mind and heart tick so we can untick that heart and mind and make it tick the right way. Clocks should go forward, not backward. And the fundy hearts and minds tick backwards. They see only gloom and doom in the present world but they think there was a golden age in the past and they want to turn the clock back to that golden age. Problem is when they get there, there is no golden age at all. It's just another period--an earlier period that had its own problems of gloom and doom. There is no time like the present and no place like right here. "Bloom where you are planted!"

[Vigile]

I guess we're back at it Vigile.

 

I hope not, for as much as I enjoy talking to you, debating this subject with one another seems to come to a standstill.

 

 

Do you really believe that if we pulled up stakes and left all Muslim nations that they would just leave us alone?

 

 

My opinion is that the religion has been used by those with political motivations who have fanned the flames of hatred. Those fanning the flames are motivated not by dogma, but by power issues, many of which are influenced by US ME policy.

 

I disagree with many on the idea that wars are fought for religion. Instead, I believe that political elites use religion to get the man on the street behind the war. Wars are more generally fought for resources and power. This was true even of the Crusades.

 

Without the politically motivated imans fanning the flames, I think most of these guys would be content to sit in the tea shops smoking a hookah than strap a bomb to their chest and walk into crowded discos.

[Legion]

I guess we're back at it Vigile.

 

I hope not, for as much as I enjoy talking to you, debating this subject with one another seems to come to a standstill.

Agreed. On all points.

 

Do you really believe that if we pulled up stakes and left all Muslim nations that they would just leave us alone?

 

 

My opinion is that the religion has been used by those with political motivations who have fanned the flames of hatred. Those fanning the flames are motivated not by dogma, but by power issues, many of which are influenced by US ME policy.

 

I disagree with many on the idea that wars are fought for religion. Instead, I believe that political elites use religion to get the man on the street behind the war. Wars are more generally fought for resources and power. This was true even of the Crusades.

 

Without the politically motivated imans fanning the flames, I think most of these guys would be content to sit in the tea shops smoking a hookah than strap a bomb to their chest and walk into crowded discos.

What about those who agree with you that this is not about religion? It's about civility vs. barbarism.

[Dhampir]

I disagree with many on the idea that wars are fought for religion. Instead, I believe that political elites use religion to get the man on the street behind the war. Wars are more generally fought for resources and power. This was true even of the Crusades.

Just thought that bore repeating

[Vigile]

What about those who agree with you that this is not about religion? It's about civility vs. barbarism.

 

They have a right to that opinion. Though I would point out that barbarism is a subjectively interpreted inflamatory word. Acts can be described as barbaric, but to describe an entire peoples as such is a bit of a stretch for me. I would also point out that this argument completely ignores the fact that the US has been involved in the ME in ways that have harmed its residents for many decades. This argument just seems very binary to me.

[Grandpa Harley]

I disagree with many on the idea that wars are fought for religion. Instead, I believe that political elites use religion to get the man on the street behind the war. Wars are more generally fought for resources and power. This was true even of the Crusades.

Just thought that bore repeating

 

 

Actually the first crusade was a 'Wag The Dog' scenario cooked up by the Patriarch of Venice so he could loot Constantinople and blame the Moors... It's why San Marco's Basilica looks 'strange' since it's actually the looted frontages of Constantinople Churches. There were more Christians killed by Christians than there were Moors killed by anyone on that one...

[Legion]

What about those who agree with you that this is not about religion? It's about civility vs. barbarism.

 

They have a right to that opinion. Though I would point out that barbarism is a subjectively interpreted inflamatory word. Acts can be described as barbaric, but to describe an entire peoples as such is a bit of a stretch for me. I would also point out that this argument completely ignores the fact that the US has been involved in the ME in ways that have harmed its residents for many decades. This argument just seems very binary to me.

So it's the fault of the U.S. that it has been attacked?

[Dhampir]

I'm not so sure about the crusades, but the rest of that statement mirrors my sentiment almost exactly.

[Grandpa Harley]

What about those who agree with you that this is not about religion? It's about civility vs. barbarism.

 

They have a right to that opinion. Though I would point out that barbarism is a subjectively interpreted inflamatory word. Acts can be described as barbaric, but to describe an entire peoples as such is a bit of a stretch for me. I would also point out that this argument completely ignores the fact that the US has been involved in the ME in ways that have harmed its residents for many decades. This argument just seems very binary to me.

 

I'd say the US (and the UK) have had too much to do in that neck of the woods for over a Century. Certainly Teddy Roosevelt's interference in the ME region, coupled with Russian, German, French and British 'interests' have made 'The West' pretty universally dislike by the former Ottoman Empire.

 

If you want barbarism, I'd say you can't do much better than colonial histories. Without the western colonialism, we'd not have the Concentration camp (invented by one of my Spanish antecedents), opium fields in Afghanistan (sponsored and expanded by the East India Company to furnish the Opium Wars) numerous land grabs in Africa in the 1950s as the Empire was dismantled, resulting in not just Imperially sponsored tribal warfare, but then the Imperial forces massacring the people who had just committed something that was Genocide in all but name.

 

The Americas have Korea, and Vietnam as overt acts of Empire building, and stuff like Chile, Peru and Argentina as covert operations, destabilising democratically elected governments since they were a little too ideologically unsound to share a big island with...

 

To level accusations of 'barbarism' is to claim a moral high ground my country certainly does not occupy, nor does any country in broader NATO.

 

Probably the only 'good' war I can think of was WW2 and I still blame the French for that...