My post today is a short one...and more of a question than anything else. It seems like a general thought that Islam is a "religion of peace" that has been hijacked by extremists...or at least so we are told.
And sure...there are plenty of peaceful Muslims. Don't get me wrong, I am well aware that the many Muslims are peaceful. But, are they actually following their religion? How "peaceful" are the teachings of Islam? Well....logically, to find this answer, we should go look at their holy book, the Qur'an. Here are five quotes from the Qur'an:
Sura (8:55) - Surely the vilest of animals in Allah's sight are those who disbelieveSuch a peace loving religion, isn't it?Sura (48:29) - Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves
Sura (9:30) - And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah... Allah (Himself) fights against them. How perverse are they!
Sura (8:12) - I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them
Sura (9:123) - O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness
Sura (5:33) - The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement
Now...here is the question part of this blog....and I would REALLY like you to leave a comment with your answer to this question:
How many deadly attacks have been carried out worldwide in the name of Islam since September 11, 2001? Now...this is just the number of attacks...not how many have been killed or injured...just how many attacks have been coordinated and carried out since 9-11? And just for perspective...the War in Iraq has seen just over 4000 of our troops killed (may they never be forgotten).
Again....I would really like to see people answer. I am genuinely curious to see your thoughts. How many deadly attacks have been carried out worldwide in the name of Islam since September 11, 2001?
I will have the answer after I get a few responses.
28 comments:
Hmmm... my guess (and it's just that, a guess) is around 1,400.
But it's just a PFA estimate! :P ;)
QUICK! Post the next one, you have me in a tizzy! :P
-Danica
Very many...let's say 10,000
300
I think there extremist in all religions even Christianity. There are people in all religion that take their religious books, be it the bible or the Qu'ran literally. A few people cause the the death of thousands on 9/11 and we can not blame the whole religion.
In the voice of Micheal Jackson, "One bad apple don't spoil the whole bunch girl."
Any post quoting Michael Jackson should be ignored because it is completely absurd and holds no merit.
too many
How would you explain the Crusades then? That war was waged by Christians in the name of God. Does that mean that we're a violent religion as well?
To those who seem to have missed the point of this blog:
I will repost my question for a fourth time. How many deadly attacks do you think there have been worldwide in the name of Islam since 2001?
I don't mind the other comments...by all means, keep them coming and rest assured, I will try to respond to them in my follow up post. But...throw in an answer to my question while you are at it too!!
The verses taken form the Qu'ran are most likely taken out of context. Unless you have read the whole Qu'ran in its original language then who are you to judge a religion that you are not a part of. And i believe in the Christian religion God in the only one who can judge.
Let me ask you one question, how many people have died in the name of god?
Rosanne said: "How would you explain the Crusades then? That war was waged by Christians in the name of God. Does that mean that we're a violent religion as well?"
Not at all, In those days people had the belief that the Pope was God's appointed official and believed that his word was practically law, so when the Pope said to go on a Crusade to reclaim the Holy City (that right there is the key of how he won their loyalty, the chance to write themselves in history as the people who took back and reclaimed the Holy City. More proof that pride is a great factor in how we make decisions) they jumped on the band wagon to help. In the end, the diseases that they were exposed to took a toll, as did the amount of time in cramped ships. In the end I think it was pride and one man's dream (the Pope) that led to the crusades, I do not want to seem like I am heaping the blame on the Pope. Was he in some way responsible for part of it, Yes. Were the soldiers responsible for the atrocities they committed on the way there, Yes. But it was not our faith that was responsible, I think it was ambition and pride in the thought of fighting 'for God's will' that made men decide to go fight in a land so far from their homes. Yes the war was fought in the name of God, but the men doing it did not behave like Christians because they figured that since they were fighting for God, any sins they committed would be forgiven in fighting under Gods banner. The only thing remotely 'violent' about our religion, is that violent is the word to describe how to pursue God in everything we do.
I would guess 3 or 4,000
Hey Todd, why don't you use your real name? Is it because you are afraid of people judging you in real life but on the internet with a fake name you are untouchable? humm...Drew???
"Hey Todd, why don't you use your real name? Is it because you are afraid of people judging you in real life but on the internet with a fake name you are untouchable? humm...Drew???"
If I wanted to truly remain unknown, would I post a link all over facebook and my AIM?
As for why "Todd," that has long been my internet alias for years, and, quite frankly, the name is rather special to me.
And you know what really cracks me up? You didn't bother to post a name yourself!! Way to practice what you preach! LOL
(The long comment about the Crusades is by my brother, Jeff... just to let you know. He didn't have an account) ;)
One argument that could be made in defense of many of those statements quoted:
If you go back to the history during the time of islam, it was really strongly repressed. Muhammed got kicked out of Mecca cause they didn't like what he was saying. If I remember correctly, much of the Q'uran was written in exile. So one could argue that many of the "slay the wicked" statements really refer to the people who (at that time) really did hate muslims.
So i think many of your quotes are out of context. Would I be right to argue that Christianity advocates slavery because of the "slaves be obedient to your masters" passage by Paul. Or that Judaism supports genocide because of what's written in the book of Joshua.
In other words, I think one needs to analyze the situation more than just a few out of context passages from the quran*.
A big question is: has the muslim world at large condemned the actions of those who kill others? Or not? If most muslim clerics are condemning the murderers, then i think one could argue that you have taken the quran out of context. If most muslims are ok with it, then i think the religion of islam either needs a Reformation or. . . . .
-David
*I am sure your arguments are deeper than these, and you're just simplifying them for the purposes of this blog. It's tough to concisely represent a complex opinion :/
You are very right David...I have many more things to say that I have not yet said. Like I have said time and time again, this particular post was made to pose a question. When I answer that question, I will go into more depth on why I even brought this subject up.
1. I am not the one with the blog.
2. If you don't like my comment, don't blog.
3. What did I preach? I just outed your real name. oh...the horror!
4. I don't have an account and therefore could not use my name.
5. No one asked, "TODD"! Or should I say Drew, I am just confused at which person you are at the moment. Question to you, do you have multiple personalities? Is that how it works? On the internet you're Todd and in real life you are Drew. I would really like some clarification.
Todd, to answer your other question:
10,880
But in iraq, over 90,251 have died. So i'm not sure which number is right, probably depends on qualification.
-David
Response to the second attacking post about my name...my numbered responses correspond to their numbered points.
1. Really?
2. You would like me to stop blogging, wouldn't you?
3. You berated me for using a pen-name and didn't bother posting your own name (see next point).
4. I am not signed into my account, but have my name(s) on this comment twice! Once by selecting Name/URL, and then again by typing it at the bottom.
5. What does that have to do with anything? Oh thats right...you aren't interested in my blog post, just attacking me because I disagree with your point of view and can actually back up my claims.
~Todd/Drew (see...its not hard to put your name at the end of the post!)
My second numbered comment:
1. Yes really, i wouldn't have posted the comment if i didn't mean it.
2. I never once said i wanted to stop blogging just be able to take comments that don't go along with your view.
3. The main problem i have with your blog is you take things out of context and manipulate them to your advantage. And this to me is not morally right. Look at the whole situation and not the part that supports your claims.
4. I will admit the last one was a little attacking but i did not intend it to be. Because of the time of night I was a little aggravated. If you felt attacked i am sorry for that and that only. I not sorry for any of the words that i typed.
Katelyn
Lets consider the idea that these quotes are taken out of context. If that is the case then we also have to consider that the individuals who kill in the name of Allah are also taking them out of context. So really does it matter? Because their actions prove the manner in which such quotes are being interpreted and used to justify the killing of innocents.
Regarding the crusades, yes there were many instances in which Christians acted anything but Christian, and there have been many examples since. Does that mean however, that as Christians we should feel guilty about what happened centuries ago and therefor excuse the actions of radical Islam?
Finally, consider the implications of ignoring the facts, radicals who call themselves Muslim have and are killing innocent people to advance their cause. These people are supported by many leaders in the faith, not just a one or two crazies. Consider also the long battle between Islam and Judaism. Read up on Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran and consider his words, his beliefs, and the quotes "taken out of context". He is a radical in control of an entire country. Put all of it together and what you come up with should really worry you.
People need to wake up.
- Scott
LOL I must say Weatherman, hanging out at your blog is more stimulating than a double espresso. Wow!
There was a very important demonstration that occurred here that we musn't miss.
Katelyn's comment to you was, "If you don't like my comment, don't blog." (I will grant that later it sounds like she is trying to say she didn't tell you not to blog, but only to not be offended by disagreeing comments... Is that correct? I digress....)
That one comment is a brilliant example of the mindset that our country is slipping into. (Quickly, in many ways.) We have confused the concept of "the rights of all" with "my rights outweigh your rights by far".
The logic of such a statement, "If you don't like my comment, stop blogging." taken to its logical conclusion could result in "If you don't like me peeing in the middle of your store (or on your product) don't have a store."
Just like your blog, a store is open to the general public to enter. But, were we the person who walked through the "deposit" left by the demonstration of the rights of such a person, I think disgust might be an expected response. Despite the person exercising their liberty.
We would be shocked and horrified to see someone peeing on the floor of Old Navy - or on one of the pair of jeans - and yet, we practice that same mindset all the time with no indication of shock nor horror.
I find it interesting that the very freedom and liberty that allows Katelyn to speak her mind is the same freedom that Drew/Todd/Weatherman is allowed as well. That freedom is given to all in the US....for now.
It is the same freedom that allows Drew to post whatever he wants to on his blog - and deny Katelyn the right to comment. (Which he could, if he wanted to do so.)
It is the same freedom that allows Drew to "hide" (which if he was hiding it, he was doing a REALLY, REALLY bad job of it) his name.
Why is that? Drew could choose to go by the name of "Aunt Jemima with the bright yellow umbrella" if he so desired. It is his right and he has the freedom to do so. So, why has liberty become so one sided?
I fear that it is this mindset- the willingness to so cavalierly give away the freedom of others, in order to guarantee that mine will continue to flourish. Sadly, liberty isn't like that. It's more like oxygen - when it's poisoned for one of us, it's poisoned for all.
That is what makes some of these issues that Drew is discussing so terrifying. When one group of people feel that the killing of another group is their best hope of eternal life - in other words, their eternal liberty is of more value than ours - it's something we should ALL stop and consider. Very, very seriously.
And worrying about whether or not someone is willing to admit that they prefer to be called Aunt Jemima with the bright yellow umbrella, is a sad and shallow distraction to the real issue at hand.
Thanks again Drew - it was great to come over to read and end up getting the opportunity to perform some mental liberty aerobics.
Hey Katelyn, sorry if my using you as an example offended you. Your words were such an absolutely perfect example of the new understanding of liberty, I simply couldn't walk away. Sadly, if you are offended, I can't even blame it on the lateness of the hour - I will simply ask your forgiveness. (Although it is my right to use your words thusly.) ;) :) :)
~Mrs MumC aka DawnC
(who, I'm sorry to say Drew, doesn't care for Aunt Jemima one bit, as I much prefer our local Amish syrup. BUT if you want me to call you that I will happily allow you to exercise that liberty.) ;)
Side note - if you haven't already I MUST encourage you to find and read Bob Woodruff and Diane Sawyer's account of their recent trip to North Korea with the New York Philharmonic Orchestra. It is truly spine tingling scary! Both of them are seasoned veteran reporters and yet, they found it frightening. Says a lot, huh?
Well if you want me to give you a number, all I can tell you is there isn't enough news coverage for that. So there's your first answer.
But consider one of the best posts I had read in response to this blog about the Crusades. This person explained that since the Pope was considered an instrument of God at the time, and the "will of God" battle cry was used to inspire the men. At the end of this person's response, he/she said:
"The only thing remotely 'violent' about our religion, is that violent is the word to describe how to pursue God in everything we do."
Well folks, that should be your real fear. Whoever wrote this, props to you!
Often times, too many religions use God as a means to excuse anything that isn't moral, especially when it comes to raging a war. I was hinting at that in my question.
Anyone religious should seriously consider what is being said to them, especially when it is tied with an agenda that promotes violence. If you don't, you'll eventually end up like any other extremist.
Being a communications major, I can wholeheartedly say that anyone can brainwash other people. If you are personable, a good speaker, and use conviction in your voice, it's very easy to do this. It doesn't matter that you're really a horrible psycho. It's been proven that in times of oppression, people tend to look at someone who wants to get them out of that horrible situation. Look at Hitler with the Nazis. He basically blamed the Jews for all of Germany's problems and millions of deaths later, we realize he was wrong. Did the people of Germany realize it at the time? Most probably didn't. But the few and far between who did realized that Hitler was wrong.
So what's my point? Considering the situation in the Middle East with some of its leaders, it is completely unfair to blame the Islam religion as violent and inciting violence to everyone else. I feel that any religion where a person comes to spirituality and God himself can't be violent, since it's a means to find HIM and peace. If you want to argue against me, then so be it. But, if you honestly think it's perfectly just and moral to blame the actions of a few to generalize a religion, then you better hope no one uses the Crusades argument against us.
Bottom line: There are always STUPID and VIOLENT people in every religion.
Generalizing an entire religion based on a few is very dangerous. But so too is assuming that the few do not hold sway over the many. Using your own example Rosanne, Hitler and the Nazis, the few, held sway over the many. While it would be wrong and inaccurate to say that all Germans were Nazis, most of them followed blindly until it was too late. Most importantly, the many enabled the few to establish a base of power that later was nearly impossible to disrupt due to the Gestapo, SS, etc.
The point then, that is being missed, is that the few, the radicals have taken control of Islam and the many, the ones who just want to live their lives in peace, are subject to the whims of the few. This is the case for several reasons.
First, assuming an equal male/female ratio, half of Muslims have no voice and cannot possibly stand up to the few because they are women.
Second, those who do not desire violence cannot stop it out of fear that they will be targetted as well.
Third, those who have managed to get into power are either radical themselves or funded by radicals.
So with the power structure in place and the element of fear established the few control the many and it really doesn't matter what Muslims in general believe...just as it wouldn't have mattered in general what German's felt.
-Scott
I like the premise of the blog but i really don't like the way it is written. It seems to be picking apart the Islam religion. Like other have said, it was only i few from the Islamic faith that caused so much death and grieving. We can't blame that whole religion but be aware what my happen because of the few.
And I really don't like that the blogger ask for a number of how many people have been killed because of the Islamic faith. These seems morbid.
Is it also morbid to ask how many were killed during the inquisition?
Is it also morbid to ask the question how many have been killed as a result of Nazi ideology in the past?
Is it also morbid to ask how many were killed during the Rape of Nanking?
Is it also morbid to ask how many were killed by the Soviet regime?
Is it also morbid to ask how many were killed during ethnic cleansing in Kosovo?
Is it morbid to ask how many have been killed in Sudan (which by the way is partially a result of fundamentalist Muslims)?
Is it morbid to ask how many Tibetans have been killed by the Chinese crackdown there?
Yeah I guess it is. Instead we should bury our heads in the sand and ignore everything that happens in the world because it may make a certain group of people look bad. So pretend nothing is happening, pretend everything is ok, but don't complain when it hits the fan on this side of the ocean again...that would be just morbid.
"I like the premise of the blog but i really don't like the way it is written. It seems to be picking apart the Islam religion. Like other have said, it was only i few from the Islamic faith that caused so much death and grieving. We can't blame that whole religion but be aware what my happen because of the few.
And I really don't like that the blogger ask for a number of how many people have been killed because of the Islamic faith. These seems morbid.
Thank you for actually reading my post! Allow me to clear up a couple things for you and others who read my post equally well.
For one, I said that there "plenty of peaceful Muslims" and "many Muslims are peaceful". I never said that all Muslims, or even a majority, were not. Yes, I may have said Islam itself was violent..and you will see that for yourself in my next post (which I am starting to work on as soon as I am done here).
And secondly, specific to the above quoted text: I didn't ask how many people have been killed. I posted about 6 times how many attacks have there been...not asking for a death toll. And yes...the whole topic is morbid and disturbing...but I see someone else has now beat me to that subject, so I will not repeat what was just said.
Post a Comment