'Muslims will rule the world'

[Esther462]

I printed of a map a few years ago, that some muslims want the world to be muslim by the next centery.

Reading the posts I've picked up that loads of people are talking about being Britsh. I am a white Britsh women and I converted when I was 19 years old. I think many British people have lost what did make us British and I feel that us Muslims should show the none muslims on how to be British by being kind, helpful, looking out for people in our coumitys and so and so on but also with the Islamic things mixed into it like women wear modist clothes and praying.
We should respect people of the book (Christans and Jews). I defently have to as there aren't many muslims in my town and my family and most of my friends are Christians. Because I respect them, they respect me and we live in harmory with each other.

 

[aadil77]

I myself like the cars, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Lotus,

Look I love cars as well, It would be a dream for me to work at mclaren, but theres no way islam is gonna get rid of cars lol.

 

[S<Chowdhury]

I'm sure you can understand my concern, if the statistics are anything to go by they suggest a big cultural 'invasion'. With British people being free to do what they want etc etc and Islam being a relatively strict culture/religion it's concerns me that Muslims will fully step into Britain's political system and to be blunt install Islam as the state religion.

To clarify, British culture is very rich, of course we have the tradition and heritage, the Monarchy, Parliament, Christianity, but I believe the core of British culture is attitude - polite, good manners, men/women treated equally, stiff upper lip when times are hard, the necessity for humor wherever appropriate.

Wiki article - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_of_the_United_Kingdom

I myself like the cars, Aston Martin, Jaguar, Lotus,

When you described British culture above you just sounded you were reading from a Victorian Text Book to be honest. The British people have never had the chance to vote for or against a monarchy. Unlike countries which have a written constitution, much of our system of government has been inherited from an undemocratic past- So much for democracy eh.

Parliament- Funny how all three branches of Government -Executive, Legislative and Judicial still overlap in Parliament.....how Tony Blair was able to stifle debate....

Anglican Church founder- Henry VIII- who himself was a catholic and only began the reformation due to him wanting a divorce...Great British Culture !

And by the way Jaguar is owned by TATA not British anymore

 

[MMohammed]

Well British Patriot, if you follow Islam correctly(the pure one), you would come to know that its the religion that seeks peace and truth.
Women wear hijab to protect themselves from....just what you said and people who are sick..And as you talked about attraction and flirtation, wouldn't it be opposing honesty and truthfulness to your partner? How ill it would be....freedom should never reach till the extent that it gives birth to corruption and badness.Hijab is for the shield and identity of Muslimahs(Muslim women).
Would you allow your wife to attract other men?
Why do you marry?To flirt other men?
And if you ask, why before marriage, then its itself for the protection for women and so that someone doesn't tease them.
Thats the clear answer if you think about it.
And the muslim rule thing,
you never know what will happen next and who will succeed you( and its not apparently impossible).You don't know that an ant will enter your nose and kill you.Infact, you wouldn't expect it to happen.
Just like this, something different will happen(which only God knows) which could make them powerful.
And Islam ruled the world before, not by sword but by kindness and truthfulness , so why can't it now?
Infact many hidden roots of science are found by Muslims so it will not be a new thing(you can say).

 

[Muhammad]

Greetings British Patriot,

My university has a large proportion of Asians and I do see many girls covered up with those black headscarf things, and to be honest I think they are being deprived. Whereas non-Muslim girls are free to follow fashion and wear what they like, Muslim girls seem shy and unable to enjoy themselves or their bodies which is a great shame as sexual attraction and flirtation is a great human pleasure.

You have taken my words too literal, what I mean is British people do not adhere to restrictive practices and are therefore freer to eat/drink/wear what they want as well as being able to act without worrying about any teachings.

What is interesting to note is that the notion of 'British culture' is something quite variable and has not remained the same over time. If we take the example you mention about women following fashion and wearing "what they like", one only has to look at what the British women were wearing not too long ago, where their long dresses and covered heads were not so different from the Islamic concept of Hijab. If we take another example of attitudes towards homosexuality, someone coming out as a homosexual in previous times would have been the laughing stock of his community, yet now this has changed.

So one might argue that many of those values true to British culture but which have now been corrupted - these values and even better can be restored and implemented by the religion of Islam.

Peace.

 

[aadil77]

And by the way Jaguar is owned by TATA not British anymore

lol yh I was gonna mention that, but thought it might put him off

also aston martin is partly owned by some arab company

 

[S<Chowdhury]

Also wanted add directed at the OP the British Culture also now prides it self on being Multi-cultural now

 

[Raaina]

Also wanted add directed at the OP the British Culture also now prides it self on being Multi-cultural now

You also forgot, With one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in Europe mg::hiding:

 

[cyclone_aeon]

Well, sorry for being late in this discussion. It is very interesting.
I’m not trying to point fingers here, but sadly, having read the posts in this topic from the start, I couldn’t help but be amazed at the turn this discussion has taken. I personally think some Muslims (certainly not all Muslims) in this forum fit the categorisation I’ve had for most I’ve debated with. Personalising the debate has to be the most common attribute with a lot of my Muslim counterparts. Example:

Claim:

• Some of the social values held/practiced by some Muslims are incompatible with the modern worldview. (Could be wrong, could be or right)

Immediate response:

• Are you Jewish?
• You must be a Zionist.
• What religion do you believe in?
• Where do you work?

What do any of these things have to do with the claim? – Absolutely nothing. Again, I would like to repeat that I don’t think all Muslims share this attribute. Nevertheless, my personal experience has shown that finding a flaw in the argument by finding a flaw in the person who made it then relating it to the argument, and sometimes ganging up against the person just for the purpose of discrediting them and their convictions rather than their argument, was generally a common debating style with Muslims and Jehovah Witnesses. I hope this attitude changes, and I apologise if I’m coming off as too critical. I mean no disrespect, I hope moderators here are open enough to allow objective criticism, it’s never a shame to admit a few flaws – no one is perfect.
Don’t get me wrong, I have my disagreements with British Patriot, especially with his/her definition of culture, and confining it, religion wise, to a certain religion, while disregarding religious convictions or attitude (i.e. religious freedom, justice for all, tolerance...etc). I think he/she must have mistaken culture for tradition.
Back to our topic, there were a few points that I felt like exploring a little more:
Extremists and moderates:
I would have to disagree with the people who said that there were no extremists in Islam, only bad or good Muslims. A person who doesn’t pray is a bad Muslim. A person who doesn’t fast is a bad Muslims. Those bad Muslims do not turn into extremists; they are simply in bad terms with ‘Allah’/God. This means nothing to me or any part of any social environment. Extremists exist in all religions, whether we admit it or not. The term might be western (or foreign to Islam), but this doesn’t mean people who fit the term don’t exist in Islam. They do, and their victims are Muslims, as well as non-Muslims. They can be bad Muslims, but not every bad Muslim is an extremist. Usually, it is extremists (disregarding their religion) who don’t believe in there being extremists and moderates, because everyone who believes differently than them is indiscriminately ‘bad’. Only their way is simply just so ‘good’.

Hijab and women protection (from serial rapists):
Well, long story short, I think a gun would be more efficient against serial rapists. Yet, a gun could create more problems, just as hijab could. Any solution you come up with will not ‘eliminate’ the problem, otherwise, there should’ve been zero rape cases in countries like Saudi or Iran, but that’s definitely not the case. Let me put it in a way similar to your question: Assume you’re in a society where there’s 100% Burqa women, are you saying that rapists would seize to exist? Wouldn’t a rapist just lower down his standards and go for the Burqa women that look thinner than overweight Burqa women? How about a stripper with a gun in her hand, and an unarmed woman wearing Hijab? Who would the rapist pick when these are his options? Does that mean arming all women is the solution? There are just billions of possibilities and billions of potential solutions, but none are 100% effective, as the problem is with the existence of rapists, not with what they have in display. The same goes for the ‘contraception isn’t 100% guaranteed’ argument. Nothing is 100% guaranteed. Yet, the side effects of contraception are far less than sexual repression.
Islam and western civilisation:
This is a very tricky topic. I can’t think of any solution, but I think it is a very serious problem, that needs to be addressed and discussed by both Muslims and non-Muslims in western countries. Failure to do so is going to take western countries down some very slippery slopes, and would have some grave consequences on both Muslims and non-Muslims. I find it very troubling that Muslims will go as far as it takes them to deny this problem, or prove that it doesn’t exist. Accusing whoever raises such discussions of being a member of any political parties, or being a part of a grand underground conspiracy aimed at destroying Islam, won’t magically make the problem disappear, nor would it make the need to discuss it insignificant.
For instance, in western countries you are free to belong to any sexual orientation you choose to. What would happen if, say a Muslims mayor in a western country decided based on the Muslim majority in the state/province he or she governs, to ban gay clubs? I think this is a very justified concern for a westerner who believes homosexuals have the right to be whoever they want to be terms of sexual orientation. This is just an example, from many examples that I think British Patriot was aiming at when discussing being free to do what you want in a western country. Why would someone who holds such values dear want the rise of a faith that demonises them for believing in freedom to be absolutely whatever you want to be? Muslims tend to use this certain freedom (to be whatever you want to be—i.e. Muslim) in order to try to change it. In the name of being free to be Muslim, some Muslims think one should have freedom to do things that contradict with western values, including the exact freedom that gave them the right to be Muslim.
There are just many issues that need to be discussed, and Muslims tend to think they’re being attacked whenever these concerns are raised, while in reality, discussion of such differences is the only way to come to some common grounds.

 

[Dagless]

Extremists and moderates:
I would have to disagree with the people who said that there were no extremists in Islam, only bad or good Muslims. A person who doesn’t pray is a bad Muslim. A person who doesn’t fast is a bad Muslims. Those bad Muslims do not turn into extremists; they are simply in bad terms with ‘Allah’/God. This means nothing to me or any part of any social environment. Extremists exist in all religions, whether we admit it or not. The term might be western (or foreign to Islam), but this doesn’t mean people who fit the term don’t exist in Islam. They do, and their victims are Muslims, as well as non-Muslims. They can be bad Muslims, but not every bad Muslim is an extremist. Usually, it is extremists (disregarding their religion) who don’t believe in there being extremists and moderates, because everyone who believes differently than them is indiscriminately ‘bad’. Only their way is simply just so ‘good’.

The people you think of as extremists are usually just misguided. Extreme would suggest they follow Islam above and beyond what is required, but usually its the case they do not follow it enough or mould certain beliefs to their objectives.

Hijab and women protection (from serial rapists):
Well, long story short, I think a gun would be more efficient against serial rapists. Yet, a gun could create more problems, just as hijab could. Any solution you come up with will not ‘eliminate’ the problem, otherwise, there should’ve been zero rape cases in countries like Saudi or Iran, but that’s definitely not the case. Let me put it in a way similar to your question: Assume you’re in a society where there’s 100% Burqa women, are you saying that rapists would seize to exist? Wouldn’t a rapist just lower down his standards and go for the Burqa women that look thinner than overweight Burqa women? How about a stripper with a gun in her hand, and an unarmed woman wearing Hijab? Who would the rapist pick when these are his options? Does that mean arming all women is the solution? There are just billions of possibilities and billions of potential solutions, but none are 100% effective, as the problem is with the existence of rapists, not with what they have in display. The same goes for the ‘contraception isn’t 100% guaranteed’ argument. Nothing is 100% guaranteed. Yet, the side effects of contraception are far less than sexual repression.

The only reason for hijab is not rape prevention; it is for general decency. It might not stop rape 100%, but thats not its objective. The rates for rape would be lower if hijab was worn than if everyone was a stripper.

Islam and western civilisation:
This is a very tricky topic. I can’t think of any solution, but I think it is a very serious problem, that needs to be addressed and discussed by both Muslims and non-Muslims in western countries. Failure to do so is going to take western countries down some very slippery slopes, and would have some grave consequences on both Muslims and non-Muslims. I find it very troubling that Muslims will go as far as it takes them to deny this problem, or prove that it doesn’t exist. Accusing whoever raises such discussions of being a member of any political parties, or being a part of a grand underground conspiracy aimed at destroying Islam, won’t magically make the problem disappear, nor would it make the need to discuss it insignificant.
For instance, in western countries you are free to belong to any sexual orientation you choose to. What would happen if, say a Muslims mayor in a western country decided based on the Muslim majority in the state/province he or she governs, to ban gay clubs? I think this is a very justified concern for a westerner who believes homosexuals have the right to be whoever they want to be terms of sexual orientation. This is just an example, from many examples that I think British Patriot was aiming at when discussing being free to do what you want in a western country. Why would someone who holds such values dear want the rise of a faith that demonises them for believing in freedom to be absolutely whatever you want to be? Muslims tend to use this certain freedom (to be whatever you want to be—i.e. Muslim) in order to try to change it. In the name of being free to be Muslim, some Muslims think one should have freedom to do things that contradict with western values, including the exact freedom that gave them the right to be Muslim.
There are just many issues that need to be discussed, and Muslims tend to think they’re being attacked whenever these concerns are raised, while in reality, discussion of such differences is the only way to come to some common grounds.

This is an odd argument for so many reasons. A mayor cannot change national law for one town. Even if you take it further and say it was the prime minister, it still wouldn't be accurate because they would do what is in the interests of the majority. If banning gay bars was what the majority wanted then thats what should happen. Isn't that what democracy is about?
Muslims follow the laws of the land, just because homosexuality is wrong in our religion it doesn't mean we're going to go out and attack every homosexual we see.

 

[Predator]

Well, long story short, I think a gun would be more efficient against serial rapists. Yet, a gun could create more problems, just as hijab could. Any solution you come up with will not ‘eliminate’ the problem, otherwise, there should’ve been zero rape cases in countries like Saudi or Iran, but that’s definitely not the case. Let me put it in a way similar to your question: Assume you’re in a society where there’s 100% Burqa women, are you saying that rapists would seize to exist? Wouldn’t a rapist just lower down his standards and go for the Burqa women that look thinner than overweight Burqa women? How about a stripper with a gun in her hand, and an unarmed woman wearing Hijab? Who would the rapist pick when these are his options? Does that mean arming all women is the solution? There are just billions of possibilities and billions of potential solutions, but none are 100% effective, as the problem is with the existence of rapists, not with what they have in display. The same goes for the ‘contraception isn’t 100% guaranteed’ argument. Nothing is 100% guaranteed. Yet, the side effects of contraception are far less than sexual repression..

As Dagless along with rape prevention and general decency , it also protects against eve teasing and no one gives them a second look .

I suggest you stop feeling sorry for them and thinking they are deprived unless you plan to take all the nuns out on the street and strip them naked and have them start fornicating for the pleasure of life and living free. What a person wears is their personal choice and if they are doing it out of their faith and commitment to their Lord then it would be hypocritical of you to see them as deprived while viewing your christian nuns as "devoted".

 

[Supreme]

Also wanted add directed at the OP the British Culture also now prides it self on being Multi-cultural now

Exactly! It is time for the far right to adapt or face extinction; we are not a 100% white, Christian country any more- we are a multiracial, secular society with every single religion on the planet having devoted followers within our borders. And I would far rather be in out secular age of the NHS, freedoms, liberties, science, free education and mulitcultarism than boring 17th Century England.

 

[جوري]

Originally Posted by cyclone_aeon should have freedom to do things that contradict with western values, including the exact freedom that gave them the right to be Muslim.
There are just many issues that need to be discussed, and Muslims tend to think they’re being attacked whenever these concerns are raised, while in reality, discussion of such differences is the only way to come to some common grounds.

What are those values and 'freedoms' you twit?
Must everyone in the world conceive 'freedom/values' the way you and your likes conceive them? If so then the problem is not confined to Muslims. It is bound to include all people who belong to other cultures; it is in fact bound to include many in the West since there is no consensus among them on the way these things are to be conceived. If your tolerance applies only to those who share your values and , further, conceive them the way you do, you will be making mockery of tolerance, which is by definition readiness to coexist peacefully with those who do not share your values. Thus in Islam a distinction is made between beliefs and believers. As far as beliefs are concerned there is absolutely no compromise: any belief that contradicts Islam is false, and must be criticized. But those who adhere to such false beliefs are to be tolerated, nicely treated and invited to the truth in the best of ways. It is because of this that Jews and Christians found their safest haven in the Muslim world long before the West started to talk about human rights and freedom of religion. “Jews familiar with history might note that from Spain to Baghdad, it was the Islamic world that offered the Jews of the Middle Ages a fair degree of toleration -- not the Christian West’, so tells us Richard Cohen in an article in the Post.; non-Muslims continue to live peacefully among Muslims. Islamic teachings, corroborated by our historical experience, teach us that the best atmosphere for the spread of Islam is the peaceful atmosphere. It is because of this that people like myself have been staunch advocates of peaceful coexistence and peaceful ways of inviting others to Islam long before September/11. And that is why we have been condemning acts of violence as ways of furthering the cause of Islam; we believe that they do just the opposite. But this has been of no avail to us; if you are an advocate of Islam, even by merely distributing copies of the Qur’an, you are bound to be viewed with suspicion. The same does not apply to organizations that put a copy of the Bible in every room of almost any hotel, not only in America, but in many other parts of the world.


Why is Islam expanding so spectacularly? … … … To any Christian familiar with the Bible, the answer is obvious: because God keeps His promises and blesses those who obey His Laws and fear Him, and punishes those who do not. … … Compare the amounts of abortion adultery, fornication and sodomy among Muslims and among Christians. Then compare the amounts of prayer. [Ecumenical Jihad, 1994, p.38]
These are the words of a Catholic professor of philosophy, Peter Kreeft. Could he perhaps be a Catholic fundie?


--a spin on Dr. Idris's objections!

all the best