Can We Coexist?

[searchingsoul]

Salaam o alaikum,
Peace,



In full agreement with your sig. Isn't that some what the reason people here think we can't live together?

Anyhows.

Peace,
Alaikum Salaam

I agree with my signature as well. lol Let me clarify something: I think that I can co-exist with open minded people of various beliefs. Unfortunately, I do not find a lot of people with an open minded approach and mutual respect.

On a really personal level, my attempt to understand beliefs other than mine makes the world an easier place to live in.

 

[searchingsoul]

Hi SearchingSoul

There is a manifest difference between calling for the west, as a political entity, to cease its manipulation of middle eastern politics, versus calling for the deportation of all middle eastern people from the west. The first is not racist while the latter is.

Regards

Even if it may be racist is still seems equitable to me.

 

[HeiGou]

It is likely that some do, but the Christian Churches, the mainstream American community, have done what no Muslims have done yet - they have said clearly, loudly and often that this is unacceptable and wrong. They have thrown such people out of their Churches. The KKK has faded away as most people in the KKK have agreed with their religious leaders and left.

In an ideal world this is what the Muslim communities of the West would do. But they haven't.

many mosques have actually also claimed it to be wrong! terrorist dont just come into a mosques and claims they are terrorists, noone knows about them! when the 7/7 happened in our local mosque and with the rest, people were very upset! there were sermons against it and prayers for the victims!

Sure. They have claimed it was wrong. What have they done in practice? Well they savaged the police over Forest Gate - clearly proving they have no interest in helping the British government deal with terrorism. They have not shared information - the Forest Gate raid would not have been such a bungle if they had good intelligence. They are not getting any.

Terrorists may not claim they are terrorists, but no one is born a terrorist. They are born innocent. Someone has to teach them that violence is an acceptable solution. Someone has to teach them that the British public deserves to pay. Someone has to pursuade them that British lives are not worth anything. Young men make a transition from normal to radical over time and through interaction with others. They don't do that at school or at McDonalds. These boys attended the same mosque and the same Muslim-run youth centre. It is likely that this is where they learnt to hate. Why did the Muslim community let their mosque and their young centre be used in this way? If these places were used to preach Christianity I do not doubt that the elders would have been on to it in no time and the person responsible kicked out. The Canadians knew that their mosque was being used to preach hatred. They did not care. I bet they did here too. Muslims have not done what the Christians did with the KKK. No one would now go to a Church and enter into any sort of activity that might lead to KKK membership. But I bet the next set of bombers are praying in mosques as we speak. I bet they are watching videos in youth centres even as I type.

I don't see that this is valid. After all White British people have bent over backwards to make Muslims and other ethnic minorities happy here. They have changed their entire culture. They have banned racial discrimination.

oh i'm sorry, it must be my imagination all the crap i get sometimes, even before 9/11! racism is universal i admit, but believe me dont call it bending over backwards for us! you give that all the ethnic groups have it ever so nice in this country, believe me mate its not like that at all! i'll tell you what the bombing came from was the war in iraq! its not right, it actually shows their coward, stupid side, however thats how strongly some people felt about the war! and what fuels your view is once again the media that can be so bias!

I doubt it is your imagination, but the fact that they have not succeeded 100 percent is not proof they have not tried and they have. They let your family into the country - what a gift that was! It *is* like that actually. Perhaps the difference here is that I am an immigrant and I know what the rest of the world is like while you're the child of immigrants. There is no, or few, country in the world that have been as generous to immigrants as Britain. Perhaps Canada or the US. Compare with, say, Malaysia.

How did the bombing come from Iraq? This is the basic problem with the Muslim communities and why co-existence is not possible. First of all the disloyalty means that Muslims cannot be tolerated here. Second is the idea that some people of the same faith dying half a world away justifies killing your fellow British citizens here. Third is the refusal of most Muslims to accept any responsibility at all. It is Blair's fault. It is my fault. God knows it is not the fault of any Muslim. Even if Blair was wrong to invade Iraq there is no justification for terrorism.

I have called for that all this year here. But "mutual understanding" seems to me an excuse for Dawa. We are to do the understanding (of the correctness of Islam and the victimhood of Muslim needless to say), not you.

hey maybe some muslims get away with it trying to convert you, but serious some mutual understanding both ways would work wonders!

I agree. It is not that the British have not tried. It is that British Muslims will not.

yet this country calls itself democratic! and in my book democracy is giving everyone equal rights, what muslim calls themselves democratic! which muslim country goes to another to help them become democratic!

And this country is democratic and at the moment Muslims are given equal rights. More rights than most Muslims have in the rest of the world. Too many rights if you listen to most Muslims in fact. If it wants to remain democratic it will have to deal with the intolerable. I don't know any Muslims who call themselves democratic. Islam and democracy, people around here tell me, are incompatible.

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Ansar, “Yes, it is a complete way of life. 'way of life' is not synonymous with political entity”.

What exactly is a “complete way of life” if it doesn’t entail politics?

Read the rest of what I wrote:

Yes, it is a complete way of life. 'way of life' is not synonymous with political entity. A politcal entity may draw its guidance from a way of life but the two are distinct. Democracy is the analogous political way/ideology in the west to Islam. Democracy is a political ideology of the political entity known as the west. Islam [was] the political ideology of political entities in the Middle East. Neither Islam nor Democracy can be considered a group of individuals who make decisions, mistakes, are influenced and so on.​

You say what I have posted is anti-Islamic drivel, I would refer you to “Is this true” or any number of other threads such as Apostasy in Islam.

'Is this true' was about insulting the Prophet pbuh - I was not aware that it is part of your beliefs to publicly revile the religion of others. I believe you are also more than familiar with the fact that in a Biblical state, insulting one's parents is punishable with execution and blaspheming God with stoning to death.

As for the thread on apostasy, I was not aware that you claimed to be an apostate or that publicly challenging the state was part of your beliefs.

If you wish to discuss this further, by all means we can go back to the thread 'is this true'.

Even if it may be racist is still seems equitable to me.

Racism is never equitable.

 

[searchingsoul]

Racism is never equitable.

Perhaps racism is never equitable. I don't think that I explained my thought in enough detail in my original post, so I do see how it came across as being racist. What I was referring to was the deportation of Middle Eastern people who did not wish to live peacefully in Western societies and abide by Western rules.

The deportation of such people would be due to their actions not their race.

 

[HeiGou]

Perhaps racism is never equitable. I don't think that I explained my thought in enough detail in my original post, so I do see how it came across as being racist.

I think his comments referred to me not you.

What I was referring to was the deportation of Middle Eastern people who did not wish to live peacefully in Western societies and abide by Western rules.

The deportation of such people would be due to their actions not their race.

And even if they were deported because they were Muslims, it would not be racism because Islam is not a race. There are, as people keep pointing out, Black Muslims, White Muslims, Brown Muslims, perhaps one day there may be Green ones too.

 

[nimrod]

Ansar Al-‘Adl, I would assume that discussing things/teachings that prevent us from living together peacefully are more than proper for the title of this thread.

Your religion teaches that I cannot practice what my religion compels me to do.
My faith compels me to publicly peacefully spread the message of Jesus as it is recorded in the bible to those who have not heard that message.

Your religion teaches that I am to be punished if I do that.
I am to be punished, not by an individual but rather, by the leadership of the communities/State.

I do not go around reviling other icons of other religions.
I do, however, not believe Muhammad was a prophet of God.

If I go around publicly saying/teaching that, your religion teaches that I am to be punished, not by an individual but rather by the State.

If I convert a person of your religion to my religion, then that convert is to be killed if they don’t revert and they choose to do what their new found religion compels them to do. To peacefully publicly preach the message of Jesus as it is taught in the Bible.

Your religion teaches that, that person is to be put to death by the State.

I do not understand how you can maintain that, when a religion teaches that the State is to carry out punishments for religious acts, Islam isn’t political.

Perhaps the problem is how you are trying to define the word political:

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/political

po•lit•i•cal
adj.
1. Of, relating to, or dealing with the structure or affairs of government, politics, or the state.
2. Relating to, involving, or characteristic of politics or politicians: “Calling a meeting is a political act in itself” (Daniel Goleman).
3. Relating to or involving acts regarded as damaging to a government or state: political crimes.
4. Interested or active in politics: I'm not a very political person.
5. Having or influenced by partisan interests: The court should never become a political institution.
6. Based on or motivated by partisan or self-serving objectives: a purely political decision.

I would think definition #1 would be the correct use of the word as you are using it.

As long as you teach that Christians are to be punished for peacefully doing what Christians are compelled to do, then no we can’t co-exist.

All that is left is separation.

Thanks
Nimrod

 

[catmando]

Nimrod has got it right. However, let me say this; there may be some little room in an Islamic State for Christians, Buddhists and other faiths, but NOT Atheists. We will not be tolerated, which is why Ibn Warraq and other Muslim Atheists(few thought they are) do not live in Islamic states, but in free nations like England and America.

 

[searchingsoul]

Nimrod has got it right. However, let me say this; there may be some little room in an Islamic State for Christians, Buddhists and other faiths, but NOT Atheists. We will not be tolerated, which is why Ibn Warraq and other Muslim Atheists(few thought they are) do not live in Islamic states, but in free nations like England and America.

I neglected to remember atheists and I apologize. You are right catmando. The remote chance that we can co-exist is probably only possible in Western countries. I'm going to ponder this for a while....Currently my reaction is +o( .

 

[Woodrow]

Nimrod has got it right. However, let me say this; there may be some little room in an Islamic State for Christians, Buddhists and other faiths, but NOT Atheists. We will not be tolerated, which is why Ibn Warraq and other Muslim Atheists(few thought they are) do not live in Islamic states, but in free nations like England and America.

I'm just nit-picking. Actually doing this to clear up a fairly common misconception. It is impossible for there to be a Muslim Atheist. I believe the word Muslim is still confusing to some non-Muslims.

Islam is to submit to Allah(swt). A Man who performs Islam (Submits to Allah swt) is a Muslim. A woman would be a Musilimah.


Muslim Atheist would be an Aheist who submits to the will of God(swt). That seems to be a contradiction of terms.

Fairly common error, people seem to think Muslim is a Race or a Nationality.

 

[KAding]

Fairly common error, people seem to think Muslim is a Race or a Nationality.

Which is quite understandable since Islam is highly nationalistic. All the attributes of nationalism can be found in Islam.

1. A collective identity. All Muslims think they are part of the ummah.
2. It seeks to unite it's 'people' under the banner of one state. In Islam an Islamic State. In this it has territorial ambitions. It wants to be not just a 'people' but also a country.
3. There is a mythical view on certain major historical events which supposedly define the character of the nation.

Muslims essentially form a nation, whose members seek to live in a fully sovereign state. Ironically, I often see it claimed that nationalism is haram in Islam, but that is an incorrect view IMHO. Islam is simply intolerant of nationalism based on a different base, which is not religious, like ethnic nationalism or nationalism based on a civic ideology (think of the 'American dream').

This is another reason why coexistance is hard. Many Muslims are struggling with this requirement of dual nationalism: on the one hand loyalty to the nation in which they reside and on the other to the nation that is Islam.

 

[Woodrow]

Which is quite understandable since Islam is highly nationalistic. All the attributes of nationalism can be found in Islam.

1. A collective identity. All Muslims think they are part of the ummah.
2. It seeks to unite it's 'people' under the banner of one state. In Islam an Islamic State. In this it has territorial ambitions.
3. There is a mythical view on certain major historical events which supposedly define the character of the nation.

Muslims essentially form a nation, whose members seek to live in a fully sovereign state. Ironically, I often see it claimed that nationalism is haram in Islam, but that is an incorrect view IMHO. Islam is simply intolerant of nationalism based on a different base, like ethnic nationalism or nationalism based on a civic ideology (think of the 'American dream').

This is another reason why coexistance is hard. Many Muslims are struggling with this requirement of dual nationalism: on the one hand loyalty to the nation in which they reside and on the other to the nation that is Islam.

Parodoxoly, many of us live in relative Peace outside of Islamic Countries, Support our countries and follow the secular laws of the land. True our loyalty is with Islam, but that is not a place.

While we are living in this physical realm, we do live by the law of the land, except for when it would be sinfull in Islam. Then we either leave or live with the consequences. Being an American, I will say that the laws do not require me to do anything I view as sinfull, although many things I view as sinfull are legal. My role is to strive for peacefull changes of those things, yet understand that I must abide by the laws or accept the consequences as enforced by the laws.

 

[bint_muhammed]

ok heigu, i want to make this very simple, because you keep coming back to the same points
1) there are many muslims who hate terrorism, they havnt had it easy because of a few that do it!
2) MANY mosques do not tolerate with terrorism, believe me! MANY mosques do not teach about it, and there many places that they can learn about terrorism i.e. internet etc.!
3) i can assure you that islam can be very democratic, even with non-muslims, the only problem in out world today is that many people dont actually understand islam properly.
4) i'm a british muslim along with many many others who are willing to concieve a mutual understanding!
5) what you mentioned about racism and the people have tried but may have not suceeded 100%, this is just the same as some muslims are trying to tackle terrorist, however its pretty early and there is no guarantee that they will tackle it! BUT THEY ARE TRYING!
6) just because some muslims are against the war in iraq doesnt make them pro-terrorist!

hya nimrod! after our prophet had passed away, there cam 4 caliphas, or leaders. one of these leaders, i cannot remeba at moment, came up with a system if you like, where help were given to the less fortunate etc. he also gave freedom to the christians and jews at the time! they were allowed to leave freely practice their feligion freely, this is because he used examples of the prophet! what i am getting at is if your a christian and want to practice your faith, islamically i cannot go and behead you, that is actually what islam teaches! this has been once again misunderstood, by narrow minded people, who claim for you being of a different faith you should be killed!

 

[Ansar Al-'Adl]

Hi SearchingSoul,

The deportation of such people would be due to their actions not their race.

I don't have a problem with that but can you see the problem with what you initially were stating:

SearchingSoul:Out of curiosity, can anyone explain to me why the West should get out of the Middle East but the Middle East shouldn't get out of the West?
[...]I was referring to Middle Eastern people being in the West. This in theory is fine but when they challenge Western practices it seems out of line. [...]Even if it may be racist is still seems equitable to me.​

Quite clearly there should be no need to call for middle eastern people to leave the west, especially when one acknowledges that it is racism. It is far more appropriate to say as you did now, that only those whose actions are contrary to the peace and order of the society should face such consequences.

Hello Nimrod,

Your religion teaches that I cannot practice what my religion compels me to do.
My faith compels me to publicly peacefully spread the message of Jesus as it is recorded in the bible to those who have not heard that message.

I see you have attempted to switch the topic again; let's look at what you originally said:

Nimrod: According to Islam, you can pursue you beliefs. If I do the same, according to Islam, I might be be-headed.
Ansar: Typical fabricated anti-islamic drivel.
Nimrod: You say what I have posted is anti-Islamic drivel, I would refer you to “Is this true” or any number of other threads such as Apostasy in Islam.
Ansar: 'Is this true' was about insulting the Prophet pbuh - I was not aware that it is part of your beliefs to publicly revile the religion of others. I believe you are also more than familiar with the fact that in a Biblical state, insulting one's parents is punishable with execution and blaspheming God with stoning to death.

As for the thread on apostasy, I was not aware that you claimed to be an apostate or that publicly challenging the state was part of your beliefs. You're not an apostate, so your comment that you would be beheaded for practicing YOUR BELIEFS was nothing short of a lie.​

So not only did you raise then drop the red-herrings about apostasy and blasphemy, but now you've attempted to subtly shift to proselytism. The problem for you, nimrod, is that there is no beheading for proselytising in Islam, but there is stoning for death for proselytising in the Bible:

Deuteronomy 13:7-12. If your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nation, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. YOU SHALL STONE HIM TO DEATH, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst.​

I do not go around reviling other icons of other religions.

In which case your intial comment that you would be beheaded for your beliefs is exactly as I said - typical fabricated anti-islamic drivel. If you did not revile the sacred icons of other religions you would not be punished in an Islamic state regardless of whether you believed in the Prophet pbuh or not or shared your religious teachings or not. So your comments on what my religion teaches are false.

I do not understand how you can maintain that [...] Islam isn’t political.

Even after reading a paragraph twice you still do not understand it? FOR A THIRD TIME I wrote:

Yes, it is a complete way of life. 'way of life' is not synonymous with political entity. A politcal entity may draw its guidance from a way of life but the two are distinct. Democracy is the analogous political way/ideology in the west to Islam. Democracy is a political ideology of the political entity known as the west. ISLAM [was] the POLITICAL ideology of political entities in the Middle East. Neither Islam nor Democracy can be considered a group of individuals who make decisions, mistakes, are influenced and so on.​

So I did not say that Islam was not political, I said it was not a political entity, but that it contained a political ideology. You clearly understood none of that and somehow imagined that I "maintained Islam isn't political" ! The problem is not with definitions nimrod, the problem is that you obstinately choose to block out the voices of others and refuse to even read their posts properly.

You have repeatedly taken this thread away from the topic of peaceful coexistence to living under a Shari'ah state; your next post that does so will be moved to the appropriate thread.

Regards

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace to you all,

We must pray for each other, nothing worthwhile can happen without prayer and coexistance requires God's help in a big way.

We must pray for justoce for all people, the poor and oppressed need justice the most.

We muxt pray for peace on Earth, a peace for all of God's creation.

We have a need to love all people so that we might openly acknowledge that the same God created all of us

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

 

[bint_muhammed]

Greetings and peace to you all,

We must pray for each other, nothing worthwhile can happen without prayer and coexistance requires God's help in a big way.

We must pray for justoce for all people, the poor and oppressed need justice the most.

We muxt pray for peace on Earth, a peace for all of God's creation.

We have a need to love all people so that we might openly acknowledge that the same God created all of us

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

i agree!

 

[catmando]

I'm just nit-picking. Actually doing this to clear up a fairly common misconception. It is impossible for there to be a Muslim Atheist. I believe the word Muslim is still confusing to some non-Muslims.

Islam is to submit to Allah(swt). A Man who performs Islam (Submits to Allah swt) is a Muslim. A woman would be a Musilimah.


Muslim Atheist would be an Aheist who submits to the will of God(swt). That seems to be a contradiction of terms.

Fairly common error, people seem to think Muslim is a Race or a Nationality.

What would you call Ibn Warraq and others who have converted to Atheism(actually, we are all Atheists at birth)? Could they be Islamic Atheists? There are Atheist Jews who still call themselves Jews.

 

[Woodrow]

What would you call Ibn Warraq and others who have converted to Atheism(actually, we are all Atheists at birth)? Could they be Islamic Atheists? There are Atheist Jews who still call themselves Jews.

The Main difference is the Jews are both a religion and a Race, Many Jews are both, of the Jewish race and of the Jewish faith. We who are Muslim are from all ethnic backgrounds. All skin colorings, all languages. If you were to see and hear me in Person you would most likely assume I was of Polish or German ancestry and from New York City. I get more static over being a transplanted Yankee, then for being Muslim.

Ibn Warraq I would call an Arab or Mid-eastern Atheist if I were to try to tie on a specific label.

 

[snakelegs]

The Main difference is the Jews are both a religion and a Race race, Many Jews are both, of the Jewish race and of the Jewish faith. We who are Muslim are from all ethnic backgrounds. All skin colorings, all languages. If you were to see and hear me in Person you would most likely assume I was of Polish or German ancestry and from New York City. I get more static over being a transplanted Yankee, then for being Muslim.

Ibn Warraq I would call an Arab or Mid-eastern Atheist if I were to try to tie on a specific label.

woodrow,
jews are not a race. they come in all colours.

 

[catmando]

Is it possible to be both an Atheist and a Muslim? Like a cultural Jew could be an Atheist?