|
I decided to respond to this finally.
Originally Posted by Poopadoop
Still bullshit. The Koran is open to interpretation just as the Bible is. There are plenty of places where the Bible preaches violence towards nonbelievers, just as there are many places in which it preaches peaceful ways. The Koran is the same.
This is a conversation worth having amongst followers of Islam. The issue, however, is that abrogation is king. The Bible says a lot of bad stuff, but it holds little sway because Jesus abrogates it. In the Islamic scriptures, the abrogation is even more resounding. To move the teachings of the religion away from Muhammad, abrogation would have to be broken. While this is probably possible in a technical sense, it is not generally thought of as a realistic idea.
But it doesn't. It returned to the Mid East after the US/UK invaded Iraq, not because Iraq had been secularized. There were revolutions in other Muslim countries in the Arab world recently that had no religious motivations. There were not theocracies set up here. There's also the problem stated above that fundamental Islam isn't what you claim it is.
A proximate cause of the the Islamic reformation of ISIS can be attributed to intervention. However, that is not the motivation of the Islamic reformation of ISIS. They are slaughtering other Muslims en masse because those Muslims are not following Muhammad.
Again, it's only one interpretation of that text and not one accepted by most Muslims, even the highly religious ones.
What highly religious ones? The scripturally devout adherents of Islam run interference when people question Islamic extremism. Have you examined how utterly disdainful Sharia is? I would be beheaded under Sharia. You would too.
Oh well i that case why stop at Iran. I'm sure they want to take over the world with their 30k guys. No fear mongering there.
The goal doesn't include taking over Iran with 30k ISIS warriors. It includes attracting millions of ISIS warriors and subsequently dominating the West as well as the apostate Muslim world.
Again, you're acting like this 'reformation' is something natural and inevitable. Like a plausible outcome is all Muslims (or at least the ones left alive) becoming violent crusaders for their religion. That's where you're fear mongering. And it's because you don't understand what you're talking about.
I am talking only about the religious belief itself. I am not against Muslim people; I am against Muhammad and Islamism. There is debate to be had on how Islam can be separated from Muhammad and Islamism.
You argued, I believe, that taking 65k Syrian refugees was a problem because they were Muslims.
That is not quite my argument. I argued that there is strong reason to believe that the Syrian "refugees" include a daunting quantity of Islamists, partly because of demographic makeup and partly because of ideological makeup and partly because of lack of scrutiny combined with geography.
This would be funny if it wasn't so telling about your ignorance. That just makes it sad.
Hundreds of millions of devout Muslims don't do those things.
And yet, ISIS is killing them because they're not devout Muslims who follow the example of Muhammad.
|